不同治理背景下的企业责任类型学研究:在缺乏负责任的国家治理的情况下怎么办?

Naomi R. Cahn, A. Gambino
{"title":"不同治理背景下的企业责任类型学研究:在缺乏负责任的国家治理的情况下怎么办?","authors":"Naomi R. Cahn, A. Gambino","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.663381","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper develops a typology of different country governance contexts, in which we propose four broad categories of countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Our analysis measures the most appropriate methods for helping to create a climate that is receptive to fostering corporate accountability. Our criteria are based on several different factors, none of which is determinative: the natural resources of the country; the country's dependence on one commodity; the corruption level; the stability and accountability of the government; the state of civil society; and the existence of ongoing conflict. Examining these factors together results in measuring not just the country's receptivity to change, but also the means for producing change. At one end of the spectrum, what we label Category 0 countries, are nations with economies and governments that are so poorly managed that there is little multinational investment - sometimes even in the context of lucrative investment opportunities. At the other end lie those countries with acceptable levels of good governance, more developed economies and markets, and with, consequently, a comparatively high level of both domestic and multinational corporate investment. We examine the appropriateness of strategies to apply external or internal pressure in different types of countries. Next, we discuss the affects of applying the proposed intervention strategies to the countries, addressing both short and long-term expected results. We find that in Category 0 countries, with extremely low levels of international investment, strategies should focus on improving governance and overall human welfare, which often could lead to welcoming international corporate investment. Other categories of countries, with greater - and often problematic - international corporate involvement, require different types of approaches.","PeriodicalId":213210,"journal":{"name":"Georgetown Journal of International Law","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Towards a Typology of Corporate Responsibility in Different Governance Contexts: What to Do in the Absence of Responsible Country Governance?\",\"authors\":\"Naomi R. Cahn, A. Gambino\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.663381\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper develops a typology of different country governance contexts, in which we propose four broad categories of countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Our analysis measures the most appropriate methods for helping to create a climate that is receptive to fostering corporate accountability. Our criteria are based on several different factors, none of which is determinative: the natural resources of the country; the country's dependence on one commodity; the corruption level; the stability and accountability of the government; the state of civil society; and the existence of ongoing conflict. Examining these factors together results in measuring not just the country's receptivity to change, but also the means for producing change. At one end of the spectrum, what we label Category 0 countries, are nations with economies and governments that are so poorly managed that there is little multinational investment - sometimes even in the context of lucrative investment opportunities. At the other end lie those countries with acceptable levels of good governance, more developed economies and markets, and with, consequently, a comparatively high level of both domestic and multinational corporate investment. We examine the appropriateness of strategies to apply external or internal pressure in different types of countries. Next, we discuss the affects of applying the proposed intervention strategies to the countries, addressing both short and long-term expected results. We find that in Category 0 countries, with extremely low levels of international investment, strategies should focus on improving governance and overall human welfare, which often could lead to welcoming international corporate investment. Other categories of countries, with greater - and often problematic - international corporate involvement, require different types of approaches.\",\"PeriodicalId\":213210,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Georgetown Journal of International Law\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2004-12-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Georgetown Journal of International Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.663381\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Georgetown Journal of International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.663381","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

本文发展了不同国家治理背景的类型学,其中我们提出了撒哈拉以南非洲国家的四大类。我们的分析衡量了最合适的方法,以帮助创造一种接受培养企业责任的氛围。我们的标准基于几个不同的因素,其中没有一个是决定性的:国家的自然资源;国家对一种商品的依赖;腐败程度;政府的稳定性和问责制;市民社会的状态;以及持续冲突的存在。综合考察这些因素,不仅可以衡量一个国家对变革的接受程度,还可以衡量产生变革的手段。在范围的一端,我们称之为第0类国家,这些国家的经济和政府管理不善,几乎没有跨国投资——有时甚至是在有利可图的投资机会的背景下。另一端是那些具有可接受的善政水平、较发达的经济和市场、因而具有较高的国内和跨国公司投资水平的国家。我们审查在不同类型的国家实施外部或内部压力的战略的适当性。接下来,我们将讨论将拟议的干预策略应用于各国的影响,解决短期和长期的预期结果。我们发现,在国际投资水平极低的第0类国家,战略应侧重于改善治理和整体人类福利,这往往可能导致欢迎国际企业投资。其他类别的国家,由于国际公司的参与较多,而且往往有问题,因此需要采取不同类型的办法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Towards a Typology of Corporate Responsibility in Different Governance Contexts: What to Do in the Absence of Responsible Country Governance?
This paper develops a typology of different country governance contexts, in which we propose four broad categories of countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Our analysis measures the most appropriate methods for helping to create a climate that is receptive to fostering corporate accountability. Our criteria are based on several different factors, none of which is determinative: the natural resources of the country; the country's dependence on one commodity; the corruption level; the stability and accountability of the government; the state of civil society; and the existence of ongoing conflict. Examining these factors together results in measuring not just the country's receptivity to change, but also the means for producing change. At one end of the spectrum, what we label Category 0 countries, are nations with economies and governments that are so poorly managed that there is little multinational investment - sometimes even in the context of lucrative investment opportunities. At the other end lie those countries with acceptable levels of good governance, more developed economies and markets, and with, consequently, a comparatively high level of both domestic and multinational corporate investment. We examine the appropriateness of strategies to apply external or internal pressure in different types of countries. Next, we discuss the affects of applying the proposed intervention strategies to the countries, addressing both short and long-term expected results. We find that in Category 0 countries, with extremely low levels of international investment, strategies should focus on improving governance and overall human welfare, which often could lead to welcoming international corporate investment. Other categories of countries, with greater - and often problematic - international corporate involvement, require different types of approaches.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信