Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 149, Issue 3, pp 519–534 | Cite as

Accountable to Whom? Rethinking the Role of Corporations in Political CSR

  • Waheed Hussain
  • Jeffrey Moriarty


According to Palazzo and Scherer, the changing role of business corporations in society requires that we take new measures to integrate these organizations into society-wide processes of democratic governance. We argue that their model of integration has a fundamental problem. Instead of treating business corporations as agents that must be held accountable to the democratic reasoning of affected parties, it treats corporations as agents who can hold others accountable. In our terminology, it treats business corporations as “supervising authorities” rather than “functionaries.” The result is that Palazzo and Scherer’s model does not actually address the democratic deficit that it is meant to solve. In order to fix the problem, we advocate removing business corporations from any policymaking role in political CSR and limiting participation to political NGOs and other groups that meet the standards we set out for a politically representative organization (PRO).


Accountability Corporate social responsibility Deliberative democracy Legitimacy Political CSR 


  1. Anderson, E. (1993). Value in ethics and economics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Archer, R. (1996). The philosophical case for economic democracy. In U. Pagano & B. Rowthorn (Eds.), Democracy and efficiency in the economic enterprise (pp. 13–35). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Banerjee, S. B. (2014). A critical perspective on corporate social responsibility: Towards a global goverance framework. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 10(1/2), 84–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baur, D. (2011). NGOs as legitimate partners of corporations: A political conceptualization. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Baur, D., & Arenas, D. (2014). The value of unregulated business–NGO interaction: A deliberative perspective. Business and Society, 53(2), 157–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baur, D., & Palazzo, G. (2011). The moral legitimacy of NGOs as partners of corporations. Business Ethics Quarterly, 21(4), 579–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beitz, C. R. (1989). Political equality: An essay in democratic theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Boatright, J. R. (1994). Fiduciary duties and the shareholder–management relation: Or, what’s so special about shareholders? Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(4), 393–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boatright, J. R. (2004). Employee governance and the ownership of the firm. Business Ethics Quarterly, 14(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brenkert, G. G. (1992a). Freedom, participation, and corporations: The issue of corporate (economic) democracy. Business Ethics Quarterly, 2(3), 251–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brenkert, G. G. (1992b). Private corporations and public welfare. Public Affairs Quarterly, 6(2), 155–168.Google Scholar
  12. Cohen, J. (1989). Deliberation and democratic legitimacy. In A. Hamlin & P. Pettit (Eds.), The good polity: Normative analysis of the state (pp. 17–34). New York: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  13. Cragg, W. (2000). Human rights and business ethics: Fashioning a new social contract. Journal of Business Ethics, 27(1/2), 205–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Crane, A., Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). Corporations and citizenship. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dahl, R. A. (1985). A preface to economic democracy. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  16. Dahl, R. A. (1989). Democracy and its critics. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Doh, J. P. (2005). Offshore outsourcing: Implications for international business and strategic management theory and practice. Journal of Management Studies, 42(3), 695–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Edward, P., & Willmott, H. (2008). Structures, identities, and politics: Bringing corporate citizenship into the corporation. In A. G. Scherer & G. Palazzo (Eds.), Handbook of research on global corporate citizenship (pp. 405–429). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  19. Ellerman, D. P. (1992). Property and contract in economics: The case for economic democracy. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  20. Fort, T. L., & Schipani, C. A. (2004). The role of business in fostering peaceful societies. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Frynas, J. G., & Stephens, S. (2015). Political corporate social responsibility: Reviewing theories and setting new agendas. International Journal of Management Reviews, 17(4), 483–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Goodin, R. E. (2007). Enfranchising all affected interests and its alternatives. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 35(1), 40–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. F. (2004). Why deliberative democracy?. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  25. Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  26. Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy (W. Rehg, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  27. Hansmann, H. (1996). The ownership of enterprise. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Hsieh, N.-H. (2005). Rawlsian justice and workplace republicanism. Social Theory & Practice, 31(1), 115–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hussain, W. (2012). Is ethical consumerism an impermissible form of vigilantism? Philosophy & Public Affairs, 40(2), 111–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hussain, W. (2013, August 17). [Review of the book Public Capitalism: The Political Authority of Corporate Executives, by C. McMahon]. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. Retrieved from
  31. Hussain, W., & Moriarty, J. (2014). Corporations, the democratic deficit, and voting. Georgetown Journal of Law & Public Policy, 12(special issue), 429–450.Google Scholar
  32. Jensen, M. C. (2002). Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(2), 235–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kobrin, S. J. (2009). Private political authority and public responsibility: Transnational politics, transnational firms, and human rights. Business Ethics Quarterly, 19(3), 349–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mansbridge, J. (1999). Everyday talk in the deliberative system. In S. Macedo (Ed.), Deliberative politics: Essays on democracy and disagreement (pp. 211–239). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Matten, D., & Crane, A. (2005). Corporate citizenship: Toward an extended theoretical conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 166–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McCall, J. J. (2001). Employee voice in corporate governance: A defense of strong participation rights. Business Ethics Quarterly, 11(1), 195–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. McMahon, C. (1994). Authority and democracy: A general theory of government and management. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  38. McMahon, C. (2013). Public capitalism: The political authority of corporate executives. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  39. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research, and application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  40. Moog, S., Spicer, A., & Böhm, S. (2015). The politics of multi-stakeholder initiatives: The crisis of the Forest Stewardship Council. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(3), 469–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Moriarty, J. (2014). Stakeholder theory and stakeholder democracy: An excavation and defense. Business and Society, 53(6), 820–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Palazzo, G., & Scherer, A. G. (2006). Corporate legitimacy as deliberation: A communicative framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 66(1), 71–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rawls, J. (1993). Political liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Rubenstein, J. C. (2013). The misuse of power, not bad representation: Why it is beside the point that no one elected Oxfam. Journal of Political Philosophy, 22(2), 204–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ruggie, J. G. (2004). Reconstituting the global public domain: Issues, actors, and practices. European Journal of International Relations, 10(4), 499–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. (2007). Toward a political conception of corporate responsibility: Business and society seen from a Habermasian perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1096–1120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. (2011). The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy. Journal of Management Studies, 48(4), 899–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Scherer, A. G., Palazzo, G., & Baumann, D. (2006). Global rules and private actors: Toward a new role of the transnational corporation in global governance. Business Ethics Quarterly, 16(4), 505–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Singer, P. (1974/2012). All animals are equal. In D. Schmidtz & E. Willott (Eds.), Environmental ethics: What really matters, what really works (pp. 49–59). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Vogel, D. (2010). The private regulation of global corporate conduct: Achievements and limitations. Business and Society, 49(1), 68–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Whelan, F. G. (1983). Prologue: Democratic theory and the boundary problem. In J. R. Pennock & J. W. Chapman (Eds.), Liberal democracy (pp. 13–47). New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Department of PhilosophyBentley UniversityWalthamUSA

Personalised recommendations