Kant’s Deontology theory states that ethical behavior is based on the moral intention of the action rather than its moral consequence. Kant’s theory is based on, having respect for others, being fair, and idealistic (universal principles). The fact that BP knew about the potential harm that might affect the population and yet didn’t do anything about it shows an unfair and disrespectful behavior toward the local population. According to Kant, BP should have fixed the problem that it was aware of before continuing on with the project, even if this would not make the company profitable. Therefore, it’s an unethical decision for BP to avoid responsibility because it has a “duty” to fix the problem.
Mill’s Utilitarianism theory states that a behavior is considered ethical and moral as long as it is the best chosen alternative that’s likely to produce maximum happiness for the greatest number of people even if a single person has to sacrifice. BP probably used this approach when it did the cost-benefit analysis and came up with the decision that it would be more profitable if they take the risk of the problem occurring and deal with the results after rather than spend money fixing the problem. However, this approach suggests that it’s an unethical decision because the oil spill caused more harm than good for the stakeholders such as the shareholders, local population, tourism, and the wildlife throughout the gulf.
Aristotle’s Virtue ethics states that people should look into their communities to see how they should react. People develop their virtues through training. One might be engaged in more than one community and this might cause an overlap. Communities consist of religion, parents, sport teams, siblings, and many more. BP’s decision violated the virtue of integrity, commitment and responsibility that is expected by BP. Avoiding responsibly under the virtue