Accountability in an Unequal World

Rubenstein, Jennifer

doi:10.1111/j.1468-2508.2007.00563.x

Cited by 115 publications

(117 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

114

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, given the existence of weak institutions, high rates of corruption and the inability of governments to implement regulations (Visser, 2006), there have been increased calls for "surrogate accountability" in developing countries (Sinkovics et al, 2016). Such surrogates, which can take a variety of forms (governments, supra-national bodies, partnerships among corporations or civil society) may be better equipped to pressurise power wielders to do what is "right" (Rubenstein, 2007). However, with respect to Zambia specifically, Hamann and Kapelus (2004, p. 90) argue that, "in the case of the Copperbelt, the danger is that it is too remote for consistent surveillance from independent and critical organizations".…”

Section: Theoretical Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From this perspective, civil society is considered good at advocacy but poor at analysis. Given MNCs' role as power wielders or as dominant stakeholders in the Zambian context of severe institutional constraints on the part of the state, civil society has the potential to act as surrogate account holders (Belal el al., 2015;Rubenstein, 2007) pressurising the powerful to act in an ethical manner (Sinkovics et al, 2016). However, other constraints in turn, relating to civil society's power of analysis render this difficult.…”

Section: At the National Level: A) Strength Of The Mncs Versus The Stmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Stakeholder interactions and corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices

Phiri

Mantzari

Gleadle

2018

AAAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to critically explore the interactions of key stakeholders and their impact upon corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices in the Zambian copper mining sector. In particular, the authors examine the power dynamics that emerge in the stakeholder interactions. Design/methodology/approach The authors analyse the stakeholder interactions based on the varying degrees of stakeholder salience and critical collaboration potential, and draw on rich evidence from 43 interviews with multiple stakeholders involved in CSR in the Zambia mining sector. Findings This paper finds stark power asymmetries in the relationship between the state, the civil society and mining companies which are exacerbated by a number of factors, including divisions within these key stakeholders themselves. Apart from power imbalances within and between stakeholders, the potential for critical collaboration at the local level is further challenged by the lack of commonly accepted social and environmental frameworks, transparency and accountability of the leadership of stakeholder groups. However, despite these power asymmetries some limited agency is possible, as civil society in particular co-opts previously dormant stakeholders to increase its own salience and, more importantly, that of the state. Originality/value This paper contributes to the literature on the key stakeholders’ interactions shaping CSR in developing countries by exploring these issues in a critical industry, the Zambian copper mining sector, on which the state economy is so heavily dependent.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: At the National Level: A) Strength Of The Mncs Versus The Stmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholder interactions and corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices

Phiri

Mantzari

Gleadle

2018

AAAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the latter, the decisive leverage on behalf of workers' interests is usually exercised by the workers themselves -either directly through trade unions or indirectly through pro-labour political parties -rather than by foreign activists, consumers and investors. Such a constellation alleviates the basic problem of surrogate accountability, which is the danger that surrogates "will sanction in the wrong cases, with the wrong intensity, or in the wrong way (where "wrong" means doing something other than what accountability holders would have done)" (Rubenstein 2007).…”

Section: (A) Enhancing Learning and Effectivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accountability in Transnational Relations: How Distinctive Is It?

Koenig‐Archibugi¹

2010

West European Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, an increasing number of scholars have used the concept of "accountability" to describe and assess relationships among actors who are primarily based in different state jurisdictions, or involving actors transcending state jurisdictions.Is there something inherently distinctive about accountability in transnational spaces as compared to the more familiar instances of accountability observed in domestic contexts? This article examines the distinctiveness of transnational accountability in relation to: (1) its general meaning and specific forms; (2) its aims and importance; (3) its empirical existence and the relative frequency of its forms; (4) its causes; and (5) its effects. The article cautiously concludes that on most of these dimensions the similarities outweigh the differences and that it would be unfruitful for research on transnational accountability to develop separately from that on domestic accountability.2

show abstract

“…Here, comparatively "few people selfdetermine without relying on anyone or anything else" (p.319). Hence, rejecting liberal stoicism, they embrace metaphysical accounts of self that consider extensions, trustees, proxies and surrogates as legitimate parts of an individual's cognitive space, whether human or non-human (Rubenstein, 2007). In less extreme cases where agents are only partially voiceless, such as a person suffering from Alzheimer's disease, we would surely see reliance on the help of a notebook as a legitimate auxiliary, proxy, aid or indeed part of his or her cognitive space.…”

Section: Mitigating Paternalism and Anthropocentrism Cultivating Insmentioning

confidence: 99%

Solidarity Between Human and Non-Human Animals: Representing Animal Voices in Policy Deliberations

Essen

Allen

2017

Environmental Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we discuss the bridging potential of "interspecies" solidarity between the often incommensurable ethics of care and justice. Indeed, we show that the Environmental Communication literature emphasizes feelings of care and compassion as vectors of responsibility taking for animals. But we also show that a growing field of Political AnimalRights suggest that such responsibility taking should instead be grounded in universalizable terms of justice. Our argument is that a dual conception of solidarity can bridge this divide: On the one hand, solidarity as a pre-political relation with animals and, on the other hand, as a political practice based on open public deliberation of universalizable claims to justice; that is, claims to justice advanced by human proxy representatives of vulnerable non-humans. Such a dual conception can both challenge and validate NGOs' claims to "speak on behalf of animals" in policy following the Aarhus Convention, indeed underwriting the Convention by insights from internatural communication in solidarity as relation, and by subjecting it to rational scrutiny in mini-publics in solidary as practice.KEYWORDS: Solidarity, internatural communication, discourse ethics, proxy representation, mini-publics Pre-production version of manuscript published in Journal of Environmental Communication http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10. 1080/17524032.2016.1269820 2 Solidarity between Human and Non-Human Animals: Representing Animal Voices in Policy DeliberationsWhile perhaps equally important in defining our relationships to vulnerable others, the concepts of care and justice are often presented as in profound tension with one another (Noddings, 1984;Gilligan, 1987;Okin, 1989). On the one hand, it is thought that such relationships must be based on feelings of care and empathetic understanding of the needs andinterests of the vulnerable who cannot, for one reason or another, rationally formulate or articulate their own good (Goodin, 1986;Donovan, 1996;Fineman, 2008). On the other hand, it is thought that our relationship and responsibility-taking for vulnerable others must be based on universalizable claims to justice; claims that gain validity through rational argumentative defenses against skeptical challenges concerning what the vulnerable need and what they are properly owed (Regan, 1995;Garner, 2012). Indeed, the rational universalizability of claims to rights and justice proves essential to the task of giving public justification to policy decisions concerning vulnerable members of the shared political community (Goodin, 1996). Here, the tension between the concepts of care and justice derives from a difference in emphasis regarding the basis of moral responsibility (Buchanan, 2013). This is the difference between developing feelings of being responsible for vulnerable others and defending before a universal audience of all those who are purportedly placed under an obligation that they should to take responsibility.Such a tension between care and justice is by no mean limited ...

show abstract

Accountability in an Unequal World

Cited by 115 publications

References 28 publications

Stakeholder interactions and corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices

Stakeholder interactions and corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices

Accountability in Transnational Relations: How Distinctive Is It?

Solidarity Between Human and Non-Human Animals: Representing Animal Voices in Policy Deliberations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About