Options
Actual and normative terms of the interaction between NGOs and corporations
Type
other project type
Start Date
01 September 2009
End Date
31 August 2011
Status
completed
Keywords
CSR
NGOs
corporations as political actors
politlcal theory
democracy
legitimacy
Description
Partnerships between companies and NGOs have received considerable attention in CSR in the past years. However, the question what makes NGOs legitimate as partners of corporations, has been neglected so far. In one publication (Baur & Palazzo 2012) I argue that the legitimacy of NGOs as partners of corporations depends on their moral legitimacy. Based on a conceptual framework that distinguishes between different types of criteria it is argued that the moral legitimacy of NGOs as partners of corporations is best judged along procedural criteria.
In another publication (Baur & Schmitz 2012), I show that intensified interaction between NGOs and corporations has led NGOs to assume increasingly business-oriented roles which tend to blur the boundaries between them and economic actors. This trend, named co-optation, is also reflected in the debate on NGO accountability where current conceptions of accountability implicitly or explicitly promote the co-optation of NGOs.
In a third publication (Baur & Arenas, forthcoming) I take a critical look at the political model that is underlying political notions of the interaction between business and civil society and I argue in favour of a more critical assessment of the benefits and dangers of regulating the interaction between business and civil society in multi-stakeholder initiatives.
Baur, D. and H. P. Schmitz (2012). "Corporations and NGOs: When Accountability leads to Co-optation." Journal of Business Ethics 106(1): 9-21.
Baur, D. and G. Palazzo (2011). "The Moral Legitimacy of NGOs as Partners of Corporations." Business Ethics Quarterly 21(4): 579-604.
Baur, D. and D. Arenas (forthcoming). "The value of unregulated business-NGO interaction: a deliberative perspective." Business & Society.
In another publication (Baur & Schmitz 2012), I show that intensified interaction between NGOs and corporations has led NGOs to assume increasingly business-oriented roles which tend to blur the boundaries between them and economic actors. This trend, named co-optation, is also reflected in the debate on NGO accountability where current conceptions of accountability implicitly or explicitly promote the co-optation of NGOs.
In a third publication (Baur & Arenas, forthcoming) I take a critical look at the political model that is underlying political notions of the interaction between business and civil society and I argue in favour of a more critical assessment of the benefits and dangers of regulating the interaction between business and civil society in multi-stakeholder initiatives.
Baur, D. and H. P. Schmitz (2012). "Corporations and NGOs: When Accountability leads to Co-optation." Journal of Business Ethics 106(1): 9-21.
Baur, D. and G. Palazzo (2011). "The Moral Legitimacy of NGOs as Partners of Corporations." Business Ethics Quarterly 21(4): 579-604.
Baur, D. and D. Arenas (forthcoming). "The value of unregulated business-NGO interaction: a deliberative perspective." Business & Society.
Member contributor(s)
Funder(s)
Topic(s)
business ethics
business and society
CSR
political theory
Method(s)
conceptual research
Range
Institute/School
Range (De)
Institut/School
Division(s)
Eprints ID
217116
Reference Number
PBSGP1-126114
1 results
Now showing
1 - 1 of 1
-
PublicationOrganizational identity in CSOs : Examining Discursive Strategies of Resistance in an Ideological Contest( 2014-05-22)
;Neesham, CristinaGreenwood, MichelleUnder the umbrella of what has been termed as ‘new public management', government policies and practices in many countries have been directed at the ‘marketization' of civil society organizations (CSOs) and subjected them to managerialist activities, often in contest with these organizations' experienced raison d'être. This paper explores how CSOs ideologically resist these trends through public discourse, and the implications of this resistance for understanding alternative organization using a government-CSO public dialogue as an illustrative case. An Australian government public review into the social contribution of the nonprofit sector provided CSOs with such an opportunity; that is, to use public dialogue for the purpose of ideological resistance. A critical discourse analysis of CSOs' public written submissions to the enquiry reveals that CSOs primarily invoke their organisational identity (formed around social purposes distinct from government and business) as a means to resist market ideologies. By revealing CSOs' discursive strategies of resistance, we gain insight into how nonmarket organizations manage ideological tensions and construct agonistic relationships with government (in this instance) and business. This analysis contributes to a deeper understanding of organizational identity and alternative organization.Type: presentation