nach oben

Journal of Business Ethics

Erschienen in:

14.09.2018 | Original Paper

How to Overcome Structural Injustice? Social Connectedness and the Tenet of Subsidiarity

verfasst von: Michael S. Aßländer

Erschienen in: Journal of Business Ethics | Ausgabe 3/2020

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Referring to the phenomenon of structural injustice resulting from unintended consequences of the combination of the actions of many people, Iris Marion Young claims for a new understanding of responsibility. She proposes what she calls a social connection model of responsibility which assigns responsibility to individuals also for participating in ongoing structural and social processes. To remedy structural injustice Young claims for collective action of various actors in society and assigns different degrees of responsibility depending on the agent’s position within the structural process. However, although Young mentions power, privilege, interest, and collective ability as parameters influencing the degree of an actor’s responsibility to contribute to structural change she does not elaborate which responsibilities concern which groups in society. As we will outline in our contribution, we hold the tenet of subsidiarity to be a useful supplement to the conception of Iris Marion Young which would allow for assigning such responsibilities to different layers in society. However, since the tenet of subsidiarity is only a supple principle which does not distinguish between different kinds of duties, we propose to enrich the tenet of subsidiarity by the Kantian conception of perfect and imperfect duties.

Vorheriger Artikel Temporal Spaces of Egalitarianism: The Ethical Negation of Economic Inequality in an Ephemeral Religious Organization

Nächster Artikel Correction to: How do Consumers Reconcile Positive and Negative CSR-Related Information to Form an Ethical Brand Perception? A Mixed Method Inquiry

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Arendt, H. (1973). The origins of totalitarianism. Orlando: Harcourt Brace.

Arendt, H. (1994). Organized guilt and universal responsibility. In H. Arendt (Ed.), Essays in understanding 1930–1954 (pp. 121–132). New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co.

Arendt, H. (2003). Collective responsibility. In H. Arendt (Ed.), Responsibility and judgement (pp. 147–158). New York: Schocken Books.

Aristotle (2009). Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Aroney, N. (2007). Subsidiarity, federalism and the best constitution: Thomas Aquinas on city, province and empire. Law and Philosophy, 26(2), 161–228.

Aroney, N. (2014). Subsidiarity in the writings of Aristotle and Aquinas. In M. Evans & A. Zimmermann (Eds.), Global perspectives on subsidiarity (pp. 9–27). Dordrecht: Springer.

Aßländer, M. S. (2011). Corporate social responsibility as subsidiary co-responsibility: A macroeconomic perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(1), 115–128.

Aßländer, M. S. (2012). Corporate or governmental duties? CSR as subsidiary co-responsibility. In D. Melé & C. Dierksmeier (Eds.), Human development in business—Values and humanistic management in the encyclical Caritas in veritate (pp. 117–133). Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan: Houndsmill.

Aßländer, M. S., & Curbach, J. (2014). The corporation as citoyen? Towards a new understanding of corporate citizenship. Journal of Business Ethics, 120(4), 541–554.

Aßländer, M. S., & Curbach, J. (2017). Corporate or governmental duties? Corporate citizenship from a governmental perspective. Business and Society, 56(4), 617–645.

Bagnoli, C. (2006). Humanitarian intervention as a perfect duty: A Kantian argument. In T. Nardin & M. S. Williams (Eds.), Humanitarian intervention (pp. 117–140). New York: New York University Press.

Barbieri, W. A. Jr. (2001). Beyond the nations: The expansion of the common good in Catholic Social Thought. The Review of Politics, 63(4), 723–754.

Barry, C., & Ferracioli, L. (2013). Young on responsibility and structural injustice. Criminal Justice Ethics, 32(3), 247–257.

Calder, T. (2010). Shared responsibility, global structural injustice, and restitution. Social Theory and Practice, 36(2), 263–290.

Carozza, P. G. (2003). Subsidiarity as a structural principle of international human-rights law. The American Journal of International Law, 97(1), 38–79.

Chaplin, J. (1997). Subsidiarity: The concept and the connections. Ethical Perspectives, 4(2), 117–130.

Cicero, M. T. (2009). On duties. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Costa, E., & Ramus, T. (2012). The Italian economia aziendale and Catholic Social Teaching: How to apply the common good principle at the managerial level. Journal of Business Ethics, 106(1), 103–116.

Crane, A., Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). Corporations and Citizenship. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Curbach, J., & Aßländer, M. S. (2014). Corporate citizenship, from corporate bourgeois to corporate citoyen. In R. C. Chandler (Ed.), Business and corporate integrity, 2 Vols. (Vol. 1, pp. 33–52). Santa Barbara: Praeger.

Erskine, T. (2001). Assigning responsibilities to institutional moral agents: The case of states and quasi-states. Ethics and International Affairs, 15(2), 67–85.

Erskine, T. (2014). Coalitions of the willing and responsibilities to protect: Informal associations, enhanced capacities and shared moral burdens. Ethics and International Affairs, 28(1), 115–145.

Evans, M. (2013). The principle of subsidiarity as a social and political principle in Catholic social teaching. Solidarity: The Journal of Catholic Social Thought and Secular Ethics, 3(1), 43–60.

Fasterling, B., & Demuijnck, G. (2013). Human rights in the void? Due diligence in the UN guiding principles on business and human rights. Journal of Business Ethics, 116(4), 799–814.

Gomes, B. (2011). The duty to oppose violence: Humanitarian intervention as a question for political philosophy. Review of International Studies, 37(3), 1045–1067.

Gosepath, S. (2005). The principle of subsidiarity. In A. Føllesdal & T. Pogge (Eds.), Real world justice. Grounds, principles, human rights, and social institutions (pp. 157–170). Dordrecht: Springer.

Guyer, P. (2010). The Obligation to be virtuous: Kant’s conception of the Tugendverpflichtung. Social Philosophy and Policy, 27(2), 206–232.

Hahn, H. (2009). The global consequence of participatory responsibility. Journal of Global Ethics, 5(1), 43–56.

Hahn, H. (2013). Iris Marion Youngs Modell politischer Verantwortung. In P. Niesen (Ed.), Zwischen Demokratie und globaler Verantwortung (pp. 77–92). Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlag.

Hill, T. E. (1999). Happiness and human flourishing in Kant’s ethics. Social Philosophy and Policy, 16(1), 143–175.

Höffe, O. (2007). Democracy in an age of globalization. Dordrecht: Springer.

Howlett, E., Davis, C., & Burton, S. (2016). From food desert to food oasis: The potential influence of food retailers on childhood obesity rates. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(2), 215–224.

Jaspers, K. (2000). The question of German guilt. New York: Fordham University Press.

Jefferson, T. (1829). In Th. Jefferson Randolph (Ed.), Memoir, correspondence, and miscellanies from the papers of Thomas Jefferson, 4 Vols (Vol. 1). Charlottesville: F. Carr & Co.

Kant, I. (1891). Principles of politics. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark.

Kant, I. (2012). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kant, I. (2013). The metaphysics of morals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kohler, L., & Saner, H. (1993). (Eds.). Hannah Arendt—Karl Jaspers: Correspondence 1926—1969. Orlando: Harcourt Brace & Company.

Lincoln, A. (1905). The life and works of Abraham Lincoln, 12 Vols (Vol. 2,2). New York, NY: Anglo-American Authors’ Association.

Maak, T. (2009). The Cosmopolitical Corporation. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(3, Suppl.), 361–372.

Matten, D., & Crane, A. (2005). Corporate citizenship: Toward an extended theoretical conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 166–179.

McIlroy, D. H. (2003). Subsidiarity and sphere sovereignty: Christian reflections on the size, shape and scope of government. Journal of Church and State, 45(4), 739–763.

Melé, D. (2005). Exploring the principle of subsidiarity in organizational forms. Journal of Business Ethics, 60(3), 293–305.

Melé, D. (2017). Subsidiarität und Partizipation. In M. S. Aßländer & B. Wagner (Eds.), Philosophie der Arbeit (pp. 489–509). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Miller, S. C. (2005). Need, care and obligation. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement, 57, 137–160.

Moggach, D. (2009). Freedom and perfection: German Debates on the state in eighteenth century. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 42(4), 1003–1023.

Nell-Breuning, O. V. (1964). Christliche Soziallehre. Mannheim: Pesch-Haus.

Nell-Breuning, O. V. (1990). Baugesetze der Gesellschaft. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder.

Néron, P.-Y. (2010). Business and the polis: What does it mean to see corporations as political actors. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(3), 333–352.

Neuhäuser, C. (2014). Structural injustice and the distribution of forward-looking responsibility. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, XXXVIII, 232–251.

O’Neill, O. (2001). Agents of justice. Metaphilosophy, 32(1/2), 180–195.

Ohreen, D. E., & Petry, R. A. (2012). Imperfect duties and corporate philanthropy: A Kantian approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 106(3), 367–381.

Osuji, O. K. (2015). Corporate social responsibility, Juridification and globalization: ‘Inventive interventionism’ for a ‘paradox’. International Journal of Law in Context, 11(3), 265–298.

Palazzo, G., & Scherer, A. G. (2006). Corporate legitimacy as deliberation. A communicative framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 66(1), 71–88.

Powell, B., & Zwolinski, M. (2012). The ethical and economic case against sweatshop labor: A critical assessment. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(4), 449–472.

Riley, P. (1979). Federalism in Kant’s political philosophy. Publius, 9(4), 43–64.

Rommen, H. (1955). The state in Catholic Thought. St. Louis: Herder Book Co.

Rotter, J. P., Airike, P.-E., & Mark-Herbert, C. (2014). Exploring political corporate social responsibility in global supply chains. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(4), 581–599.

Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. (2011). The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy. Journal of Management Studies, 48(4), 899–931.

Scherer, A. G., Palazzo, G., & Baumann, D. (2006). Global rules and private actors: Toward a new role of the transnational corporation in global governance. Business Ethics Quarterly, 16(4), 505–532.

Schrempf, J. (2014). A social connection approach to corporate responsibility: The case of the fast-food industry and obesity. Business & Society, 53(2), 300–332.

Tempels, T., Blok, V., & Verwij, M. (2017). Understanding political responsibility in corporate citizenship: Towards a shared responsibility for the common good. Journal of Global Ethics, 13(1), 90–108.

Van Til, K. A. (2008). Subsidiarity and sphere-sovereignty: A match made in…. Theological Studies, 69(3), 610–636.

Waschkuhn, A. (1995). Was ist Subsidiarität? Ein Sozialphilosophisches Ordnungsprinzip: Von Thomas von Aquin zur “Civil Society”. Wiesbaden: Springer.

Weinberger, L. D. (2014). The relationship between sphere sovereignty and subsidiarity. In M. Evans & A. Zimmermann (Eds.), Global perspectives on subsidiarity (pp. 49–63). Dordrecht: Springer.

Wettstein, F. (2010). The duty to protect: Corporate complicity, political responsibility, and human rights advocacy. Journal of Business Ethics, 96(1), 33–47.

Williams, H. (2010). Towards a Kantian theory of international distributive justice. Kantian Review, 15(2), 43–77.

Young, I. M. (2003). Political responsibility and structural injustice. In The Lindley Lecture. Lawrence: University of Kansas.

Young, I. M. (2004). Responsibility and global labor justice. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 12(4), 365–388.

Young, I. M. (2006). Responsibility and global justice: A social connection model. Social Philosophy and Policy, 23(1), 102–130.

Young, I. M. (2011). Responsibility for justice. New York: Oxford University Press.

CA: John Paul II. (1991). Centesimus Annus, Encyclical on the hundredth Anniversary of Rerum Novarum, 1st of May 1991. Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.

CV: Benedict XVI. (2009). Encyclical-Letter Caritas in Veritate, on Integral Human Development in Charity and Truth, 29th of June 2009. Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.

LS: Francis. (2015). Laudato Si, Encyclical Letter on Care for our Common Home, 24th of May 2015. Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.

MM: John XXIII. (1961). Mater et Magistra, Encyclical on Christianity and Social Progress, 15th of May 1961. Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.

PCJP: Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. (2004). Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church. Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.

PT: John XXIII. (1963). Pacem in Terris, Encyclical on Establishing Universal Peace in Truth, Justice, Charity, and Liberty, 11th of April 1963. Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.

QA: Pius XI. (1931). Quadragesimo Anno, Encyclical on Reconstruction of the Social Order, 15th of May 1931. Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.

RN: Leo XIII. (1891). Rerum Novarum, Encyclical on Capital and Labor, 15th of May 1891. Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.

Titel: How to Overcome Structural Injustice? Social Connectedness and the Tenet of Subsidiarity
verfasst von: Michael S. Aßländer
Publikationsdatum: 14.09.2018
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Journal of Business Ethics / Ausgabe 3/2020
Print ISSN: 0167-4544
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-0697
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3985-0

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2020

Boiling the Frog Slowly: The Immersion of C-Suite Financial Executives into Fraud

Understanding Economic Inequality Through the Lens of Caste

Think Tanks, Business and Civil Society: The Ethics of Promoting Pro-corporate Ideologies

Denial of Corruption: Voluntary Disclosure of Bribery Information

Does Religiosity Matter to Value Relevance? Evidence from U.S. Banking Firms

‘Consuming Good’ on Social Media: What Can Conspicuous Virtue Signalling on Facebook Tell Us About Prosocial and Unethical Intentions?

Premium Partner