Do Firms With Unique Competencies for Rescuing Victims of Human Catastrophes Have Special Obligations?

Business Ethics Quarterly 16 (2):185-210 (2006)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Firms possessing a unique competency to rescue the victims of a human catastrophe have a minimum moral obligation to devote substantial resources toward best efforts to aid the victims. The minimum amount that firms should devote to rescue is the largest sum of their most recent year’s investment in social initiatives, their five-year trend, their industry’s average, or the national average. Financial exigency may justify a lower level of investment. Alternative social investments may be continued if they have an equally compelling rationale. These duties apply to the global pharmaceutical companies in the context of the AIDS pandemic in sub-Saharan Africa.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,616

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Legitimacy of Direct Corporate Humanitarian Investment.David Hess - 2000 - Business Ethics Quarterly 10 (1):95-109.
Permissible rescue killings.Cécile Fabre - 2009 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 109 (1pt2):149-164.
Dimensions of Moral Emotions.Kurt Gray & Daniel M. Wegner - 2011 - Emotion Review 3 (3):258-260.
Lifeboat ethics: Rescuing the metaphor.Diane Brzozowski - 2003 - Ethics, Place and Environment 6 (2):161 – 166.
Some Observations on the Global Practice of Socially Responsible Investment.Donald H. Schepers - 2006 - Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society 17:164-169.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-01-09

Downloads
45 (#311,164)

6 months
9 (#144,939)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?