Employing Normative Stakeholder Theory in Developing Countries

Abstract

Although the use of stakeholder analysis to investigate corporate responsibilities has burgeoned over the past two decades, there has been relatively little work on how corporate responsibilities may change for firms with operations in developing countries. This article argues, from a critical theory perspective, that two sets of factors tend to come together to increase the responsibilities of corporations active in developing countries to a full range of stakeholder groups: (a) the different (economic, political, and sociocultural) circumstances under which corporations have to operate in developing countries and (b) several key normative principles, which typically do not come into play in the context of developed countries.The use of stakeholder analysis to investigate corporate responsibilities has burgeoned over the past two decades (Clarkson, 1998). A key aspect of this development has been the employment of different ethical traditions to elaborate different normative stakeholder theories. Where stakeholder theory has been slower to progress, however, has been in the appreciation that the application of such theories may be significantly conditioned by the contexts in which they are employed. This is particularly true with respect to corporations operating in developing economies. Although there have been limited but important efforts to investigate the ethics of international business over the past decade and a half (DeGeorge

A Critical Theory perspective on the pressures, contradictions and dilemmas faced by entry-level accounting academics

“…A person with social activist tendencies or an environmentalist may also be allocated a capital markets or mainstream topic and then be unable to generate any internal enthusiasm within her/himself for the subject matter, hidden ideology and research methods of the PhD topic. Investigating only share price reaction to accounting information may well create mental confusion in the mind of an environmentalist student who prefers a Normative Critical Stakeholder Theory (Reed, 2002) view of the world and approach to research. Although there are nowadays at least "pockets" or an isolated 1 or 2 researchers in every Australian Accounting Department doing "critical perspectives" research (or at least qualitative and interpretative work of the type published in AAAJ (Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal)), there may be no opportunities for a junior staff member to do PhD with such researchers as they may not be senior enough within the school or they may be already over-committed.…”

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Business Practices and Stakeholders Considered Relevant for the Energy Sector: The Case of Romania

“…Moreover, almost all land, even private land, became State property. During communism, companies were non-legitimate (Reed, 2002), but now they should operate without benefiting from historic injustices (Reed, 2002). Citizen participation is a process that should take part in stages, firstly to inform, secondly to consult, and finally to involve.…”

“…Clarkson (1995) propose two types of stakeholders: primary and secondary, while Spiller (2000) identifies the primary stakeholders comprising of: shareholders, customers, employees, suppliers, community and environment. The different circumstances in developing countries may change the application of stakeholder theory (Reed, 2002). …”

“…Clarkson (1995) (Jamali, 2008). Critics such as Freeman (1999) argue that the distinction made by Donaldson and Preston leads to confusion (Reed, 2002 Considering the above research, the author of this paper has identified the need for additional research to determine how CSR is approached from the stakeholder perspective, which stakeholders count more for the energy sector and the business-related CSR practices to be proposed and followed.…”

Why Do Corporate Actors Engage in Pro-Social Behavior? A Bourdieusian Perspective on Corporate Social Responsibility

“…Freeman et al (2010, p. 28) stated that: "If trade-offs have to be made, as often happens in the real world, than the executive must figure out how to make the trade-offs, and immediately begin improving the trade-offs for all sides." To give more guidance in such situations, stakeholder theory has been combined with many ethical approaches like those of Rawls 11/49 (Phillips, 1997), deontologists (Bowie, 1999), critical theorists (Reed, 2002), and libertarian scholars (Freeman and Philips, 2002).…”