Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is a collective noun for all kinds of alternative methods to formal dispute resolution. Business ethics attempts to theorize the different forms of normative coordination of corporate acts that remain within the lifeworld and outside the formal sphere of the legal system. In this context, business ethics could offer a positive approach to ADR, as ADR would be an effective, practical form of casuistry ethics. In this manner, concrete conflicts of interest and disagreements between economic actors (...) could be resolved based on moral intentions and moral validity claims. This approach of ADR through business ethics is confirmed by many articles in business ethical journals. In two important aspects, namely justice and autonomy, law is contrary to ethics. ADR lacks exactly these ethical characteristics; thus the idea that ADR belongs to the discourse of business ethics is misleading. This article will argue that ADR is not in the realm of the ethical, but in the realm of the legal. This critical analysis of ADR will show a deeper dimension in the relationship between business ethics and law, namely the systematic colonization of ethical methods by law. (shrink)

Moral repair is an important way for firms to heal moral relationships with stakeholders following a transgression. The concept is rooted in recognition theory, which is often used to develop normative perspectives and prescriptions, but the same theory has also propelled a view of moral repair as premised on negotiation between offender and victim(s), which involves the complex social construction of the transgression and the appropriate amends. The tension between normative principles and socioconstructivist implementation begs the question how offending firms (...) should approach moral repair. Addressing this question, we develop a two-level conceptualization of moral repair, distinguishing between procedural and substantive levels of practice, which accommodate normativity and socioconstructivism, respectively. In so doing, we enrich the literature by 1) promoting conceptual clarity, 2) refining understanding of the moral repair process, and 3) suggesting the use of a unified, configurational approach to studying (nonlinear) relations between amends and moral outcomes. (shrink)

Firms have traditionally responded to environmental violations by increasing information disclosure and/or communication to manage stakeholder perceptions. As such, these approaches may be symbolic in nature, with no genuine intention to improve the environment. We draw from restorative justice grounded in stakeholder theory and explore a relatively new approach in the form of supplemental environmental projects aimed at restoring the environment, and empirically examine the role of corporate governance in firms’ decisions to undertake reparative actions. Using environmental violations and SEPs (...) data from the US Environmental Protection Agency between 2002 and 2015, we find that firms with smaller boards are more likely to undertake SEPs. We also find that firms with higher board independence and CEO duality undertake SEPs more frequently; however, board gender diversity and the existence of a sustainability committee appear to have no impacts. These results are robust to propensity score matching and an alternative data source. We extend the scope of stakeholder theory by emphasizing a new approach—restorative justice—by which corporations can repair damaged relationships and also improve the environment. We also contribute to corporate governance and environmentalism literature by identifying governance structures that promote environmental restorative justice. Thus, our study will inform different stakeholders, including regulators, shareholders, and boards of directors, and will open new avenues for business ethics scholarship. (shrink)

The devastating impact of the climate crisis has led many countries to promulgate regulations that hold businesses accountable for their environmental externalities. However, while these formal constraints compel businesses to fulfill their legal obligations, scholars argue that acting in a socially and environmentally responsible way requires more than mere compliance with the law. Accordingly, we provide novel evidence of how the concept of social justice, implicit in society as an informal construct, underpins firms’ ethical behavior, compelling them to accept their (...) social responsibilities by reducing their environmental violations, implementing procedures to prevent further infractions, and repairing the breach in social trust that their transgressions have caused by engaging in restorative acts. Based on unique environmental violation and remedial action data from 2007 to 2022 in China, we establish that social trust significantly lowers a firm’s propensity to commit further ecological abuses. We also determine that firms in high-trust regions are more likely to undertake remedial actions in the aftermath of an environmental breach. Moreover, cross-sectional analyses reveal that the relationship between social trust and environmental violations is more pronounced for firms that face greater reputational pressure from higher media reporting, analyst coverage, auditing by Big Four auditors, and institutional site visits. This study augments the literature on environmentalism and argues that social trust also shapes corporate ethical behavior in addition to regulatory pressures. (shrink)

Studying and discussing boundary violations between people is important for potentially averting future harm. Organizations typically respond to boundary violations in retributive ways, by punishing the perpetrator. Interestingly, prior research has largely ignored the impact of sexual boundary violations and retributive dynamics on teams. This is problematic as teams provide an obvious setting not only to detect and discuss troubling behavior by peers, but also for learning how to prevent future harm. Therefore, in this study we explore team-level experiences regarding (...) sexual boundary violations and organizational responses to these incidents. Drawing on an in-depth case study, our findings shed light on the profound negative consequences of a retributive organizational response to sexual boundary violations. Additionally, our findings show how a restorative approach, inviting teams to reflect on the violations and their impact, can help teams to recover. Our main contribution involves a model that demonstrates how the interplay between sexual boundary violations, retributive, and restorative organizational responses affects teams. This model shows how combining these responses can acknowledge distress within teams, heal relationships between team members through dialogue, and open up the possibility to learn from these events. This model extends prior research focusing on individual actions and outcomes regarding violations. Additionally, by combining retributive and restorative organizational responses in one model, we extend the literature on restorative organizational responses to boundary violations. (shrink)

Using the political corporate social responsibility lens of parentalism, this paper investigates the more subtle and less-visible interactional dynamics and strategies of power, resistance and justification that manifest between a multi-stakeholder-governed foundation and victims of a mining corporation’s dam collapse. The Renova Foundation was established to provide remedy through a deliberative approach to hundreds of thousands of victims from Brazil’s worst socio-environmental disaster—the collapse of Samarco Mining Corporation’s Fundão tailings dam. Data were collected from a combination of fieldwork and archival (...) analysis to assess the perceptions of victims, their defenders and foundation executives. The findings reveal 12 dialectical tensions from Renova’s attempts to remedy the victim’s injustices. The case analysis contributes through proposing a dialectical process model of stakeholder resistance and subversion to parentalist PCSR. The case reveals the pivotal use of time via the act of stalling as a strategic resource to exhaust victims and reach settlements. Furthermore, organizations justify their parentalism by blaming delays on the bureaucracy and shared responsibility of multi-stakeholder deliberation. Ultimately, I contend that victims must have an equal voice in the outcome of their remediation and that businesses responsible for causing harm should not decide these matters. (shrink)

This paper puts forth a critical perspective on remedy for business-related human rights abuses. It reflects on the purpose of remedy in Business and Human Rights and argues that effective remedy should address the multiple root causes of abuses to prevent reoccurrences rather than focus on surface issues and isolated cases. To develop a theoretical framework to conceptualize preventative remedy that addresses multiple root causes, this research draws on Fraser’s radical democratic conception of justice and participatory parity. According to the (...) principle, justice is achieved through social arrangements that enable all actors to engage with one another as peers. To conceptualize effective remedy as participatory parity, the paper examines three dimensions—cultural, economic, and political—where injustices or root causes of abuses must be addressed to realize participatory parity. The paper analyzes the illustrative case of the Fair Food Program through the lens of Fraser’s framework. Analysis reveals effective enforcement as necessary to realize participatory parity and address the three dimensions of justice in the context of severe power asymmetries. In the theorized framework, remedy aims to address the multiple root causes of business-related human rights abuses toward prevention and empower rightsholders to engage meaningfully in remedial processes. (shrink)

In the remediation of business-related human rights abuses, meaningful stakeholder engagement which culminates in effective access to remedy begins with forms of communication that enable the voice and agency of marginalized stakeholders, and value their lived experiences. Here, we consider how the development of a _dialogical_ theorization of stakeholder engagement is aligned with the practical and ethical goals of an effective access to human rights remedy. Drawing on dialogical theory, we discern four ethical criteria —_power cognizance, polyphonic pluralism, generative agonism (...) and discursive unfinalizability_— that reveal three general approaches to stakeholder engagement —_essentially monologic, seemingly dialogic and authentically dialogic_— based on the extent to which they exhibit the criteria above. We propose and discuss an 'authentically dialogic' approach for organizations adopting morally expansive, victim-centric approaches to engagement in the design and implementation of company-led remedial mechanisms. (shrink)

This paper investigates necessary conditions for developing a participatory, rightsholder-driven approach to remedy for business-related human rights abuses by analyzing findings from a case study with the Fair Food Program. With the inclusion of human rights into discussions of business ethics and CSR, scholars and practitioners have made calls for participatory approaches to remedy to address cases of human rights abuses. However, a gap remains in our understanding of how to operationalize participatory approaches in a manner that empowers rightsholders, particularly (...) within contexts of severe power imbalances. The paper puts forth a rightsholder-driven theoretical framework for remedy, grounded on critical dialogic accountability principles and integrated with empirical analysis from the Fair Food Program case study. This framework defines remedy as a system comprising reinforcing aspects rather than standalone mechanisms. The critical dialogic accounting and accountability framework provides a theoretical framing of engagement that enables the inclusion of multiple, divergent voices and aims toward meaningful engagement with marginalized groups. The analysis of findings from the case study identifies enforcement and education as necessary conditions for effective and empowering rightsholder-driven approaches to remedy. The paper deconstructs these conditions to develop an understanding of the program’s unique approach to enforcement and education. The paper concludes by discussing the implications of rightsholder-driven remedy for Business and Human Rights and business accountability. (shrink)