Business Ethics Quarterly
corporate responsibility; business and human rights; leverage; sphere of influence; John Ruggie
Should companies’ human rights responsibilities arise, in part, from their “leverage” – their ability to influence others’ actions through their relationships? Special Representative John Ruggie rejected this proposition in the United Nations Framework for business and human rights. I argue that leverage is a source of responsibility where there is a morally significant connection between the company and a rights-holder or rights-violator, the company is able to make a contribution to ameliorating the situation, it can do so at modest cost, and the threat to human rights is substantial. In such circumstances companies have a responsibility to exercise leverage even though they did nothing to contribute to the situation. Such responsibility is qualified, not categorical; graduated, not binary; context-specific; practicable; consistent with the social role of business; and not merely a negative responsibility to avoid harm but a positive responsibility to do good.
Stepan Wood, "The Case for Leverage-Based Corporate Human Rights Responsibility" ([forthcoming in 2012]) 22:1 Bus Ethics Q 63-98.
NOTE: The "Download" button above will provide access to a working draft, and the "Find in your Library" button below will provide access to the final published version.