IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rsocec/v76y2018i1p43-72.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developing business ethics theory and integrating economic analysis into business ethics teaching – a conceptualization based on externalities and diminishing marginal utility

Author

Listed:
  • Norbert Hirschauer
  • Antje Jantsch
  • Oliver Musshoff

Abstract

Contrary to understandings that treat ethical considerations and economic thinking as separate if not antagonistic issues, we advocate a holistic view that links business ethics to consequentialist economic concepts and their concern about how scarce means should be used for the attainment of (given) ends. We believe that business ethics students will profit from a development of business ethics theory that facilitates an outcome-based evaluation of business strategies anchored in the economic concepts of externalities, game theory, equilibria, efficiency, transaction costs, and diminishing marginal utility. We outline how moral judgments about (socially irresponsible) business behaviors, which often lack theoretical grounding and self-critical examination, can be made both more consistent and transparent through a systematic application of these theoretical concepts. We furthermore point out that, in this evaluative exercise, business ethics analysts should make all assumptions explicit to meet their task of facilitating informed public debates and informed moral choices.

Suggested Citation

  • Norbert Hirschauer & Antje Jantsch & Oliver Musshoff, 2018. "Developing business ethics theory and integrating economic analysis into business ethics teaching – a conceptualization based on externalities and diminishing marginal utility," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 76(1), pages 43-72, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rsocec:v:76:y:2018:i:1:p:43-72
    DOI: 10.1080/00346764.2017.1333132
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00346764.2017.1333132
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00346764.2017.1333132?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:rsocec:v:76:y:2018:i:1:p:43-72. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RRSE20 .

    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.