Business Ethics Quarterly 7 (1):51-66 (1997)
Stakeholder theory has become a central issue in the literature on business ethics / business and society. There are, however, a number of problems with stakeholder theory as currently understood. Among these are: 1) the lack of a coherent justificatory framework, 2) the problem of adjudicating between stakeholders, and 3) the problem of stakeholder identification. In this essay, I propose that a possible source of obligations to stakeholders is the principle of fairness (or fair play) as discussed in the political philosophic literature of Rawls, Simmons, and Cullity among others. The principle of fairness states that, “Whenever persons or groups of persons voluntarily accept the benefits of a mutually beneficial scheme of co-operation requiring sacrifice or contribution on the parts of the participants and there exists the possibility of free-riding, there exist obligations of fairness on the part of these persons or groups to co-operate in proportion to the benefits accepted.” In this essay I discuss the gaps in the current stakeholder literature, elucidate and defend a principle of fairness that fills the gap, compare the fairness model to other similar models of business ethics, and draw some conclusions for the future of stakeholder theory
|Keywords||Applied Philosophy Business and Professional Ethics Social Science|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
An Institution of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in Multi-National Corporations (MNCs): Form and Implications. [REVIEW]Krista Bondy, Jeremy Moon & Dirk Matten - 2012 - Journal of Business Ethics 111 (2):281-299.
Stakeholder Management, Reciprocity and Stakeholder Responsibility.Yves Fassin - 2012 - Journal of Business Ethics 109 (1):83-96.
Corporate and Stakeholder Responsibility: Making Business Ethics a Two-Way Conversation.Jerry D. Goodstein & Andrew C. Wicks - 2007 - Business Ethics Quarterly 17 (3):375-398.
Theorising Corporate Social Responsibility as an Essentially Contested Concept: Is a Definition Necessary?Adaeze Okoye - 2009 - Journal of Business Ethics 89 (4):613-627.
Similar books and articles
The Environment as a Stakeholder? A Fairness-Based Approach.Robert A. Phillips & Joel Reichart - 2000 - Journal of Business Ethics 23 (2):185 - 197.
If Fairness is the Problem, is Consent the Solution? Integrating ISCT and Stakeholder Theory.J. van Buren Iii Harry - 2001 - Business Ethics Quarterly 11 (3):481-499.
Trust and Stakeholder Theory: Trustworthiness in the Organisation–Stakeholder Relationship. [REVIEW]Michelle Greenwood & I. I. I. Buren - 2010 - Journal of Business Ethics 95 (3):425-438.
The Politics of Stakeholder Theory.R. Edward Freeman - 1994 - Business Ethics Quarterly 4 (4):409-421.
Fairness, Political Obligation, and the Justificatory Gap.Jiafeng Zhu - 2014 - Journal of Moral Philosophy (4):1-23.
Three Elements of Stakeholder Legitimacy.Adele Santana - 2012 - Journal of Business Ethics 105 (2):257-265.
The Primordial Stakeholder: Advancing the Conceptual Consideration of Stakeholder Status for the Natural Environment. [REVIEW]Cathy Driscoll & Mark Starik - 2004 - Journal of Business Ethics 49 (1):55-73.
If Fairness is the Problem, is Consent the Solution? Integrating ISCT and Stakeholder Theory.I. I. I. Buren - 2001 - Business Ethics Quarterly 11 (3).
Mediation as an Ethical Adjunct of Stakeholder Theory.Marc Lampe - 2001 - Journal of Business Ethics 31 (2):165 - 173.
Added to index2011-12-01
Total downloads91 ( #57,128 of 2,171,850 )
Recent downloads (6 months)12 ( #26,718 of 2,171,850 )
How can I increase my downloads?