Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Contestation in Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives: Enhancing the Democratic Quality of Transnational Governance.Daniel Arenas, Laura Albareda & Jennifer Goodman - 2020 - Business Ethics Quarterly 30 (2):169-199.
    ABSTRACTThis article studies multi-stakeholder initiatives as spaces for both deliberation and contestation between constituencies with competing discourses and disputed values, beliefs, and preferences. We review different theoretical perspectives on MSIs, which see them mainly as spaces to find solutions to market problems, as spaces of conflict and bargaining, or as spaces of consensus. In contrast, we build on a contestatory deliberative perspective, which gives equal value to both contestation and consensus. We identify four types of internal contestation which can be (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  • Conceptualizing data‐deliberation: The starry sky beetle, environmental system risk, and Habermasian CSR in the digital age.Mario D. Schultz & Peter Seele - 2020 - Business Ethics 29 (2):303-313.
    Building on an illustrative case of a systemic environmental threat and its multi‐stakeholder response, this paper draws attention to the changing political impacts of corporations in the digital age. Political Corporate Social Responsibility (PCSR) theory suggests an expanded sense of politics and corporations, including impacts that may range from voluntary initiatives to overcome governance gaps, to avoiding state regulation via corporate political activity. Considering digitalization as a stimulus, we explore potential responsibilities of corporations toward public goods in contexts with functioning (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Breaking the Cycle of Marginalization: How to Involve Local Communities in Multi-stakeholder Initiatives?Manon Eikelenboom & Thomas B. Long - 2022 - Journal of Business Ethics 186 (1):31-62.
    While the benefits of including local communities in multi-stakeholder initiatives have been acknowledged, their successful involvement remains a challenging process. Research has shown that large business interests are regularly over-represented and that local communities remain marginalized in the process. Additionally, little is known about how procedural fairness and inclusion can be managed and maintained during multi-stakeholder initiatives. The aim of this study was therefore to investigate how marginalized stakeholders, and local communities in particular, can be successfully involved during the course (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Goal-Based Private Sustainability Governance and Its Paradoxes in the Indonesian Palm Oil Sector.Janina Grabs & Rachael D. Garrett - 2023 - Journal of Business Ethics 188 (3):467-507.
    In response to stakeholder pressure, companies increasingly make ambitious forward-looking sustainability commitments. They then draw on corporate policies with varying degrees of alignment to disseminate and enforce corresponding behavioral rules among their suppliers and business partners. This goal-based turn in private sustainability governance has important implications for its likely environmental and social outcomes. Drawing on paradox theory, this article uses a case study of zero-deforestation commitments in the Indonesian palm oil sector to argue that goal-based private sustainability governance’s characteristics set (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Southern sustainability initiatives in agricultural value chains: a question of enhanced inclusiveness? The case of Trustea in India.Verena Bitzer & Alessia Marazzi - 2020 - Agriculture and Human Values 38 (2):381-395.
    Recent studies have shed light on the emergence of Southern sustainability initiatives in commodity-based value chains. These initiatives position themselves as countering the exclusionary nature of many global multi-stakeholder initiatives, as critically analysed by previous studies. However, a common theoretical perspective on the inclusiveness of MSIs is still lacking. By drawing on the theory of regimes of engagement, we develop a theoretical framework which helps understanding the overt and subtle practices of including or excluding different stakeholders in MSIs. We apply (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Harnessing Wicked Problems in Multi-stakeholder Partnerships.Domenico Dentoni, Verena Bitzer & Greetje Schouten - 2018 - Journal of Business Ethics 150 (2):333-356.
    Despite the burgeoning literature on the governance and impact of cross-sector partnerships in the past two decades, the debate on how and when these collaborative arrangements address globally relevant problems and contribute to systemic change remains open. Building upon the notion of wicked problems and the literature on governing such wicked problems, this paper defines harnessing problems in multi-stakeholder partnerships as the approach of taking into account the nature of the problem and of organizing governance processes accordingly. The paper develops (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   33 citations  
  • Fit for addressing grand challenges? A process model for effective accountability relationships within multi‐stakeholder initiatives in developing countries.Esther Hennchen & Judith Schrempf-Stirling - 2020 - Business Ethics, the Environment and Responsibility 30 (3):5-24.
    Business is expected to contribute to grand challenges (GC) such as poverty within their corporate social responsibilities. Multi‐stakeholder initiatives (MSIs) have developed to a popular governance model to address GC. While existing scholarship has discussed the positive and negative aspects of MSIs, we know relatively little about how corporations within MSIs are held accountable. The objective of the study is to analyze the dynamics of accountability relationships between the corporate actor and the accountability forum to conceive a process model for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Rawlsian Critique of Utilitarianism: A Luhmannian Interpretation.Vladislav Valentinov - 2017 - Journal of Business Ethics 142 (1):25-35.
    The present paper builds on the Rawlsian critique of utilitarianism in order to identify the moral implications of Niklas Luhmann’s social systems theory. While Luhmann aptly discerned the pervasive problems of the precarious system–environment relations throughout the modern society, he took moral communication to be person-centered and thus ill-equipped to deal with these problems. At the same time, the Rawlsian possibility of sacrificing fundamental liberties for the sake of economic gains not only exemplifies the Luhmannian precariousness of the relations of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations