Abstract
The “basic debate” in business ethics between shareholder theory and stakeholder theory has underlined the field since its inception, with wide ranging normative, descriptive, and instrumental arguments offered on both sides. We maintain that insofar as this is primarily a normative debate, clarity can be brought by elucidating how it is framed by the political philosophies of liberalism and libertarianism.With liberalism represented by John Rawls’s theory of justice and libertarianism represented by the ideas of Milton Friedman and Robert Nozick, and Edward Freeman, the paper shows that both liberalism and libertarianism can be interpreted to justify shareholder and stakeholder theory respectively. The debate between shareholder theory and stakeholder theory is framed by liberal and libertarian justifications that hinge primarily on whether and to what extent one should have exogenous or endogenous safeguards on corporate behavior. Accordingly, political philosophy turns out to be highly relevant to both business ethics and corporate governance, not because the corporation resembles the state, but because of the potential safeguards placed on the corporation by the state
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.5840/bpej201311185
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 72,634
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Fallacy of Corporate Moral Agency.David Rönnegard (ed.) - 2015 - Springer Netherlands.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Stakeholder Theory: A Libertarian Defense.R. Edward Freeman & Robert A. Phillips - 2002 - Business Ethics Quarterly 12 (3):331-350.
Shareholder Theory and Kant’s ‘Duty of Beneficence’.Samuel Mansell - 2013 - Journal of Business Ethics 117 (3):583-599.
Tinged Shareholder Theory: Or What's so Special About Stakeholders?Geoff Moore - 1999 - Business Ethics, the Environment and Responsibility 8 (2):117–127.
Assessing Freeman’s Stakeholder Theory.James A. Stieb - 2009 - Journal of Business Ethics 87 (3):401 - 414.
Differentiating Stakeholder Theories.John Kaler - 2003 - Journal of Business Ethics 46 (1):71 - 83.
Classical Liberalism and the Basic Income.Matt Zwolinski - 2011 - Basic Income Studies 6 (2):1-14.
Business Ethics and Stakeholder Theory.Wesley Cragg - 2002 - Business Ethics Quarterly 12 (2):113-142.
Stakeholder Theory: 25 Years Later.R. Edward Freeman - 2009 - Philosophy of Management 8 (3):97-107.
Stakeholders and the Moral Responsibilities of Business.Bruce Langtry - 1994 - Business Ethics Quarterly 4 (4):431-443.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2015-02-05

Total views
25 ( #460,510 of 2,533,807 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #163,468 of 2,533,807 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes