IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eurman/v20y2002i3p260-271.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effectiveness of Self-regulation:: Corporate Codes of Conduct and Child Labour

Author

Listed:
  • Kolk, Ans
  • van Tulder, Rob

Abstract

The effectiveness of self-regulation to promote corporate social responsibility, with codes of conduct as most common means, continues to be the subject of widespread interest. This article explores the effectiveness of corporate codes of conduct, focusing on the issue of child labour. This issue is all the more pronounced, because a strict approach, involving firing child workers or terminating relationships with suppliers that employ them, does not change underlying causes. Effectiveness is explored by a close examination of the nature of child labour codes of six pioneering international garment companies, and by a survey among a focus group of opinion leaders in companies and stakeholders, who were asked for their views on the different dilemmas surrounding codes and child labour. Overall, our research shows that corporate codes are considered to be important, though not the only instruments for addressing child labour. Possible negative side effects and limitations of codes are not seen as crucial factors that harm their effectiveness. Codes must be specific, strictly implemented and monitored, and combined with alternative arrangements for under-age child workers. The importance of a supply-chain approach and attention for the host-country context is recognized. But this also raises many difficult dilemmas concerning the boundaries of corporate social responsibility, which the article examines in more detail.

Suggested Citation

  • Kolk, Ans & van Tulder, Rob, 2002. "The Effectiveness of Self-regulation:: Corporate Codes of Conduct and Child Labour," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 260-271, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eurman:v:20:y:2002:i:3:p:260-271
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0263237302000439
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eurman:v:20:y:2002:i:3:p:260-271. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/115/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.