Regulating Transnational Corporations through Corporate Codes of Conduct

Wawryk, Alexandra

doi:10.1057/9781403937520_3

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…McIntosh et al (1998) asserts that businesses are socially responsible when they consider and act on the needs and demands of their different stakeholder groups. Finally the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WBCSD) defines CSR as "The continuing commitment by business to behaving ethically and contributing to economic development while improving the quality of life of the workforce and their families as well as of the community and society at large" (Wawryk, 2003). At the other end of the spectrum of corporate responsibility are the more fundamentalist views of Friedman (1970) and Levitt (1983) who argue that business has only one responsibility and that is to make a profit for its shareholders.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholders’ Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility: Empirical Evidences from Iran

Salehi¹,

Azary

2009

IBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is very high on corporations' agenda in recent years. CSR means different things to different stakeholders but generally refers to saving people, communities and the environment way that goes beyond what is legally required of a firm. In such a position majority of stakeholders look for higher CSR. However, according to this survey there is an expectation gap between actual level of CSR and expected level from the viewpoint of stakeholders. In this survey the authors became to conclusion Iranian corporate sectors have very less CSR from the viewpoint of third parties. It not only damaged third parties confidence but corporate performance also.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholders’ Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility: Empirical Evidences from Iran

Salehi¹,

Azary

2009

IBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These firm-level initiatives may have responded to, or indirectly contributed to, a vague global norm regarding corporate respect for international human rights that made its way into various institutional bodies. 1 In the 1980s and 1990s, in the wake of several disasters in which businesses were involved, efforts to control abusive firms and salvage industries' reputations emerged (Haufler 2010, Wawryk 2003. 2 Although these industry sector-led initiatives indicated that companies might accept monitoring and enforcement of global human rights standards, and human rights advocates pushed for such global agreements, voluntary measures prevailed.…”

Section: Corporate Complicity and International Normsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Corporate Complicity in International Human Rights Violations

Payne

Pereira

2016

Annu. Rev. Law. Soc. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two literatures-business and human rights and transitional justice-can be usefully combined to consider the issue of corporate complicity in past human rights violations in dictatorships and armed conflicts. But although the transitional justice literature emphasizes the positive role that international pressure plays in advancing justice, the business and human rights literature identifies international constraints in the area of corporate abuses. These include the lack of settled law establishing businesses' human rights responsibilities, the absence of courts to adjudicate corporate human rights violation cases, and the international focus on voluntary principles over legal obligations. Despite this unpropitious international climate, civil society mobilization and judicial innovation have advanced accountability efforts and overcome the strong veto power of business in some countries, often creatively blending international and domestic law. These efforts from below provide access to justice for victims and potential models for overcoming the current accountability gap. 20.1

show abstract

“…Cutler (2001: 135) notes that after Westphalia the "entire edifice of modern international law came to be crafted on the foundation of positive acts of sovereign consent, evidenced explicitly in treaty law and implicitly in customary international law." In the orthodox or traditional view, states are the only subjects of international law, the only entities which possess international legal personality and the capacity to have duties and rights (Ruggie, 2004;Wawryk, 2003). Corporations are seen as objects whose legal rights and duties are "derivative of, and enforceable only by, states who as 'subjects' conferred those rights and duties upon them" (Cutler, 2001: 13).…”

Section: The Westphalian Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Private Political Authority and Public Responsibility: Transnational Politics, Transnational Firms, and Human Rights

Kobrin¹

2009

Bus Ethics Q

209

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transnational corporations have become actors with significant political power and authority which should entail responsibility and liability, specifically direct liability for complicity in human rights violations. Holding TNCs liable for human rights violations is complicated by the discontinuity between the fragmented legal/political structure of the TNC and its integrated strategic reality and the international state system which privileges sovereignty and non-intervention over the protection of individual rights. However, the post-Westphalian transition—the emergence of multiple authorities, increasing ambiguity of borders and jurisdiction and blurring of the line between the public and private spheres—should facilitate imposing direct responsibility on transnational firms. Mechanisms for imposing direct responsibility on TNCs are considered including voluntary agreements and international law. However, I conclude that a hybrid public-private regime which relies on non-hierarchical compliance mechanisms is likely to be both more effective and consistent with the structure of the emerging transnational order.

show abstract

Regulating Transnational Corporations through Corporate Codes of Conduct

Cited by 6 publications

References 7 publications

Stakeholders’ Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility: Empirical Evidences from Iran

Stakeholders’ Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility: Empirical Evidences from Iran

Corporate Complicity in International Human Rights Violations

Private Political Authority and Public Responsibility: Transnational Politics, Transnational Firms, and Human Rights

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About