Hostname: page-component-69cd664f8f-gvmbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-12T20:16:22.605Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Political Perspective of Corporate Social Responsibility: A Critical Research Agenda

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 January 2015

Glen Whelan
Glen Whelan*
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

I here advance a critical research agenda for the political perspective of corporate social responsibility (Political CSR). I argue that whilst the ‘Political’ CSR literature is notable for both its conceptual novelty and practical importance, its development has been hamstrung by four ambiguities, conflations and/or oversights. More positively, I argue that ‘Political’ CSR should be conceived as one potential form of globalization, and not as a consequence of ‘globalization’; that contemporary Western MNCs should be presumed to engage in CSR for instrumental reasons; that ‘Political’ CSR should be associated with a corresponding ‘political’ model of corporate governance; and that both a ‘Rawlsian’ and ‘Habermasian’ perspective of Political CSR are different from ‘Political’ CSR. In concluding, I use these four critiques to identify a number of areas within which increasingly robust and sophisticated positive and normative theories of Political CSR are required.

Keywords

corporate governanceglobalizationHabermasmultinational corporationsRawlspolitical corporate social responsibility
Type
Articles
Information
Business Ethics Quarterly , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , October 2012 , pp. 709 - 737
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Business Ethics 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Aguilera, R. V., Rupp, D. E.,Williams, C.A., &Ganapathi, J. 2007. Putting the S back in Corporate Social Responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(3): 836–63.Google Scholar
Amazon Web Services. 2010. Blog Posting.Amazon Web Services Blog(December 2). Available from http://aws.amazon.com/message/65348/. Accessed May 5, 2011.Google Scholar
Amnesty International. 2010. Google stops its censorship in China: Amnesty response.Amnesty News(January 13). Available fromhttp://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details .asp?NewsID=18572. Accessed November 16, 2010.Google Scholar
Angle, S.C. 2005. Decent democratic centralism. Political Theory, 33(4): 518–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berle, A. A. Jr., 1932. For whom corporate managers are trustees: A note. Harvard Law Review, 45(7): 1365–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, A. R. 2007. Human rights, global justice, and disaggregated states: John Rawls, Onora O’Neill and Anne-Marie Slaughter. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 66(1): 87–72.Google Scholar
Blanchfield, L. 2011. The United Nations Human Rights Council: Issues for Congress. CRS report for Congress, 7-5700 (January 26). Available from http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33608.pdf. Accessed June 29, 2011.Google Scholar
Boatright, J. R. 2006. What's wrong—and what's right—with stakeholder management. Journal of Private Enterprise, 21(2): 106–30.Google Scholar
Boddewyn, J.J., &Brewer, T.L. 1995. International-business political behavior: New theoretical directions. Academy of Management Review, 19(1): 119–43.Google Scholar
Bonardi, J.-P., Hillman, A., &Keim, G. 2005. The attractiveness of political markets: Implication for firm strategies. Academy of Management Review, 30(3): 397–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowie, N.E. 1999. Business ethics: A Kantian perspective. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.Google Scholar
BP.N.D. Website.http://bp.com. Accessed June 16, 2012.Google Scholar
Bull, H. 1995. The anarchical society: A study of order in world politic. (2nd ed.). Houndsmills, Hampshire: Macmillan Press.Google Scholar
Bull, H., &Watson, A. (Eds.) 1984. The expansion of international society. (2nd ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Business Leaders Initiative on Human Rights (BLIHR). 2008. Statement of support for Rug-gie's protect, respect and remedy framework. Available from http://198.170.85.29/ BLIHR-statement-Ruggie-report-2008.pdf. Accessed May 18, 2009.Google Scholar
Cohen, C. L. 1989. Deliberation and democratic legitimacyIn A. Hamlin and B. Pettit (Eds.).The good polity: 17–34. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cooper, S. M., &Owen, D.L. 2007. Corporate social reporting and stakeholder accountability: The missing link. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32(7-8): 649–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crane, A., Matten, D., &Moon, J. 2008. Corporations and citizenship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dacin, M. T., Oliver, C., &Ro, J.-P. 2007. The legitimacy of strategic alliances: An institutional perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 28(2): 169–87.Google Scholar
Detomasi, D.A. 2007. The multinational corporation and global governance: Modelling global public policy networks. Journal of Business Ethics, 71(3): 321–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DiMaggio, P. J. 1988. Interest and agency in institutional theoryIn L. G. Zucker (Ed.), Institutional patterns and organizations: Culture and environment: 3–21. Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger.Google Scholar
Donaldson, T., &Dunfee, T.W. 1994. Toward a unified conception of business ethics: Integrative social contracts theory. Academy of Management Review, 19(2): 252–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, A. 1957. An Economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Drezner, D. W. 2007. All politics is global. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Drummond, D. 2010. A new approach to China. The official Google blog(January 12). Available from http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/new-approach-to-china. html. Accessed November 16, 2010.Google Scholar
Dunning, J.H., &Lundan, S.M. 2008. Multinational enterprises and the global economy (2nd ed.). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Evan, W. M., &Freeman, R.E. 1988. A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation: Kantian capitalism. In Beauchamp, T.L. &Bowie, N.E.(Eds.). Ethical theory in business (3rd Edition): 97–106. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Freeman, S. 2007. Rawls. Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Friedman, M. 1982. Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Gienger, V., &Capaccio, T. 2010. Clinton condemns WikiLeaks release as ‘attack’ on U.S. efforts. Bloomberg Business Week (November 29). Available from http:// www.businessweek.com/news/2010-11-29/clinton-condemns-wikileaks-release -as-attack-on-u-s-efforts.html. Accessed May 5, 2011.Google Scholar
Gilbert, D. U., Rasche, A., &Waddock, S. 2011. . Accountability in a global economy: The emergence of international accountability standards. Business Ethics Quarterly, 21(1): 23–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilpin, R. 2001. Global political economy: Understanding the international economic order. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Global Business Initiative on Human Rights (GBI). 2010. Statement of support for Rug-gie's draft guiding principles(December 10). Available from http://www.global -business-initiative.org/srsg/GBI%20Statement%20Dec%2010%202010.pdf. Accessed June 6, 2011.Google Scholar
Global Network Initiative. N.D. Website.http://www.globalnetworkinitiative.org/. Accessed December 6, 2010.Google Scholar
Gourevitch, P. A., &Shinn, J. 2005. Political power and corporate control: The new global politics of corporate governance Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1989. The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society, trans. Burger, T. and Lawrence, F. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1990. Moral consciousness and communicative action, trans. Lenhardt, C. and Weber Nicholsen, S. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1995. Reconciliation through the public use of reason: Remarks on John Raw-ls’s Political Liberalism. The Journal of Philosophy, 92(3): 109–31.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1996. Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy, trans. Rehg, W. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1998. Remarks on legitimation through human rights. Philosophy and Social Criticism, 24(2/3): 157–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, J. 2001. The postnational constellation: Political essays, trans. Pensky, M. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 2008. Between naturalism and religion: Philosophical essays, trans. Cronin, C. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 2009. Europe: The faltering project. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Haufler, V. 2010. Disclosure as governance: The extractive industries transparency initiative and resource management in the developing world. Global Environmental Politics, 10(3): 53–73.Google Scholar
Heath, J. 2001. Communicative action and rational choice. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Heath, J. &Norman, W. 2004. Stakeholder theory, corporate governance and public management: What can the history of state-run enterprises teach us in the post-Enron era? Journal of Business Ethics, 53(3): 247–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hotten, R. 2010. Google’s rift with China is a calculated business risk. BBC News (March 26). Available from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8587129.stm. Accessed November 16, 2010.Google Scholar
Hsieh, N.-h. 2009. Does global business have a responsibility to promote just institutions? Business Ethics Quarterly, 19(2): 251–73.Google Scholar
Hu, J., 2005. Build towards a harmonious world of lasting peace and common prosperity. Speech delivered at the High-Level Plenary Meeting of the United Nations 60th session, New York (September 15). Available from http://sy.chineseembassy.org/eng/ xwfb/t213754.htm Accessed February 17, 2010.Google Scholar
Human Rights Watch. 2011. UN Human Rights Council: Weak stance on business standards. Human Rights Watch News (June 16). Available from http://www.hrw.org/ en/news/2011/06/16/un-human-rights-council-weak-stance-business-standards. Accessed June 17, 2011.Google Scholar
Jerbi, S. 2011. UN adopts guiding principles on business and human rights-what comes next? Institute for human rights and business. Staff Commentary (June 17). Available from http://www.ihrb.org/commentary/staff/un_adopts_guiding_principles_ on_business_and_human_rights.html. Accessed June 17, 2011.Google Scholar
Kant, I. 2006. An answer to the question: What is enlightenment?In P. Kleingeld (Ed.), Toward Perpetual Peace and Other Writings on Politics, Peace and History trans. Colclasur:, D.L. 17–23. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O. 1984. After hegemony: Cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Keping, Y. 2008. Ideological change and incremental democracy in reform-era ChinaIn C. Li (Ed.), China's changing political landscape: Prospects for democracy: 44–58. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Kobrin, S.J. 2005. Multinational corporations, the protest movement, and the future of global governance In Chandler, A. D. Jr. &Mazlish, B. (eds.), Leviathans: Multinational corporations and the new global history: 219–35. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kobrin, S.J. 2009. Private political authority and public responsibility: Transnational politics, transnational firms, and human rights Business Ethics Quarterly, 19(3): 349–74.Google Scholar
Krasner, S.D. 1991. Global communications and national power: Life on the Pareto frontier. World Politics, 43(3): 336–66.Google Scholar
Lea, D. 2004. The imperfect nature of corporate responsibilities to stakeholders. Business Ethics Quarterly, 14(2): 201–17.Google Scholar
Levy, S. 2011. Inside Google's China misfortune. Fortune (April 15). Available from http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/04/15/googles-ordeal-in-china/. Accessed June 6, 2011.Google Scholar
Maitland, I. 2001. Distributive justice in firms: Do the rules of corporate governance matter? Business Ethics Quarterly, 11(1): 129–43.Google Scholar
Marcoux, A. M. 2003. A fiduciary argument against stakeholder theory. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(1): 1–24.Google Scholar
Matten, D., &Crane, A. 2005. Corporate citizenship: Toward an extended theoretical conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 30(1): 166–79.Google Scholar
McWilliams, A., &Siegel, D. 2001. Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(1): 117–27.Google Scholar
McWilliams, A., Van Fleet, D.D., &Cory, K.D. 2002. Raising rivals' costs through political strategy: An extension of resource-based theory. Journal of Management Studies, 39(5): 707–23.Google Scholar
Mearsheimer, J.J. 2001. The tragedy of great power politics. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Meyer, J.W., Drori, G.S., &Hwang, H. 2006. World society and the proliferation of formal organization. In Drori, G.S. Meyer, J. W., &Hwang, H. (Eds.): 25–49. Globalization and organization: World society and organizational change. Oxford: Oxford University Press CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, J.W., &Rowan, B. 1977. Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. The American Journal of Sociology, 83(2): 340–63.Google Scholar
Moon, J., Crane, A., &Matten, D. 2005. Can corporations be citizens? Corporate citizenship as a metaphor for business participation in society. Business Ethics Quarterly, 15(3): 429–53.Google Scholar
Moon, J. D. 2003. Rawls and Habermas on public reason: Human rights and global justice. Annual Review of Political Science, 6: 257–74.Google Scholar
Néron, P.-Y., &Norman, W. 2008. Citizenship, inc.: Do we really want businesses to be good corporate citizens? Business Ethics Quarterly, 18(1): 1–26.Google Scholar
Nike, . 2005. Restated articles of incorporation of Nike, Inc. (as amended September 23 2005. Available from http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/ data/320187/000032018705000124/exhibit-3_1.txt. Accessed June 13, 2012.Google Scholar
Noland, J., &Phillips, R. 2010. Stakeholder engagement, discourse ethics and strategic management. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1): 39–49.Google Scholar
Novo-Nordisk, . Website. http://www.novonordisk.com. Accessed June 16, 2012.Google Scholar
Nozick, R. 1974. Anarchy, state, and utopia. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, M.C. 2000. Women and human development: The capabilities approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Oliver, C. 1991. Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1): 145–79.Google Scholar
O'Neill, O. 1989. Constructions of reason: Explorations of Kant's practical philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
O'Neill, O. 2000. Bounds of justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
O'Neill, O. 2001. Agents of justice. Metaphilosophy. 32(1/2): 180–95.Google Scholar
Palazzo, G., &Scherer, A.G. 2006. Corporate legitimacy as deliberation: A communicative framework Journal of Business Ethics, 66(1): 77–88.Google Scholar
PayPal, . 2010. PayPal statement regarding WikiLeaks. PayPal Blog (December 2). Available from https://www.thepaypalblog.com/2010/12/paypal-statement-regarding-wikileaks/. Accessed May 5, 2011.Google Scholar
Purdy, R. 2009. Using earth observation technologies for better regulatory compliance and enforcement of environmental laws. Journal of Environmental Law, 22(1): 59–87.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. 1971. A theory of justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. 1999a. The idea of public reason revisited. In Rawls, J. The law of peoples, with ”the idea of public reason revisited“: 131–80. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. 1999b. The law of peoples. In Rawls, J. The law of peoples, with “the idea of public reason revisited“: 3–128. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. 2001 Justice as fairness: a restatement. Delhi: Universal Law Publishing.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. 2005 Political liberalism (expanded ed.). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Reporters without Borders.2010. Google rebels against China's internet censors. Press release (January 14). Available from http://en.rsf.org/china-google-rebels-against-china-s-14-01-2010,36059. Accessed November 16, 2010.Google Scholar
Roach, B. 2005. A primer on multinational corporations. In Chandler, A.D. Jr. &Ma-zlish, B.(Eds.), Leviathans: Multinational corporations and the new global history: 19–44. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ROCIC (Regulator of Community Interest Companies). 2007. Community interest companies: Briefing pack Cardiff: TROCIC. Available from http://www.network2012. net/community/resources/cicreg_cic_briefing_pack.pdf. Accessed May 14, 2009.Google Scholar
ROCIC (Regulator of Community Interest Companies). 2010. Annual report 2009-10. Available from http://www.cicregulator.gov.uk/news/Annual%20Report/Annual%20Report%202009-10-%20Final.pdf. Accessed June 25, 2011.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. 1991. Objectivity, relativism and truth: Philosophical papers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. 1993. Putnam and the relativist menace. The Journal of Philosophy, 90(9): 443–61.Google Scholar
Ruggie, J.G. 1982. International regimes, transactions, and change: Embedded liberalism in the postwar economic order. International Organization, 36(2): 379–415.Google Scholar
Ruggie, J.G. 1998. What makes the world hang together? Neo-utilitarianism and the social constructivist challenge. International Organization, 54(4): 855–85.Google Scholar
Ruggie, J. G. 2003. Taking embedded liberalism global: The corporate connection. In Held, D. &Koenig-Archibugi, M.(Eds.), Taming globalization: Frontiers of governance: 93–129. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Ruggie, J.G. 2004. Reconsituting the global public domain: Issues, actors, and practices. European Journal of International Relations, 10(4): 499–529.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. 2008a. Embedding global markets: An enduring challenge. Aldershot,Hampshire: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. 2008b. EProtect, respect and remedy: A framework for business and human rights. Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and other Business Enterprises, U.N. Doc A/HRC/8/5 (April 7).Google Scholar
Rorty, R. 2011 Guiding principles on business and human rights: Implementing the United Nations “protect, respect and remedy” framework. Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and other Business Enterprises, U.N. Doc A/HRC/17/31 (March 21).Google Scholar
Scherer, A.G. &Palazzo, G. 2007. Toward a political conception of corporate social responsibility: Business and society seen from a Habermasian perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32(4): 1096–1120.Google Scholar
Scherer, A.G. &Palazzo, G. 2008. Globalization and corporate social responsibility. In Crane, A. Mc-Williams, D. Moon, J. &Siegel, D. S.(Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility: 413–31. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Scherer, A.G. &Palazzo, G. 2010. The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance and democracy. Journal of Management Studies, 48(4): 899–931.Google Scholar
Scherer, A.G., Palazzo, G., &Baumann, D. 2006. Global rules and private actors: Toward a new role of the transnational corporation in global governance. Business Ethics Quarterly, 16(4): 505–32.Google Scholar
Scherer, A.G., Palazzo, G., &Matten, D. 2009. Introduction to the special issue: Globalization as a challenge for business responsibilities. Business Ethics Quarterly, 19(3): 327–47.Google Scholar
Schmidt, E., &Cohen, J. 2010. The digital disruption. Foreign Affairs, 89(6): 75–85.Google Scholar
Scholte, J. A. 2005. Globalization: A critical introduction (2nd ed.). Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Sen, A. 1999. Development as freedom. Oxford:.Google Scholar
Smith, A. 1986(1776). The wealth of nations-Books I-III. London: Penguin Classics.Google Scholar
Smith, C. 2006. Statement. The internet in China: A tool for freedom or suppression? Joint Hearing, House of Representatives, 109th Congress, Second Session (February 15). Available from http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/archives/109/26075.pdfAccessed 15/11/2010.Google Scholar
Social Investment Forum Foundation. 2010. Report on socially responsible investing trends in the United States. Available from http://ussif.org/resources/. Accessed June 24, 2011.Google Scholar
Stout, L. 2012. The shareholder value myth: How putting shareholders first harms investors, corporations, and the public. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.Google Scholar
Tan, K.-C. 2006. The problem of decent peoples. In Martin, R. &Reidy, D. A.(Eds). Raw-ls's law of peoples: A realistic utopia?: 76–94. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tierney, B. 1982. Religion, law, and the growth of constitutional thought, 1150-1650. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development). 2010. World investment report 2010: Investing in a low-carbon economy. New York: United Nations Publications.Google Scholar
van Oosterhout, J.(Hans). 2008. Transcending the confines of economic and political organization: The misguided metaphor of corporate citizenship. Business Ethics Quarterly, 18(1): 35–42.Google Scholar
WBCSD & WZB (World Business Council for Sustainable Development & Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung). 2003. Intellectual property rights in biotechnology and healthcare: Results of a stakeholder dialogue. Switzerland: WBCSD.Google Scholar
Wenar, L. 2006. Why Rawls is not a cosmopolitan egalitarian. In Martin, R. &Re-idy, D. A.(Eds.). Rawls’s law of peoples: A realistic utopia?: 95–113. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Whelan, G., Moon, J., &Orlitzky, M. 2009. Human rights, transnational corporations and embedded liberalism: What chance consensus? Journal of Business Ethics, 87(supplement2): 367–83.Google Scholar
Willke, H., &Willke, G. 2008. Corporate moral legitimacy and the legitimacy of morals: A critique of Palazzo/Scherer’s communicative framework Journal of Business Ethics 81(1): 27–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar