The Role of Deliberative Mini-Publics in Improving the Deliberative Capacity of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives

IF 3.4 2区 哲学 Q2 BUSINESS Business Ethics Quarterly Pub Date : 2022-09-22 DOI:10.1017/beq.2022.20
S. Pek, S. Mena, Brent J Lyons
{"title":"The Role of Deliberative Mini-Publics in Improving the Deliberative Capacity of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives","authors":"S. Pek, S. Mena, Brent J Lyons","doi":"10.1017/beq.2022.20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs)—private governance mechanisms involving firms, civil society organizations, and other actors deliberating to set rules, such as standards or codes of conduct, with which firms comply voluntarily—have become important tools for governing global business activities and the social and environmental consequences of these activities. Yet, this growth is paralleled with concerns about MSIs’ deliberative capacity, including the limited inclusion of some marginalized stakeholders, bias toward corporate interests, and, ultimately, ineffectiveness in their role as regulators. In this article, we conceptualize MSIs as deliberative systems to open the black box of the different elements that make up the MSI polity and better understand how their deliberative capacity hinges on problems in different elements. On the basis of this conceptualization, we examine how deliberative mini-publics—forums in which a randomly selected group of individuals from a particular population engage in learning and facilitated deliberations about a topic—can improve the deliberative capacity of MSIs.","PeriodicalId":48031,"journal":{"name":"Business Ethics Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Business Ethics Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2022.20","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs)—private governance mechanisms involving firms, civil society organizations, and other actors deliberating to set rules, such as standards or codes of conduct, with which firms comply voluntarily—have become important tools for governing global business activities and the social and environmental consequences of these activities. Yet, this growth is paralleled with concerns about MSIs’ deliberative capacity, including the limited inclusion of some marginalized stakeholders, bias toward corporate interests, and, ultimately, ineffectiveness in their role as regulators. In this article, we conceptualize MSIs as deliberative systems to open the black box of the different elements that make up the MSI polity and better understand how their deliberative capacity hinges on problems in different elements. On the basis of this conceptualization, we examine how deliberative mini-publics—forums in which a randomly selected group of individuals from a particular population engage in learning and facilitated deliberations about a topic—can improve the deliberative capacity of MSIs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
深思熟虑的小型公众在提高多方利益相关者倡议的深思熟虑能力中的作用
多方利益相关者倡议(MSIs)——涉及企业、民间社会组织和其他行为者的私人治理机制,它们正在考虑制定企业自愿遵守的规则,如标准或行为准则——已成为管理全球商业活动以及这些活动的社会和环境后果的重要工具。然而,这种增长与对MSIs审议能力的担忧并行,包括对一些边缘化利益相关者的有限包容、对企业利益的偏见,以及最终对其监管作用的无效性。在这篇文章中,我们将MSI概念化为审议系统,以打开构成MSI政体的不同元素的黑匣子,并更好地理解其审议能力如何取决于不同元素中的问题。在这个概念的基础上,我们研究了审议性小型公众——从特定人群中随机选择的一群人参与学习并促进对某个主题的审议的论坛——如何提高MSIs的审议能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
10.00%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Business Ethics Quarterly (BEQ) is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal that publishes theoretical and empirical research relevant to the ethics of business. Since 1991 this multidisciplinary journal has published articles and reviews on a broad range of topics, including the internal ethics of business organizations, the role of business organizations in larger social, political and cultural frameworks, and the ethical quality of market-based societies and market-based relationships. It recognizes that contributions to the better understanding of business ethics can come from any quarter and therefore publishes scholarship rooted in the humanities, social sciences, and professional fields.
期刊最新文献
A Better Account of Constitutional Contractarianism Implies a Cooperative Form of Governance of the Sharing Economy: Critical Assessment of Hielscher, Everding, and Pies’ (2022) “Ordo-responsibility in the Sharing Economy: A Social Contracts Perspective” Corporate Responsibility and Repair for Anti-Black Racism The Free-Riding Issue in Contemporary Organizations: Lessons from the Common Good Perspective Business without Management: MacIntyrean Accounting, Management, and Practice-Led Business It’s a Three-Ring Circus: How Morally Educative Practices Are Undermined by Institutions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1