One specific issue with competing pressures is that companies may not be able to market their products in certain ways due to their competitors. For example, Kraft can’t call one of their products “Parmesan Cheese” in Europe because their competitor Parmigiano Reggiano works with the government agency Protected Designation of Origin to prevent Kraft and other cheese brands from selling the cheese under a name similar to theirs. A business issue like this one can be influenced by a social concern when the public strongly believes the name of a product should belong to one specific company.

Government regulation can address the issue by deciding which company the name belongs too. However, by choosing one company over the other, they are influencing the public to make the same decision they did and choose the company they did. This presents the idea that minimal regulation is beneficial because it prevents the government from influencing the consumers’ choice.

Another debate about government regulation is whether governments should heavily regulate companies to move towards sustainability. Some people believe that to prevent further climate change and pollution, government regulation is needed to prevent companies from participating in and benefiting from industries that harm the environment. However, some people are against this government regulation because sustainability and climate change are still seen as political issue, so if the government can regulate on sustainability, they might be able to have opportunities in the future to regulate businesses on other political issues.