The rise of liberal market economies, propagated by neoliberal free market thought, has created a vacant responsibility for public interests in the market order of society. This development has been critiqued by Catholic social teaching (CST), forcefully arguing that governments and businesses should be directed to the common good. In this debate, no attention has yet been given to the Reformational tradition and its principle of sphere sovereignty, which provides guidelines on the responsibilities of governments and companies for the public interest of society. This article analyzes the differences and similarities between CST and the Reformational philosophy in their critiques of the neoliberal free market perspective of Hayek. We apply the three perspectives to the case of orphan drugs in the pharmaceutical industry and show that CST and the Reformational philosophy offer valuable insights in correction to Hayek’s views on the responsibilities of governments and companies for public health interests.
{"title":"Free Markets and Public Interests in the Pharmaceutical Industry: A Comparative Analysis of Catholic and Reformational Critiques of Neoliberal Thought","authors":"Mathilde Oosterhuis-Blok, Johan Graafland","doi":"10.1017/beq.2022.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2022.9","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The rise of liberal market economies, propagated by neoliberal free market thought, has created a vacant responsibility for public interests in the market order of society. This development has been critiqued by Catholic social teaching (CST), forcefully arguing that governments and businesses should be directed to the common good. In this debate, no attention has yet been given to the Reformational tradition and its principle of sphere sovereignty, which provides guidelines on the responsibilities of governments and companies for the public interest of society. This article analyzes the differences and similarities between CST and the Reformational philosophy in their critiques of the neoliberal free market perspective of Hayek. We apply the three perspectives to the case of orphan drugs in the pharmaceutical industry and show that CST and the Reformational philosophy offer valuable insights in correction to Hayek’s views on the responsibilities of governments and companies for public health interests.</p>","PeriodicalId":48031,"journal":{"name":"Business Ethics Quarterly","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138532005","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
According to the nonworseness claim, it cannot be morally worse to exploit someone than not to interact with them at all when the interaction 1) is mutually beneficial, 2) is voluntary, and 3) has no negative effects on third parties. My aim in this article is to defend the moral significance of exploitation from this challenge. To that end, I develop a novel account of why sweatshop owners have a moral obligation to pay sweatshop workers a nonexploitative wage despite the fact that their relationship is entirely optional. More precisely, I defend two main claims. First, I show that sweatshop owners are morally obligated to pay sweatshop workers a nonexploitative wage even though they have a right not to hire them and even though that will require them to pay sweatshop workers a wage that is higher than the one they voluntarily accepted. Second, I explain why this obligation on the part of sweatshop owners is not defeated by the fact that other individuals not party to the transaction would benefit even more than sweatshop workers from receiving this additional level of pay.
{"title":"Sweatshops, Exploitation, and the Nonworseness Claim","authors":"Michael Kates","doi":"10.1017/beq.2022.11","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2022.11","url":null,"abstract":"According to the nonworseness claim, it cannot be morally worse to exploit someone than not to interact with them at all when the interaction 1) is mutually beneficial, 2) is voluntary, and 3) has no negative effects on third parties. My aim in this article is to defend the moral significance of exploitation from this challenge. To that end, I develop a novel account of why sweatshop owners have a moral obligation to pay sweatshop workers a nonexploitative wage despite the fact that their relationship is entirely optional. More precisely, I defend two main claims. First, I show that sweatshop owners are morally obligated to pay sweatshop workers a nonexploitative wage even though they have a right not to hire them and even though that will require them to pay sweatshop workers a wage that is higher than the one they voluntarily accepted. Second, I explain why this obligation on the part of sweatshop owners is not defeated by the fact that other individuals not party to the transaction would benefit even more than sweatshop workers from receiving this additional level of pay.","PeriodicalId":48031,"journal":{"name":"Business Ethics Quarterly","volume":"33 1","pages":"682 - 703"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43157602","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jordi Vives-Gabriel, W. Van Lent, Florian Wettstein
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.
{"title":"Moral Repair: Toward a Two-Level Conceptualization","authors":"Jordi Vives-Gabriel, W. Van Lent, Florian Wettstein","doi":"10.1017/beq.2022.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2022.6","url":null,"abstract":"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.","PeriodicalId":48031,"journal":{"name":"Business Ethics Quarterly","volume":"33 1","pages":"732 - 762"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44077584","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Niki A. den Nieuwenboer, Jennifer J. Kish-Gephart, L. Treviño, A. Peng, Iris Reychav
Organizations differ in the extent to which they emphasize the importance of status, yet most extant research on the role of status at work has utilized a limited view of status as merely a matter of a person’s status rank. In contrast, we examine people’s perceptions of the extent to which having status matters in their work context and explore the behavioral implications of such perceptions. We offer a new construct, perceived status importance, defined as employees’ subjective assessment of the degree to which people within their organization are preoccupied with status. Relying on social comparison theory, we propose that higher perceived status importance triggers envy, which leads to interpersonal deviance. Across three studies, using multiwave survey and experimental designs, we find support for these relationships. We also find support for the mitigating influence of core self-evaluations on the perceived status importance—envy relationship. Implications are discussed.
{"title":"The Dark Side of Status at Work: Perceived Status Importance, Envy, and Interpersonal Deviance","authors":"Niki A. den Nieuwenboer, Jennifer J. Kish-Gephart, L. Treviño, A. Peng, Iris Reychav","doi":"10.1017/beq.2022.2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2022.2","url":null,"abstract":"Organizations differ in the extent to which they emphasize the importance of status, yet most extant research on the role of status at work has utilized a limited view of status as merely a matter of a person’s status rank. In contrast, we examine people’s perceptions of the extent to which having status matters in their work context and explore the behavioral implications of such perceptions. We offer a new construct, perceived status importance, defined as employees’ subjective assessment of the degree to which people within their organization are preoccupied with status. Relying on social comparison theory, we propose that higher perceived status importance triggers envy, which leads to interpersonal deviance. Across three studies, using multiwave survey and experimental designs, we find support for these relationships. We also find support for the mitigating influence of core self-evaluations on the perceived status importance—envy relationship. Implications are discussed.","PeriodicalId":48031,"journal":{"name":"Business Ethics Quarterly","volume":"33 1","pages":"261 - 295"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45695883","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Voluntary sustainability standards (VSS) aim to encourage ethical behaviors of organizations, yet studies show that many VSS adopters do not live up to these promises. Existing literature typically attributes the reason for this ineffectiveness to either policy–practice decoupling, owing to a lack of adhering to VSS requirements, or means–ends decoupling, owing to a lack of adapting to the local context. However, little is known about how the contradictory needs of adherence and adaptation evolve throughout VSS implementation. Building on the knowledge transfer literature, we develop a dynamic conceptual framework that distinguishes two phases of VSS implementation. Specifically, we theorize how tensions emerge in the transition between phases since the first phase primarily calls for adherence, whereas the second calls for adaptation. Applying this framework, we develop propositions to illustrate how these tensions relate to different VSS characteristics: stringency, enforcement, and scope. The article concludes with implications and future research directions for VSS scholarship.
{"title":"The Challenge of Implementing Voluntary Sustainability Standards: A Dynamic Framework on the Tension between Adherence and Adaptation","authors":"Lucrezia Nava, Maja Tampe","doi":"10.1017/beq.2022.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2022.1","url":null,"abstract":"Voluntary sustainability standards (VSS) aim to encourage ethical behaviors of organizations, yet studies show that many VSS adopters do not live up to these promises. Existing literature typically attributes the reason for this ineffectiveness to either policy–practice decoupling, owing to a lack of adhering to VSS requirements, or means–ends decoupling, owing to a lack of adapting to the local context. However, little is known about how the contradictory needs of adherence and adaptation evolve throughout VSS implementation. Building on the knowledge transfer literature, we develop a dynamic conceptual framework that distinguishes two phases of VSS implementation. Specifically, we theorize how tensions emerge in the transition between phases since the first phase primarily calls for adherence, whereas the second calls for adaptation. Applying this framework, we develop propositions to illustrate how these tensions relate to different VSS characteristics: stringency, enforcement, and scope. The article concludes with implications and future research directions for VSS scholarship.","PeriodicalId":48031,"journal":{"name":"Business Ethics Quarterly","volume":"33 1","pages":"296 - 326"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43526247","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Roberto Frega argues for the advancement of workplace democracy theorisation by synergising the conceptual pathways of various disciplines. He places a particular emphasis on the practice of employee involvement, which, according to him, constitutes one of the three pillars of workplace democracy, the other two being voice and representation. The present commentary broadens the interdisciplinary horizons of this debate by reflecting on the central role of accountability in workplace democracy and the workings of the three pillars identified by Frega. The commentary explores the potential of accountability and the insights drawn from critical accounting research to translate democratic ideals into meaningful and sustainable organisational practices and so strengthen workplace democracy.
{"title":"The Role of Accountability in Workplace Democracy","authors":"G. Goncharenko","doi":"10.1017/beq.2022.3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2022.3","url":null,"abstract":"Roberto Frega argues for the advancement of workplace democracy theorisation by synergising the conceptual pathways of various disciplines. He places a particular emphasis on the practice of employee involvement, which, according to him, constitutes one of the three pillars of workplace democracy, the other two being voice and representation. The present commentary broadens the interdisciplinary horizons of this debate by reflecting on the central role of accountability in workplace democracy and the workings of the three pillars identified by Frega. The commentary explores the potential of accountability and the insights drawn from critical accounting research to translate democratic ideals into meaningful and sustainable organisational practices and so strengthen workplace democracy.","PeriodicalId":48031,"journal":{"name":"Business Ethics Quarterly","volume":"33 1","pages":"381 - 393"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49549040","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
I n his recently published book, Georges Enderle discusses wealth creation, human rights, and corporate responsibility. Enderle presents an original argument, according to which business enterprises, as organizations, must create wealth but also carry moral obligations on human rights. It is an intriguing argument, especially when compared to mainstream perspectives on corporate responsibility, usually centered on profit and shareholder returns or on stakeholder value creation. The first part of the book presents an innovative conception of wealth creation. In the following section, Enderle develops a normative-ethical perspective centered on human rights. He carefully defines the purpose of business and economy as the creation of wealth and argues that it should be guided by human rights. The last section is dedicated to showing how his perspective can be applied to the ethics of business organizations. Enderle argues that it is necessary to understand wealth in a comprehensive manner: wealth not only involves economic capital but also encompasses natural, human, and social capital. Enderle argues that the literature dealing with a nation’s wealth that considers only its monetary dimension is limited. When applied to business ethics, this notion of wealth implies, as he seeks to demonstrate throughout the book, a set of corporate ethical obligations. The author draws a parallel between wealth and public and private goods. Public goods are defined by nonexcludability and nonrivalry. The wealth of a society, according to Enderle, is defined by the same characteristics. Wealth can be seen as a combination, and not a mere aggregation, of private and public wealth because they are mutually dependent. There is no way of creating private wealth without existing public wealth, and public wealth depends on the availability of private wealth. An implication of a broader understanding of wealth as private and public is the type ofmotivation behindwealth creation. If it is true that self-interestedmotivations do not underlie preferences and choices for public goods, the creation of wealth, in Enderle’s terms, would also require other-regarding motivations to be carried out. Furthermore, the process of wealth generation has not only the productive dimension—traditionally considered by the mainstream literature—but also a distributive one. In the book, Enderle seeks to demonstrate how corporate responsibility should face income inequalities in business organizations and society at large (chapter 19). Enderle argues for a reduction of executive compensation as a means of diminishing income inequality within business firms. The discussion of inequalities and rewards echoes contemporary work in political philosophy on “limitarianism” (Robeyns 2022), the view that no one should have more than a certain upper limit of wealth 352 Business Ethics Quarterly
{"title":"Corporate Responsibility for Wealth Creation and Human Rights, by Georges Enderle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021. 332 pp.","authors":"Marcos Paulo de Lucca-Silveira","doi":"10.1017/beq.2022.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2022.5","url":null,"abstract":"I n his recently published book, Georges Enderle discusses wealth creation, human rights, and corporate responsibility. Enderle presents an original argument, according to which business enterprises, as organizations, must create wealth but also carry moral obligations on human rights. It is an intriguing argument, especially when compared to mainstream perspectives on corporate responsibility, usually centered on profit and shareholder returns or on stakeholder value creation. The first part of the book presents an innovative conception of wealth creation. In the following section, Enderle develops a normative-ethical perspective centered on human rights. He carefully defines the purpose of business and economy as the creation of wealth and argues that it should be guided by human rights. The last section is dedicated to showing how his perspective can be applied to the ethics of business organizations. Enderle argues that it is necessary to understand wealth in a comprehensive manner: wealth not only involves economic capital but also encompasses natural, human, and social capital. Enderle argues that the literature dealing with a nation’s wealth that considers only its monetary dimension is limited. When applied to business ethics, this notion of wealth implies, as he seeks to demonstrate throughout the book, a set of corporate ethical obligations. The author draws a parallel between wealth and public and private goods. Public goods are defined by nonexcludability and nonrivalry. The wealth of a society, according to Enderle, is defined by the same characteristics. Wealth can be seen as a combination, and not a mere aggregation, of private and public wealth because they are mutually dependent. There is no way of creating private wealth without existing public wealth, and public wealth depends on the availability of private wealth. An implication of a broader understanding of wealth as private and public is the type ofmotivation behindwealth creation. If it is true that self-interestedmotivations do not underlie preferences and choices for public goods, the creation of wealth, in Enderle’s terms, would also require other-regarding motivations to be carried out. Furthermore, the process of wealth generation has not only the productive dimension—traditionally considered by the mainstream literature—but also a distributive one. In the book, Enderle seeks to demonstrate how corporate responsibility should face income inequalities in business organizations and society at large (chapter 19). Enderle argues for a reduction of executive compensation as a means of diminishing income inequality within business firms. The discussion of inequalities and rewards echoes contemporary work in political philosophy on “limitarianism” (Robeyns 2022), the view that no one should have more than a certain upper limit of wealth 352 Business Ethics Quarterly","PeriodicalId":48031,"journal":{"name":"Business Ethics Quarterly","volume":"32 1","pages":"352 - 355"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45327805","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Better Business: How the B Corp Movement Is Remaking Capitalism, by Christopher Marquis. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2020. 312 pp.","authors":"R. Antolín-López","doi":"10.1017/beq.2022.4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2022.4","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48031,"journal":{"name":"Business Ethics Quarterly","volume":"32 1","pages":"348 - 351"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48722240","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"BEQ volume 32 issue 2 Cover and Front matter","authors":"F. D. Hond, Bradley R. Agle, Laura Albareda","doi":"10.1017/beq.2022.7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2022.7","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48031,"journal":{"name":"Business Ethics Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":"f1 - f5"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43362066","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号