IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v166y2020i4d10.1007_s10551-020-04577-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Social Commons Ethos in Public Policy-Making

Author

Listed:
  • Jennifer Lees-Marshment

    (University of Auckland)

  • Aimee Dinnin Huff

    (Oregon State University)

  • Neil Bendle

    (University of Georgia)

Abstract

In the business ethics literature, a commons paradigm orients theorizing toward how civil society can promote collaboration and collectively govern shared resources, and implicates the common good—the ethics of providing social conditions that enable individuals and collectives to thrive. In the context of representative democracies, the shared resources of a nation can be considered commons, yet these resources are governed in a top-down, bureaucratic manner wherein public participation is often limited to voting for political leaders. Such governance, however, can be motivated by values of solidarity and stewardship, and a bottom-up approach to participation, in ways that are consistent with a social commons ethos (Meyer and Hudon in J Bus Ethics 160:277–292, 2019). We employ an inductive methodology focused on successes and possibilities, using data from interviews with 93 policy-makers and national-level government leaders in 5 democratic countries, and observational and archival data. We reveal how governments can operationalize a social commons ethos in decision-making. This approach to governance involves stakeholder engagement that is Broad, Deep, and Continual (BDC). In this model, leaders engage a wide breadth of stakeholders, engage them deeply and meaningfully throughout the decision-making process, and sustain this engagement in a continual manner. Implications for governance of non-governmental bureaucracies are discussed, including the normative and strategic benefits of engaging stakeholders in this manner.

Suggested Citation

  • Jennifer Lees-Marshment & Aimee Dinnin Huff & Neil Bendle, 2020. "A Social Commons Ethos in Public Policy-Making," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 166(4), pages 761-778, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:166:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s10551-020-04577-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-020-04577-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10551-020-04577-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-020-04577-3?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Camille Meyer & Marek Hudon, 2019. "Money and the Commons: An Investigation of Complementary Currencies and Their Ethical Implications," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 160(1), pages 277-292, November.
    2. Helen M. Haugh & Alka Talwar, 2016. "Linking Social Entrepreneurship and Social Change: The Mediating Role of Empowerment," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 133(4), pages 643-658, February.
    3. Rebecca Neaera Abers & Margaret E. Keck, 2009. "Mobilizing the State: The Erratic Partner in Brazil's Participatory Water Policy," Politics & Society, , vol. 37(2), pages 289-314, June.
    4. Michelle Greenwood, 2007. "Stakeholder Engagement: Beyond the Myth of Corporate Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 315-327, September.
    5. Benjamin Neville & Simon Bell & Gregory Whitwell, 2011. "Stakeholder Salience Revisited: Refining, Redefining, and Refueling an Underdeveloped Conceptual Tool," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 357-378, September.
    6. Agle, Bradley R. & Donaldson, Thomas & Freeman, R. Edward & Jensen, Michael C. & Mitchell, Ronald K. & Wood, Donna J., 2008. "Dialogue: Toward Superior Stakeholder Theory," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 153-190, April.
    7. Saki Bailey & Ugo Mattei, 2013. "Social Movements as Constituent Power: The Italian Struggle for the Commons," IUC Research Commons 1-13, International University College of Turin.
    8. Cedric Dawkins, 2014. "The Principle of Good Faith: Toward Substantive Stakeholder Engagement," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 121(2), pages 283-295, May.
    9. Abelson, Julia & Forest, Pierre-Gerlier & Eyles, John & Smith, Patricia & Martin, Elisabeth & Gauvin, Francois-Pierre, 2003. "Deliberations about deliberative methods: issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 239-251, July.
    10. Domenico Dentoni & Verena Bitzer & Stefano Pascucci, 2016. "Cross-Sector Partnerships and the Co-creation of Dynamic Capabilities for Stakeholder Orientation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(1), pages 35-53, April.
    11. Jeffrey S. Harrison & Douglas A. Bosse & Robert A. Phillips, 2010. "Managing for stakeholders, stakeholder utility functions, and competitive advantage," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 58-74, January.
    12. John Hasnas, 2013. "Whither Stakeholder Theory? A Guide for the Perplexed Revisited," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 112(1), pages 47-57, January.
    13. Van Buren, Harry J., 2001. "If Fairness is the Problem, Is Consent the Solution? Integrating ISCT and Stakeholder Theory," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 481-499, July.
    14. Björn C. Mitzinneck & Marya L. Besharov, 2019. "Managing Value Tensions in Collective Social Entrepreneurship: The Role of Temporal, Structural, and Collaborative Compromise," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 159(2), pages 381-400, October.
    15. Chris Mason & John Simmons, 2014. "Embedding Corporate Social Responsibility in Corporate Governance: A Stakeholder Systems Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 119(1), pages 77-86, January.
    16. Päivi Myllykangas & Johanna Kujala & Hanna Lehtimäki, 2010. "Analyzing the Essence of Stakeholder Relationships: What do we Need in Addition to Power, Legitimacy, and Urgency?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 65-72, August.
    17. Thomas Maak, 2007. "Responsible Leadership, Stakeholder Engagement, and the Emergence of Social Capital," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 329-343, September.
    18. Phillips, Robert A., 1997. "Stakeholder Theory and A Principle of Fairness," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(1), pages 51-66, January.
    19. Suzanne Young & Vijaya Thyil, 2014. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Governance: Role of Context in International Settings," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 122(1), pages 1-24, June.
    20. Edwin Micewski & Carmelita Troy, 2007. "Business Ethics – Deontologically Revisited," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 17-25, April.
    21. Burns, James MacGregor, 1977. "Wellsprings of Political Leadership ," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 71(1), pages 266-275, March.
    22. James Hine & Lutz Preuss, 2009. "“Society is Out There, Organisation is in Here”: On the Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility Held by Different Managerial Groups," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 88(2), pages 381-393, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Huff, Aimee Dinnin & Barnhart, Michelle, 2022. "UNRAVEL-ing gnarly knots: A path for researching market-entangled wicked social problems," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 717-727.

    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. Mitchell, J. Robert & Israelsen, Trevor L. & Mitchell, Ronald K. & Lim, Dominic S.K., 2021. "Stakeholder identification as entrepreneurial action: The social process of stakeholder enrollment in new venture emergence," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 36(6).
    2. Jocelyn D. Evans & Elise Perrault & Timothy A. Jones, 2017. "Managers’ Moral Obligation of Fairness to (All) Shareholders: Does Information Asymmetry Benefit Privileged Investors at Other Shareholders’ Expense?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 140(1), pages 81-96, January.
    3. Alejandra Marin & Ronald Mitchell & Jae Lee, 2015. "The Vulnerability and Strength Duality in Ethnic Business: A Model of Stakeholder Salience and Social Capital," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 130(2), pages 271-289, August.
    4. Linda D. Hollebeek & V. Kumar & Rajendra K. Srivastava & Moira K. Clark, 2023. "Moving the stakeholder journey forward," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 23-49, January.
    5. Samuel Mansell, 2013. "Shareholder Theory and Kant’s ‘Duty of Beneficence’," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 117(3), pages 583-599, October.
    6. Anne-Laure P. Winkler & Jill A. Brown & David L. Finegold, 2019. "Employees as Conduits for Effective Stakeholder Engagement: An Example from B Corporations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 160(4), pages 913-936, December.
    7. Silvia Biraghi & Rossella Gambetti & Stefania Romenti, 2017. "Stakeholder Engagement beyond the Tension between Idealism and Practical Concerns," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(2), pages 1-14, January.
    8. Samantha Miles, 2012. "Stakeholder: Essentially Contested or Just Confused?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 108(3), pages 285-298, July.
    9. Jeffrey S. Harrison & Andrew C. Wicks, 2021. "Harmful Stakeholder Strategies," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 169(3), pages 405-419, March.
    10. Federico Barnabè & Maria Cleofe Giorgino & Martin Kunc, 2019. "Visualizing and managing value creation through integrated reporting practices: a dynamic resource-based perspective," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 23(2), pages 537-575, June.
    11. Danso, Albert & Adomako, Samuel & Lartey, Theophilus & Amankwah-Amoah, Joseph & Owusu-Yirenkyi, Diana, 2020. "Stakeholder integration, environmental sustainability orientation and financial performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 652-662.
    12. Cedric Dawkins, 2014. "The Principle of Good Faith: Toward Substantive Stakeholder Engagement," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 121(2), pages 283-295, May.
    13. David Weitzner & Yuval Deutsch, 2023. "Harm Reduction, Solidarity, and Social Mobility as Target Functions: A Rortian Approach to Stakeholder Theory," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 186(3), pages 479-492, September.
    14. Guillermo Casasnovas & Jessica Jones, 2022. "Who Has a Seat at the Table in Impact Investing? Addressing Inequality by Giving Voice," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 179(4), pages 951-969, September.
    15. J. Robert Mitchell & Ronald K. Mitchell & Richard A. Hunt & David M. Townsend & Jae H. Lee, 2022. "Stakeholder Engagement, Knowledge Problems and Ethical Challenges," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 75-94, January.
    16. Meyer, Camille, 2020. "The commons: A model for understanding collective action and entrepreneurship in communities," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 35(5).
    17. Gordon Liu & Catherine Liston-Heyes & Wai-Wai Ko, 2010. "Employee Participation in Cause-Related Marketing Strategies: A Study of Management Perceptions from British Consumer Service Industries," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 92(2), pages 195-210, March.
    18. Gastón Reyes, 2023. "The All-Stakeholders-Considered Case for Corporate Beneficence," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 188(1), pages 37-55, November.
    19. Oluyomi A. Osobajo & David Moore, 2017. "Who is Who? Identifying the Different Sub-groups of Secondary Stakeholders within a Community: A Case Study of the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria Communities," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(9), pages 188-209, September.
    20. Linda O’Riordan & Jenny Fairbrass, 2014. "Managing CSR Stakeholder Engagement: A New Conceptual Framework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 125(1), pages 121-145, November.

    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:kap:jbuset:v:166:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s10551-020-04577-3. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.