Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A Moral Pluralist Perspective on Corporate Social Responsibility: From Good to Controversial Practices

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study starts from the observation that there are relatively few controversial issues in corporate social responsibility (CSR). Given its strong normative background, CSR is rather an atypical discipline, especially in comparison with moral philosophy or applied ethics. Exploring the mainstream CSR agenda, this situation was echoed by widespread consensus on what was considered to be “good practice”: reducing pollution, shutting down sweatshops, discouraging tax evasion, and so on. However, interpretation of these issues through the lens of moral pluralism unveils latent controversies. The moral appraisal of good practices within CSR depends on key moral concepts (such as harm, responsibility, intention, and consequences), which have various—and often incompatible—interpretations. In a nutshell, this article argues that from a moral pluralist standpoint, all CSR topics are potentially controversial.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Archard, D. (Ed.). (1996). Philosophy and pluralism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrington, R. (1982). Advertising and behavioral control. Journal of Business Ethics, 1(1), 3–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakan, J. (2004). The corporation: The pathological pursuit of profit and power. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, S. B. (2000). Whose land is it anyway? National interest, indigenous stakeholders and colonial discourses: The case of the Jabiluka Uranium Mine. Organization and Environment, 13(1), 3–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, S. B. (2007). Corporate social responsibility: The good, the bad and the ugly. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, S. B. (2008). Necrocapitalism. Organization Studies, 29(12), 1541–1563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, J. (1999). Environment and social theory. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendheim, C. L., Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1998). Determining best practice in corporate-stakeholder relations using data envelopment analysis: An industry-level study. Business & Society, 37(3), 306–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berlin, I. (1979). Against the current: Essays in the history of ideas. London: Hogarth Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The location of culture. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Block, W. (1977). Coase and Demsetz on private property rights. Journal of Libertarian Studies, 1(2), 111–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Block, W. (2008). Labor economics from a free-market perspective: Employing the unemployable. Toh Tuck Link, Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Boatright, J. R. (2010). Finance ethics. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, C. S. (2005). The sustainable enterprise: Profiting from best practice. London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callicott, J. B. (1999). Beyond the land ethic: More essays in environmental philosophy. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of definitional construct. Business & Society, 38(3), 268–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castelló, I., & Lozano, J. M. (2011). Searching for new forms of legitimacy through corporate responsibility rhetoric. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(1), 11–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coase, R. H. (1960). The problem of social cost. Journal of Law and Economics, 3(October), 1–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, G. A. (2000). If you are an egalitarian, how come you’re so rich?. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, A. (1999). Responsible advertisers: A contractualist approach to ethical power. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 14(2), 82–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, K. (1996). Selling sin: The marketing of socially unacceptable products. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Den Uyl, D. J. (1984). The new crusaders: The corporate social responsibility debate. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunne, S. (2011). Corporate social responsibility. In M. Tadajewski (Ed.), Key concepts in critical management studies (pp. 62–66). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esty, D. C., & Winston, A. S. (2009). Green to gold. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg, J. (1984). Harm to others. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine, September 13.

  • Gallie, W. B. (1956). Essentially contested concepts. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 56, 167–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garriga, E., & Melé, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1), 51–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, M., & O’Connor, J. (Eds.). (2005). Corporate social responsibility and alcohol: The need and potential for partnership. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, A. (2008). New strategies for reputation management: Gaining control of issues, crises and corporate social responsibility. London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, D. (2001). Misguided virtue: False notions of corporate social responsibility. London: Institute of Economic Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennigfeld, J., Pohl, M., & Tolhurst, N. (Eds.). (2006). The ICCA handbook on corporate social responsibility. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heugens, P., van Oosterhout, H., & Kaptein, M. (2006). Foundations and applications for contractualist business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 68(3), 211–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A., & Keim, G. (2001). Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues. What’s the bottom line? Strategic Management Journal, 22(2), 125–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Idowu, S. O., & Filho, W. L. (Eds.). (2009). Professionals’ perspectives of corporate social responsibility. London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kekes, J. (1993). The morality of pluralism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinder, P., Domini, A., & Lydenberg, S. (1993). Investing for good: Making money while being socially responsible. New York: Harper Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick, J. (1986). A philosophic defense of advertising. Journal of Advertising, 15(2), 42–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korten, D. (2001). When corporations rule the world. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (2005). Corporate social responsibility: Doing the most good for your company and your cause. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laczniak, G. R., & Murphy, P. E. (2006). Normative perspectives for ethical and socially responsible marketing. Journal of Macromarketing, 26(2), 154–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, A. T., & Weber, J. S. J. (2008). Business and society: Stakeholder relations, ethics and public policy. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M.-D. (2008). A review of the theories of corporate social responsibility: Its evolutionary path and the road ahead. International Journal of Management Reviews, 10(1), 53–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindgreen, A., Hingley, M. K., & Vanhamme, J. (Eds.). (2009). The crisis of food brands: Sustaining safe, innovative and competitive food supply. Burlington, VT: Gower.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindgreen, A., & Swaen, V. (2010). Corporate social responsibility. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, T., McDonald, B., & Yun, H. (2008). A wolf in sheep’s clothing: The use of ethics-related terms in 10-K reports. Journal of Business Ethics, 89(1), 39–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacIntyre, A. (1998). A short history of ethics: A history of moral philosophy from the Homeric age to the twentieth century. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackie, J. L. (1977). Ethics: Inventing right and wrong. London: Viking Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mankiw, G. N. (2011). Principles of microeconomics. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2001). People and profits? The search for a link between a company’s social and financial performance. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(June), 268–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May, S., Cheney, G., & Roper, J. (2009). The debate over corporate social responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCloskey, H. J. (1969). Meta-ethics and normative ethics. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • McGee, R. W. (Ed.). (2012). The ethics of tax evasion. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moon, J. (2002). Corporate social responsibility: An overview. In C. Hartley (Ed.), The international directory of corporate philanthropy (pp. 3–14). London: Europa Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munthe, C. (2011). The price of precaution and the ethics of risks. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nader, R., Green, M., & Seligman, J. (1976). Taming the giant corporation. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: Partners for progress. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palazzo, G., & Richter, U. (2005). CSR business as usual? The case of the tobacco industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 61(4), 387–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Passas, N., & Goodwin, N. (Eds.). (2004). It’s legal but it ain’t right. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Philander, G. (Ed.). (2008). Encyclopedia of global warming and climate change. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K. (2005). The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid: Eradicating poverty through profits. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Wharton School Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prasad, A. (Ed.). (2003). Postcolonial theory and organizational analysis: A critical engagement. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, W. (1989). Actions, intentions, and consequences: The doctrine of double effect. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 18(4), 334–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1987). The idea of an overlapping consensus. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 7(1), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reich, R. B. (2008). Supercapitalism: The transformation of business, democracy, and everyday life. New York: Vintage/Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reich, R. B. (2010). Aftershock: The next economy and America’s future. New York: Knopf Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renouard, C. (2011). Corporate social responsibility, utilitarianism and the capabilities approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(1), 85–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richter, U. H. (2010). Liberal thought in reasoning on CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(4), 625–649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ridley-Duff, R. (2007). Communitarian perspectives on social enterprise. Corporate Governance, 15(2), 382–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, W. D. (1930). The right and the good. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, R. J. S. (2004). Poverty and abuse in the new sweatshops. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seethaler, S. (2009). Lies, damned lies, and science: How to sort through the noise around global warming, the latest health claims, and other scientific controversies. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharfman, M. (1996). The construct validity of the Kinder, Lydenberg & Domini social performance ratings data. Journal of Business Ethics, 15(3), 287–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, W. H. (2009). Marxism, business ethics, and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(4), 565–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinnott-Armstrong, W. (1988). Moral dilemmas. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sparkes, R., & Cowton, C. J. (2004). The maturing of socially responsible investment: A review of the developing link with corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 52(1), 45–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Starr, W. C. (1983). Codes of ethics: Towards a rule-utilitarian justification. Journal of Business Ethics, 2(2), 99–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, C. (1975). Where the law ends: The social control of corporate behaviour. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, L. J. (2008). Gender equity and corporate social responsibility. Business Ethics: A European Review, 17(1), 87–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanhamme, J., & Grobben, B. (2008). Too good to be true! The effectiveness of CSR history in countering negative publicity. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(2), 273–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Visser, W., Matten, D., Pohl, M., & Tolhurst, N. (Eds.). (2010). The A to Z of corporate social responsibility. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, J. (Ed.). (1997). Crapped out: How gambling ruins the economy and destroys lives. Monroe, ME: Common Courage Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, D. (2005). The market for virtue: The potential and limits of corporate social responsibility. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S., & Graves, S. (1997). The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waldron, J. (1988). The right to private property. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weissman, R. (2008). The system implodes: The 10 worst corporations of 2008. Multinational Monitor, 29(3). Retrieved November 10, 2011 from http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2008/112008/weissman.html.

  • Wellman, C. (1963). The ethical implications of cultural relativity. The Journal of Philosophy, 60(7), 169–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werther, B. W., & Chandler, D. (2010). Strategic social responsibility: Stakeholders in a global environment. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wong, D. B. (1984). Moral relativity. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodward, P. A. (Ed.). (2001). The doctrine of double effect: Philosophers debate a controversial moral principle. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Finance, Economics & Law, Groupe ESC Troyes en Champagne, 217, Avenue Pierre Brosolette, BP 710, 10002, Troyes Cedex, France

    Marian Eabrasu

Authors
  1. Marian Eabrasu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marian Eabrasu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Eabrasu, M. A Moral Pluralist Perspective on Corporate Social Responsibility: From Good to Controversial Practices. J Bus Ethics 110, 429–439 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1491-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1491-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation