How useful are universal owner arguments for a large, diversified investor such as Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM)? This article presents concrete issues, such as climate change and corruption, which can be analysed using universal owner arguments. However, it also discusses potential weaknesses of this argumentative strategy. The article includes a general background to Norway's Government Pension Fund Global - now one of the world's largest funds - and concludes that such a fund could utilise universal owner insights in its work as an active owner by (1) addressing both companies and standard setters on issues of portfolio-wide, long-term importance; (2) respecting a division of labour between different actors in the market place; and (3) taking part in collaborative arrangements, both within organised networks and informally between investors. Copyright (c) 2007 The Authors; Journal compilation (c) 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

No abstract

No abstract

This article furnishes a philosophical background for the current debate about responsibility and culpability for war crimes by referring to ideas from three important just war thinkers: Augustine, Francisco de Vitoria, and Michael Walzer. It combines lessons from these three thinkers with perspectives on current problems in the ethics of war, distinguishes between legal culpability, moral culpability, and moral responsibility, and stresses that even lower-ranking soldiers must in many cases assume moral responsibility for their acts, even though they are part of a military hierarchy and act under orders. The questions addressed in this article are arguably among the hardest and most muddled in military ethics and deserve close philosophical analysis and scrutiny.