Skip to main content

Erosion of Sovereign Control: Deliberation, ‘We-Reasoning,’ and the Legitimacy of Norms and Standards in a Globalized World

  • Chapter

Part of the The International Society of Business, Economics, and Ethics Book Series book series (ISBEE,volume 5)

Abstract

This chapter analyzes the complex ways in which new norms and standards emerge out of multi-stakeholder initiatives when stakeholders have conflicting interests. We present a team game-theoretical framework in which players can switch between two kinds of reasoning: an individual mode in which stakeholders aim for the best possible outcome for themselves and a “we-mode” in which they are genuinely concerned with finding a standard that is optimal for the whole group. We show that a higher inclination towards “we-mode” reasoning is beneficial overall and maximizes individual payoffs and the outcome for the entire group. We argue that cooperation is therefore in the rational self-interest of stakeholders; it is not just desirable from a vague moral perspective. We conclude that in a world where national regulatory frameworks are losing their grip, only norms that have been worked out by a sufficiently large number of “we-reasoning” stakeholders can be called legitimate.

Keywords

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

The authors appear in alphabetical order.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bacharach, M. (1999). Interactive team reasoning: A contribution to the theory of co-operation. Research in Economics, 53, 117–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bacharach, M. (2006). Beyond individual choice: Teams and frames in game theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press (ed. by Gold, N. and Sugden, R.).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, S., & Cashore, B. (2007). Can non-state global governance be legitimate? An analytical framework. Regulation and Governance, 1, 247–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S., Jackson, G., & Matten, D. (2012). ‘Corporate social responsibility and institutional theory: New perspectives on private governance’, Socio-Economic-Review, Special issue: Corporate social responsibility and institutional theory: New perspectives on private governance, 10, 3–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cashore, B., Auld, G., & Newsom, D. (2004). Governing through markets: Forest certification and the emergence of non-state authority. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coglianese, C., & Nash, J. (Eds.). (2001). Regulating from the inside: Can environmental management systems achieve policy goals? Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conzelmann, T. (2012). A procedural approach to the design of voluntary clubs: Negotiating the responsible care global charter. Socio-Economic Review, 10, 193–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dingwerth, K. (2007). The new transnationalism: Transnational governance and democratic legitimacy. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Djelic, M. L., & Quack, S. (Eds.). (2010). Transnational communities. Shaping global economic governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fransen, L. (2012). Multi-stakeholder governance and voluntary program interactions: Legitimation politics in the institutional design of corporate social responsibility. Socio-Economic Review, 10, 163–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, M. (2006). Rationality in collective action. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 36, 3–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, R. (2011). Internationale standardisation and global Governance’. Die Betriebswirtschaft, 71, 121–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hakli, R., Miller, K., & Tuomela, R. (2010). Two kinds of we-reasoning. Economics and Philosophy, 26, 291–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klinke, A. (2009). Deliberative Politik in transnationalen Räumen – Legitimation und Effektivität in der grenzüberschreitenden Umweltpolitik zwischen Kanada und USA. Politische Vierteljahreszeitschrift, 50, 774–803.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krause, J. (2012). Collective intentionality and the (Re)production of social norms: The scope for a critical social science. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 42, 323–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manin, B., Stein, E., & Mansbridge, J. (1987). On legitimacy and political deliberation. Political Theory, 15, 338–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansbridge, J., et al. (2010). The place of self-interest and the role of power in deliberative democracy. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 18, 64–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D., & Crane, A. (2005). Corporate citizenship: Toward an extended theoretical conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 30, 166–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattli, W., & Büthe, T. (2003). Setting international standards: Technological rationality or primacy of power? World Politics, 56, 1–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, G. (2010). Legitimacy in financial markets: Credit default swaps in the current Crisis’ special issue on Law and legitimacy in transnational governance. Socio-Economic Review, 8, 17–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Overdevest, C. (2010). ‘Comparing forest certification schemes: The case of ratcheting standards in the forest sector’, Special issue on law and legitimacy in transnational governance. Socio-Economic Review, 8, 47–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palazzo, G., & Scherer, A. (2006). Corporate legitimacy as deliberation: A communicative framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 66, 71–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pigou, A. (1920, 1960). The economics of welfare (4th ed.). London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potoski, M., & Prakash, A. (2009). Voluntary programs – a club theory perspective. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Prakash, A., & Potoski, M. (2006a). Racing to the bottom? Trade, environmental governance, and ISO 14001. American Journal of Political Science, 50, 350–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prakash, A., & Potoski, M. (2006b). The voluntary environmentalists: Green clubs, ISO 14001, and voluntary environmental regulations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Quack, S. (2010a). Law, expertise and legitimacy in transnational economic governance, Special issue on law and legitimacy in transnational governance, Socio-Economic Review, 8, 3–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quack, S. (2010b). Law, expertise and legitimacy in transnational economic governance: An Introduction. Socio-Economic Review, 8, 3–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Risse, T., & Kleine, M. (2007). Assessing the legitimacy of the EU’s treaty revision methods. Journal of Common Markets Studies, 1, 69–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A., 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, 505–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Searle, J. R. (1995). The construction of social reality. London: Penguin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20, 571–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sugden, R. (2000). Team preferences. Economics and Philosophy, 16, 175–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sugden, R. (2008). Nash equilibrium, team reasoning, and cognitive hierarchy theory. Acta Psychologica, 128, 402–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuomela, R. (2007). The philosophy of social reality: The shared point of view. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, D. (2005). Market for virtue. Washington: Brookings Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windsor, D. (2004). The development of international business norms. Business Ethics Quarterly, 14, 729–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, I. M. (1996). Communication and the other: Beyond deliberative democracy. In S. Benhabib (Ed.), Democracy and difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juljan Krause .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Krause, J., Scholz, M. (2016). Erosion of Sovereign Control: Deliberation, ‘We-Reasoning,’ and the Legitimacy of Norms and Standards in a Globalized World. In: Coutinho de Arruda, M., Rok, B. (eds) Understanding Ethics and Responsibilities in a Globalizing World. The International Society of Business, Economics, and Ethics Book Series, vol 5. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23081-8_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics