IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/wzbtci/spiv2020103r.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Business authority in global governance: Beyond public and private

Author

Listed:
  • Mende, Janne

Abstract

This paper discusses the concept of authority in global governance by unpacking the components that characterize its various notions. These components are the triadic relationship between power, legitimacy, and the reference to public interests, and how they are embedded in the constellation between public and private. After clarifying each of these components, the article applies them to business enterprises - key actors in global governance -, focusing on the issue area of business and human rights. The paper shows that business authority does not neatly fit into the public-private distinction that is pervasive in conceptions of global governance and the international human rights regime. Instead, businesses have public and private, as well as hybrid, roles in global governance. Business authority then forms a peculiar third, next to public authority and private authority. Accordingly, the paper suggests extending the two-pole constellation of public and private into a three-pole constellation, with business building a peculiar third position between and beyond the public and the private. This approach allows furthering the understanding of business authority in global governance in particular and the concept of authority in global governance more generally.

Suggested Citation

  • Mende, Janne, 2022. "Business authority in global governance: Beyond public and private," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2020-103r, WZB Berlin Social Science Center, revised 2022.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:wzbtci:spiv2020103r
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/265308/1/iv20-103r.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ruggie, John Gerard, 1982. "International regimes, transactions, and change: embedded liberalism in the postwar economic order," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(2), pages 379-415, April.
    2. Scharpf, Fritz W., 2004. "Legitimationskonzepte jenseits des Nationalstaats," MPIfG Working Paper 04/6, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    3. Kobrin, Stephen J., 2009. "Private Political Authority and Public Responsibility: Transnational Politics, Transnational Firms, and Human Rights," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(3), pages 349-374, July.
    4. Wood, Stepan, 2012. "The Case for Leverage-Based Corporate Human Rights Responsibility," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 63-98, January.
    5. Cutler,A. Claire, 2003. "Private Power and Global Authority," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521533973.
    6. Ciepley, David, 2013. "Beyond Public and Private: Toward a Political Theory of the Corporation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(1), pages 139-158, February.
    7. Hurd, Ian, 1999. "Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(2), pages 379-408, April.
    8. Cutler,A. Claire, 2003. "Private Power and Global Authority," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521826600.
    9. Rowe, James, 2005. "Corporate Social Responsibility as Business Strategy," Center for Global, International and Regional Studies, Working Paper Series qt5dq43315, Center for Global, International and Regional Studies, UC Santa Cruz.
    10. Bishop, John Douglas, 2012. "The Limits of Corporate Human Rights Obligations and the Rights of For-Profit Corporations," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 119-144, January.
    11. Ruggie, John Gerard, 2004. "Reconstituting the Global Public Domain: Issues, Actors and Practices," Working Paper Series rwp04-031, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    12. Scharpf, Fritz W., 1998. "Interdependence and democratic legitimation," MPIfG Working Paper 98/2, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mende, Janne, 2020. "Business authority in global governance: Beyond public and private," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2020-103, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    2. João Paulo Cândia Veiga & Fausto Makishi & Murilo Alves Zacareli & Thiago Augusto Hiromitsu Terada, 2016. "Corporate Leadership, Multilevel Enforcement and Biodiversity Regulation," Journal of Business, LAR Center Press, vol. 1(3), pages 43-53, July.
    3. Nicolas Dahan & Jonathan Doh & Jonathan Raelin, 2015. "Pivoting the Role of Government in the Business and Society Interface: A Stakeholder Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(3), pages 665-680, October.
    4. J. Oosterhout & Pursey Heugens, 2009. "Extant Social Contracts in Global Business Regulation: Outline of a Research Agenda," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 88(4), pages 729-740, October.
    5. Wettstein, Florian & Giuliani, Elisa & Santangelo, Grazia D. & Stahl, Günter K., 2019. "International business and human rights: A research agenda," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 54-65.
    6. Tanja Börzel, 2010. "European Governance: Negotiation and Competition in the Shadow of Hierarchy," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(2), pages 191-219, March.
    7. Alexander Kentikelenis & Erik Voeten, 2021. "Legitimacy challenges to the liberal world order: Evidence from United Nations speeches, 1970–2018," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 721-754, October.
    8. Grahame Thompson, 2007. "Tracking Global Corporate Citizenship: Some Reflections on ‘Lovesick' Companies," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp192, IIIS.
    9. Georgios Dimitropoulos, 2022. "The use of blockchain by international organizations: effectiveness and legitimacy [The governance of blockchain dispute resolution]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 41(3), pages 328-342.
    10. Bärbel R. Dorbeck‐Jung & Mirjan J. Oude Vrielink & Jordy F. Gosselt & Joris J. Van Hoof & Menno D. T. De Jong, 2010. "Contested hybridization of regulation: Failure of the Dutch regulatory system to protect minors from harmful media," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(2), pages 154-174, June.
    11. Peter T. Leeson, 2008. "How Important is State Enforcement for Trade?," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 61-89.
    12. Mikkel Kruuse & Kasper Reming Tangbæk & Kristjan Jespersen & Caleb Gallemore, 2019. "Navigating Input and Output Legitimacy in Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives: Institutional Stewards at Work," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-27, November.
    13. Sandrine Brachotte, 2021. "The Limits of Arbitration Law in Addressing Cultural Diversity: The Example of Ismaili Arbitration in the United Kingdom," Laws, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-24, June.
    14. Terry Macdonald, 2008. "What's So Special about States? Liberal Legitimacy in a Globalising World," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 56(3), pages 544-565, October.
    15. Benedicte Bull, 2010. "Public–Private Partnerships: The United Nations Experience," Chapters, in: Graeme A. Hodge & Carsten Greve & Anthony E. Boardman (ed.), International Handbook on Public–Private Partnerships, chapter 20, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Fabrizio Cafaggi & Katharina Pistor, 2015. "Regulatory capabilities: A normative framework for assessing the distributional effects of regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(2), pages 95-107, June.
    17. Barkemeyer, Ralf & Preuss, Lutz & Lee, Lindsay, 2015. "On the effectiveness of private transnational governance regimes—Evaluating corporate sustainability reporting according to the Global Reporting Initiative," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 312-325.
    18. Karin Buhmann, 2016. "Public Regulators and CSR: The ‘Social Licence to Operate’ in Recent United Nations Instruments on Business and Human Rights and the Juridification of CSR," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 136(4), pages 699-714, July.
    19. Waheed Hussain & Jeffrey Moriarty, 2018. "Accountable to Whom? Rethinking the Role of Corporations in Political CSR," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 149(3), pages 519-534, May.
    20. Tana Johnson, 2011. "Guilt by association: The link between states’ influence and the legitimacy of intergovernmental organizations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 57-84, March.

    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:zbw:wzbtci:spiv2020103r. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ggwzbde.html .

    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.