Indian leather exports, a significant foreign exchange earner for the country has been reportedly hit hard by the decision of some main US retail chains similar to Eddie Bauer, LL Bean, Timberland and Casual Corner and a German company Bader to boycott leather goods from India in protest against the ill-treatment of animals here. This move came abruptly after a decision by global retail chains Gap, Marks and L. Spencer, Liz Claiborne and J. Crew not to buy Indian leather goods. This growth has a lot to do with the lobbying by the US-based animal rights group People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) for a ban on leather goods from India by documenting evidence of “cruelty to Animals” killed for making leather. It has been reported that the overseas firms have officially communicated to the Indian outfit of PETA which they will not be sourcing leather products from India till there is strict enforcement of animal protection laws. Following this, the Mumbai –based Teja Industries, the official supplier of leather goods for Marks and Spencer in India, started out-sourcing leather from other countries to manufacture the products for global chain.
problem 1: In the light of the above, describe the implications of social activist groups for business.
problem 2: With reference to this case, describe the failure of the governments, council for Leather Exports and the leather industry and the lessons of this case.
problem 3: What must the governments, Council for Leather Exports and the leather industry do to overcome the dilemma?