Product boycott — often a form of protest — takes place in many countries. According to multiple sources including the BBC and CNN, Israeli products were boycotted by several Muslim countries because of its war on Palestine. But this is not the only event of product boycotts. Along with the boycotts of products of several other countries including the Montgomery Bus Boycott during the Civil Rights Movement, where African Americans refused to use segregated buses, the products of many companies were also boycotted in the past within the state and in other states including the Nestle boycott in 2005 and the Nike boycott in 2001, often as a protest to harmful products of companies and the policies of states.
It is pertinently notable that there are product based, geopolitical and other reasons for product boycotts. Unethical business practices, harmful ingredients in products and a lack of transparency in production processes play vital roles in product boycotts many times. For instance, the Nestle boycott in the United States was due to unethical marketing practices. Undermining peace through aggressive acts, geopolitical conflicts and tensions between countries including wars and the violation of human rights are also crucial causes of product boycotts. Among others, many also boycott products due to environmental concerns involved with different products. But the failure of the government and the concerned authorities are more responsible for product boycotts. Along with the government’s failure to implement regulations, its geopolitical policies lead to product boycotts. India called to boycott Chinese products in response to border disputes between the two countries.
The governments and concerned companies take negotiation based and other steps that help address the concerns, which lead to product boycotts on reasonable grounds many times. While governments implement regulatory measures, many companies engage with stakeholders to understand their concerns and implement changes to address the concerns of protests many times in different countries. Many multinational companies including, but not limited to, Nestle and Nike addressed the reasonable concerns of protesters. Among others, the countries that encounter product boycotts take diplomatic negotiations with other countries involved in boycotts, work with international organizations to mediate disputes and take actions to mitigate the concerns associated with product boycotts, leading to reduced tensions many times.
But the product based and geopolitical concerns of product boycotts are not addressed many times in different countries, even if when they are reasonable. There is a failure to take meaningful action to rectify the issues at hand by companies, driven by several causes including, but not limited to, the overemphasis on corporate interests and a lack of commitment to consumers, and the lack of steps to effectively implement regulatory steps by the government in different countries. Among others, there are insufficient efforts of the governments to address the conflicts and disputes that lead to product boycotts — driven by a variety of causes including geopolitical and other causes.
Product boycotts may not be reasonable always. But it is desired that the reasons behind reasonable product boycotts be addressed in different countries. Companies need to ensure their commitment to consumers in providing products and ethical practices. But the role of the government is needed more. Implementing regulatory steps by the concerned authority is vital in many countries. Addressing the conflicts and disputes that lead to product boycotts is also desired through negotiations based steps.
Amir M Sayem
Chief Editor
Dhaka Opinion Magazine
