Assignment On Adani Case Study Analysis

Running head: ADANI CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
Adani Case Study Analysis
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1ADANI CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
Executive Summary
Adani Australia is one of the largest firms operating in the country of Australia and it has
acquired a lot of negative attention in recent times because of the unethical way that it has been
conducting its operations, especially with regard to its coal mining development project by virtue
of which it has antagonized sections of the country’s indigenous population. This report engages
in the analysis of a case study that highlights the unethical operations that have been undertaken
by Adani Australia against the Wangan and Jagalingou people with the matter being assessed
through the use of stakeholder theory, theory of customer shared value and the normative ethical
theory of deontology as well as utilitarianism.

2ADANI CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
Table of Contents
Introduction......................................................................................................................................4
1. Understanding how Adani Australia has dealt with the Matter of Diversity and Inclusion....4
2. Criticism of the Actions of Adani Australia using Stakeholder Theory, Customer Shared
Value Theory and the Normative Theory of Ethics.........................................................................7
Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................10
References......................................................................................................................................12

3ADANI CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
Introduction
Adani Australia is a renowned infrastructure and energy company which is committed to
the delivery of energy solutions meant for promoting and developing an advanced world. It is
headed by Gautam Adani. The largest mining project in Australia is owned and undertaken by
the Adani Group. While the coal mining undertakings of Adani Australia are supported by the
government and while it is aimed at the development of Australian society and economy, many
of the activities that have been carried out by Adani Australia as part of this project are
controversial in nature, as is evident from reading the case study that has been provided (Smith
2017). What is particularly controversial about the work that is undertaken by Adani Australia is
the fact that it fails to incorporate matters diversity and inclusion well enough into its corporate
agenda. The company, has, as made clear from the given scenario, been antagonizing the
indigenous people of Australia by virtue of its coal mining activities and has not been living up
to the goals of corporate social responsibility, goals that feature on the agenda of every corporate
firm in Australia and not the Adani group alone (Gleeson 2018). This report analyzes in detail,
the case study which has been provided and answers a number of questions based on the case
study pertaining to diversity and inclusion, stakeholder interests, criticizes the activities of Adani
Australia using stakeholder theory and the creation of shared value and analyzes the decisions
and actions of the company using normative theories of ethics.

4ADANI CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
1. Understanding how Adani Australia has dealt with the Matter of
Diversity and Inclusion
Prior to engaging in a discussion about the manner by which Adani Australia has dealt with
issues surrounding diversity and inclusion it is important to talk about what stakeholder theory is
all about. Stakeholder theory is theory that incorporates a market based view as well as a
resource based view on corporate strategy and it adds a socio-political dimension to this as well.
What stakeholder theory essentially appears to do is identify the key stakeholders of a company’s
business operations after which the conditions in which such parties are treated as stakeholders
by the company, are examined (Jones et al. 2018). Upon reading the case study which has been
provided it is clear that one of the key stakeholders of the Adani Australia mining project is the
Wangan and Jagalingou people on whose land the project is being undertaken and who have
been vehemently protesting to the activities that are being undertaken by the Adani officials on
their indigenous territory in spite of the fact that the company has allegedly procured consent
from this group of people in order to do so. Corporate social responsibility demands that the
business operations which are undertaken by a firm benefit people in society rather than go
against them (Miles 2017). The Wangan and Jagalingou Family Council has been agitating for
the indigenous land use agreement that is currently being used by the Adani Group to be
invalidated, the reason being that the agreement was handed over the group arbitrarily and
unethically by a certain group of persons who without the sanction of the Wangan and
Jagalingou community signed over the land use rights to the Adani Australia Company, giving
them full and complete rights over the use of the land. Upon reading the case study in detail it
appears that the coal mining development activities which are taking place on the land of the
Wangan and Jagalingou people is something that is bad for the surrounding natural environment

5ADANI CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
(based on the case study provided). It is making the surrounding natural environment toxic and
harmful and the natural territory of the Wangan and Jagalingou people is being considerably
encroached upon by the developers, something that goes entirely against the tenets of corporate
social responsibility, whereby the work undertaken by firms must benefit stakeholders and
members of society rather than antagonize or go against them. Upon reading the case study it
appears that the Federal Court of Australia has been turning down the requests that have been
made by the Wangan and Jagalingou Family Council to have the indigenous land use agreement
invalidated, since the handover of this agreement to Adani Australia did not take place along
ethical lines. The handover is something that is not being accepted by the indigenous people of
the land on which the coal mining activities are taking place and it appears that even the
government of Australia under the leadership of Malcolm Turnbull is going against the
indigenous people by taking the side of Adani Australia and promising them that all disputes
pertaining to the land agreement will be fixed as soon as possible. This arbitrary and wrongful
marginalization of the indigenous people by Adani Australia goes to show that stakeholder
theory and stakeholder theory is something that has been entirely neglected by the company.
External stakeholders like the indigenous Australians are being ignored by the company and it is
only the interests of the internal stakeholders such as the investors in the firm that are being
taken cognizance of by the company officials. Adani Australia is a firm that has been doing
business in Australia for quite some time now and it is expected that the firm will live up to the
principles of corporate social responsibility which it is currently not able to do or is not doing so
intentionally (based on the case study provided). The coal mining project that is being
undertaken by Adani Australia on the land of the Wangan and Jagalingou people is something
that is harming them rather than doing any good for them. It is making the surrounding natural

6ADANI CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
environment toxic in nature and it is becoming difficult for the people to breathe while other
accompanying dangerous like soil erosion and land degradation can also ultimately take place as
a consequence of the coal mining development activities which are currently being engaged in by
the Adani officials (Gleeson 2018). Diversity and inclusion has therefore not been incorporated
by the Adani Australia firm as part of its corporate social responsibility agenda. It has ignored
the interest of the W and J people. It has got the Australian government which is filled with right
wing elements at the moment, to back its project and the Federal Court of the company has been
repeatedly turning down the requests that are being made by the Wangan and Jagalingou Family
Council to have the indigenous land use agreement invalidated. The company in the given
scenario which is Adani Australia is not only going against indigenous Australians and is failing
to address the matter of diversity and inclusion but it has also got the state and legal authorities to
turn a deaf ear and a blind eye to the repeated requests that are being made by the Wangan and
Jagalingou people to assert their indigenous land rights (Smith 2017). Hence corporate social
responsibility is something that Adani Australia as a company is not able to live up to in the area
of diversity and inclusion. It is the duty and responsibility of all corporate firms all over the
world to attend to the needs and requirements of stakeholders, both internal and external as part
of its business operations, but Adani Australia is appearing to do just the opposite when it comes
to the business that is related to its coal mining project. It is oppressing the indigenous
community, denying them all legal and governmental support and is definitely not doing a good
enough job of taking into consideration their concerns and their requirements (Gleeson 2018).

7ADANI CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
2. Criticism of the Actions of Adani Australia using Stakeholder Theory,
Customer Shared Value Theory and the Normative Theory of Ethics
The actions that have been undertaken by the Adani Australia firm are those that invite
criticism and definitely do not call for anything other than condemnation. Stakeholder theory
demands that the interests and requirements of internal and external stakeholders be taken
cognizance of by a firm (Miles 2017). Yet this is not something that Adani Australia has been
doing at all. If both stakeholder theory and customer shared value are to be taken into
consideration when analyzing the coal mining activities of Adani Australia then it can be said
that the organization is one that has been going against the principles or the tenets of both of the
theories. Indeed customer shared value which entails the creation of valuable opportunities for
stakeholders is not being undertaken by Adani Australia when it comes to its coal mining
development project in Australia (Smith 2017). The organization has not addressed the matter of
diversity and inclusion and it has also not created valuable opportunities for the people on whose
land the work is being undertaken. On the other hand what is being done by Adani Australia
appears to be quite oppressive in its nature. The people of the land where the work is being
undertaken are outraged by the fact that the resources, notably the natural resources of the land
are being considerably exploited by the coal mining authorities, and there are no benefits that the
local people are able to reap as a consequence of such activities. Rather, they are suffering as a
result of it (Newbert and Craig 2017). The stakeholder interests in this respect have not been well
looked into by Adani Australia. While it is true that the demands and the requirements of the
internal stakeholders like investors is being considered by the officials of Adani Australia by
undertaking such a large scale project in the first place, the needs of the external stakeholders of
the company such as the Wangan and Jagalingou people is being entirely ignored by the Adani

8ADANI CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
Australia officials as it suits the company to exploit the natural resources of the land of the
indigenous people rather than take such stakeholder interests into account (Andriof and Waddock
2017). On this basis it can be said that the work being done by Adani Australia is highly
unethical in its nature and scope that it is something that is worthy of criticism and not praise.
The fact that the company is being so actively supported by the right wing strong Turnbull
government and the fact that the company has managed to even get the Federal Court of
Australia to go against the interests of the company by declining the requests that are being made
by the Wangan and Jagalingou Council in this respect, is shameful and definitely invites
criticism rather than praise.
The coal mining development activities of the Adani Group in Australia can be criticized
further using a normative theory of ethics for this purpose. The specific theory which is going to
be utilized for this purpose is the deontology theory of ethics which requires people to be
accountable for their actions and to uphold their duties and responsibilities when engaging in
decision making activities (Werhane 2019). Adani Australia has clearly not been responsible in
the least in its approach to the use of indigenous people’s land for its coal mining project. It has
acquired permission to make use of this land in an unethical and illegal manner and it appears
from reading the case study that has been provided that the people who handed over to the
company the rights to use the land did so under coercion or because they were at the receiving
end of favors. Thus the manner by which indigenous land use was acquired by the Adani
Australia Company is something that is entirely unethical in nature. It cannot be justified using
the ethical theory of deontology which states that people need to adhere to their rights and
responsibilities when they engaging in decision making activities (Leget et al. 2019). Adani
Australia has not shown any sense of accountability or responsibility to the indigenous people of

9ADANI CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
Australia as part of the activities that it has undertaken for its coal mining project. The case study
which has been provided reveals the fact that this is a company which has been completely
hesitant to live up to its responsibilities to the indigenous people of the land on which it is
undertaking its coal mining project, which also happens to be one of the largest coal mining
projects in the country of Australia. It has also managed to drive the government and the legal
authorities of the country against the indigenous people.
The work that is being done by Adani Australia cannot also be supported by the ethical
theory of utilitarianism which regards certain activities, even those of a supposedly unethical
nature to be alright or acceptable provided such activities are carried out in the interest of the
greater good (Winkler and Duminy 2016). According to utilitarianism, actions need to be
undertaken that are directed at the greater good of the people and in general, such activities
should also aim at the betterment of people living in society from both and economic as well as
political perspective (Winkler and Duminy 2016). The actions of Adani Australia as made
evident in the given scenario are those that are apparently aimed at the wellbeing of the people of
Australia but in truth the project being undertaken by the company is one that is set to do more
harm than good. It is harming the natural environment of the place where the work is being
undertaken and the people of the land are protesting against the activities of the company as
legally, the manner by which permission has been procured to conduct business operations on
the land is one that is under question. Using both deontology and utilitarianism, it can be stated
that the work that is being done by Adani Australia is entirely unethical in nature and that it must
be ceased immediately. Adani Australia is falling behind on its corporate social responsibility
and is failing to conduct its operations in an ethical manner (Gleeson 2018).

10ADANI CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
Conclusion
Thus, it can be stated that the project of the Adani Australia firm pertaining to coal
mining and development is a project that does not address diversity and inclusion, it ignores
stakeholder interests as the external stakeholders in the given scenario, the Wangan and
Jagalingou people are being ignored and acted against, and the operations of the company are
being undertaken in an unethical manner. This is because efforts are being made on the part of
the company officials to convince the government of Australia which is currently quite favorably
disposed towards capitalist elements that the government should take the side of the corporation
and the Federal Court of Australia should also go against the people which it is appearing to do
so already by continuously rejecting the appeals that are being made by the Wangan and
Jagalingou Family Council to have the indigenous land use agreement of the company
invalidated.

11ADANI CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
References
Andriof, J. and Waddock, S., 2017. Unfolding stakeholder engagement. In Unfolding stakeholder
thinking (pp. 19-42). Routledge
Gleeson, M., 2018. Wangan and Jagalingou v Adani-the fight resumes. Green Left Weekly,
(1169), p.6.
Jones, T.M., Harrison, J.S. and Felps, W., 2018. How applying instrumental stakeholder theory
can provide sustainable competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 43(3), pp.371-
391.
Kagan, S., 2018. Normative ethics. Routledge.
Leget, C., van Nistelrooij, I. and Visse, M., 2019. Beyond demarcation: Care ethics as an
interdisciplinary field of inquiry. Nursing ethics, 26(1), pp.17-25.
Miles, S., 2017. Stakeholder theory classification: A theoretical and empirical evaluation of
definitions. Journal of Business Ethics, 142(3), pp.437-459.
Newbert, S. and Craig, J.B., 2017. Moving beyond socioemotional wealth: Toward a normative
theory of decision making in family business. Family Business Review, 30(4), pp.339-346.
Smith, K., 2017. Grandparents call out Labor over support for Adani. Green Left Weekly, (1130),
p.4
Werhane, P.H., 2019. The normative/descriptive distinction in methodologies of business ethics.
In Systems Thinking and Moral Imagination (pp. 21-25). Springer, Cham.

12ADANI CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
Winkler, T. and Duminy, J., 2016. Planning to change the world? Questioning the normative
ethics of planning theories. Planning Theory, 15(2), pp.111-129.