Corporate Social Responsibility and the Priority of Shareholders

Journal of Business Ethics 88 (S4):553-560 (2009)


In a series of articles, Thomas Dunfee defended the view that managers are permitted and at times, required, to utilize corporate resources to alleviate human misery even if this is at the expense of shareholder interests. In this article, I summarize Dunfee's defense of this view, raise some questions about his account and propose ways in which to answer these questions. The aim of this article is to highlight one of Dunfee's contributions to the debate about corporate governance and corporate responsibility

Download options


    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,879

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library


Added to PP

46 (#250,494)

6 months
1 (#386,001)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

References found in this work

What We Owe to Each Other.Thomas Scanlon - 1998 - Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Survey Article: Justice in Production.Nien-hê Hsieh - 2008 - Journal of Political Philosophy 16 (1):72–100.
Survey Article: Justice in Production &Ast.Nien-hê Hsieh - 2008 - Journal of Political Philosophy 16 (1):72-100.

View all 12 references / Add more references

Similar books and articles

The Obligatory Theory of Corporate Social Responsibility: A Discourse on Business Ethics.Jim I. Unah - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 7:43-48.
Corporate Democracy and the Rights of Shareholders.William Irvine - 1988 - Journal of Business Ethics 7 (1-2):99 - 108.
The Benefit Corporation and Corporate Social Responsibility.Janine S. Hiller - 2013 - Journal of Business Ethics 118 (2):287-301.
Differentiating Stakeholder Theories.John Kaler - 2003 - Journal of Business Ethics 46 (1):71 - 83.
The Idea of Corporate Social Responsibility.Jacob Dahi Rendtorff - 2007 - The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 1:111-117.