Florian Wettstein

Normativity, Ethics, and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: A Critical Assessment

This article critically assesses the work of the UN Special Representative for Business and Human Rights (SRSG) John Ruggie. The article adopts a normative perspective on the issue. Thus, its critique is derived from the standpoint of ethics. The SRSG was instrumental in shifting the burden of proof to those who deny corporate human rights responsibilities. This achievement, however, is relativized by the very restrictive interpretation of such responsibilities, both in terms of their scope as well as the normative force assigned to them. Finally, the article explores and analyzes the SRSGs relative reluctance to address and engage with ethical categories more explicitly. It outlines the dangers and blind spots that may result from this reluctance and reflects on the role that ethics can, and perhaps should, play in the broader debate on business and human rights.

Corporate Responsibility in the Collective Age: Toward a Conception of Collaborative Responsibility

In this article, I will argue that it is time to rethink and reconfigure some of the established assumptions underlying our conception of moral responsibility. Specifically, there is a mismatch between the individualism of our common sense morality and the imperative for collaborative responses to global problems in what I will call the “collective age.” This must have an impact also on the way we think about the responsibility of corporations. I will argue that most plausibly we ought to reframe corporate responsibility as a conception of collaborative responsibility. Such a conception of collaborative responsibility is characterized by five key elements: first, it is based on the moral imperative for collaboration. Second, it shifts emphasis from commission to omission. Third, it is not only negative but also, and perhaps essentially, positive responsibility. Fourth, it is political responsibility. And finally, it is, most basically, human rights responsibility.

CSR’s New Challenge: Corporate Political Advocacy

In summer 2011, Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz launched a highly publicized campaign against the prevailing political climate in the U.S. and the respective “lack of cooperation and irresponsibility among elected officials as they have put partisan agendas before the people’s agenda.”1 Building a coalition with other corporations, they pledged “to withhold any further campaign contributions to elected members of Congress and the President until a fair, bipartisan deal is reached that sets our nation on stronger long-term fiscal footing.”2 Furthermore, in an open letter to his “dear fellow citizens,” he called upon all citizens to send a message to their elected officials in which to remind them “that the time to put citizenship ahead of partisanship is now.”3 Schultz’s political advance raised eyebrows not only in the corporate and political communities, but also among scholars concerned with questions of business ethics and corporate responsibility. Noted business ethicists Andy Crane and Dirk Matten, for example, commented: “For a business leader like Schultz to come out and so explicitly take a stand that effectively seeks to hold his domestic politicians to ransom until they do his bidding represents a fairly unique twist on the growing involvement of business in politics.”4