IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rvr/journl/20119173.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

RSE et théorie des parties prenantes : les impasses du contrat

Author

Listed:
  • Cazal, Didier

Abstract

Cet article traite de la théorie des parties prenantes et de ce qu’elle implique pour la recherche sur la RSE et les pratiques en la matière. Tout d’abord, certaines faiblesses conceptuelles et théoriques sont relevées. Nous soulignons ensuite l’enracinement de la théorie des parties prenantes dans le contractualisme : une conception de la firme en termes de nœuds de contrats entre parties prenantes, inspirée de la théorie des coûts de transaction, une justification plus philosophique par les théories du contrat social et de la justice comme équité, inspirée des travaux de Rawls. Nous pointons les problèmes théoriques que cet enracinement contractualiste soulève avant d’en questionner les implications sociopolitiques. Fonder la RSE sur des conceptions inspirées de la théorie des parties prenantes risque de conduire à un libéralisme élargi, au volontarisme en matière de RSE et en définitive à une moralisation limitée d’un capitalisme débridé.

Suggested Citation

  • Cazal, Didier, 2011. "RSE et théorie des parties prenantes : les impasses du contrat," Revue de la Régulation - Capitalisme, institutions, pouvoirs, Association Recherche et Régulation, vol. 9.
    • Handle: RePEc:rvr:journl:2011:9173
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://regulation.revues.org/9173
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://regulation.revues.org/pdf/9173
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew C. Wicks & R. Edward Freeman, 1998. "Organization Studies and the New Pragmatism: Positivism, Anti-positivism, and the Search for Ethics," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 123-140, April.
    2. David Detomasi, 2008. "The Political Roots of Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 82(4), pages 807-819, November.
    3. Scherer, Andreas Georg & Palazzo, Guido & Baumann, Dorothée, 2006. "Global Rules and Private Actors: Toward a New Role of the Transnational Corporation in Global Governance," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 505-532, October.
    4. Edward Freeman, R. & Evan, William M., 1990. "Corporate governance: A stakeholder interpretation," Journal of Behavioral Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 337-359.
    5. Edward Freeman, R. & Phillips, Robert A., 2002. "Stakeholder Theory: A Libertarian Defense," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 331-349, July.
    6. Richard Sobel & Nicolas Postel & Sandrine Rousseau, 2006. "La responsabilité sociale et environnementale des entreprises : une reconfiguration du rapport salarial fordiste ?," Post-Print halshs-00228094, HAL.
    7. Aurélien Acquier & Franck Aggeri, 2008. "Une généalogie de la pensée managériale sur la RSE," Post-Print halshs-00645679, HAL.
    8. Bodet, Catherine & Lamarche, Thomas, 2007. "La Responsabilité sociale des entreprises comme innovation institutionnelle. Une lecture régulationniste," Revue de la Régulation - Capitalisme, institutions, pouvoirs, Association Recherche et Régulation, vol. 1.
    9. Burton, Brian K. & Dunn, Craig P., 1996. "Collaborative Control and the Commons: Safeguarding Employee Rights," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 277-288, July.
    10. Nicolas Postel & Sandrine Rousseau & Richard Sobel, 2006. "La Responsabilité Sociale et Environnementale des Entreprises : une reconfiguration du rapport salarial fordiste ?," Post-Print halshs-00284021, HAL.
    11. D. Cazal, 2008. "Parties prenantes et RSE : des enjeux sociopolitiques au-delà des contrats," Post-Print hal-00323835, HAL.
    12. Phillips, Robert & Freeman, R. Edward & Wicks, Andrew C., 2003. "What Stakeholder Theory is Not," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 479-502, October.
    13. Wicks, Andrew C. & Gilbert, Daniel R. & Freeman, R. Edward, 1994. "A Feminist Reinterpretation of The Stakeholder Concept," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(4), pages 475-497, October.
    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. Pierre Baret & Vincent Helfrich, 2019. "The “trilemma” of non-financial reporting and its pitfalls," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 23(2), pages 485-511, June.
    2. Kévin Pastier & François Silva, 2020. "Objet, raison d’être et praxis : les coopératives et le commun au secours de l’entreprise ?," Post-Print hal-02872799, HAL.
    3. Eric Berthelot & Steven Coissard & Kachour Maher, 2012. "Les parties prenantes au cœur du business model," Working Papers hal-00967045, HAL.

    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. Postel, Nicolas & Sobel, Richard, 2011. "Polanyi contre Freeman," Revue de la Régulation - Capitalisme, institutions, pouvoirs, Association Recherche et Régulation, vol. 9.
    2. R. Edward Freeman & Andrew C. Wicks & Bidhan Parmar, 2004. "Stakeholder Theory and “The Corporate Objective Revisited”," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 364-369, June.
    3. Valentinov, Vladislav, 2023. "Stakeholder theory: Toward a classical institutional economics perspective," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 188(1), pages 75-88.
    4. Samantha Miles, 2017. "Stakeholder Theory Classification: A Theoretical and Empirical Evaluation of Definitions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 142(3), pages 437-459, May.
    5. 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.
    6. Yafet Yosafet Wilben Rissy, 2021. "The stakeholder model: its relevance, concept, and application in the Indonesian banking sector," Journal of Banking Regulation, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(3), pages 219-231, September.
    7. Lorenzo Dorigo & Giuseppe Marcon, 2014. "A caring interpretation of stakeholder management for the social enterprise. Evidence from a regional survey of micro social cooperatives in the Italian welfare mix," Working Papers 01, Venice School of Management - Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    8. Vladislav Valentinov, 2023. "Stakeholder Theory: Toward a Classical Institutional Economics Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 188(1), pages 75-88, November.
    9. Silvana Signori & Gianfranco Rusconi, 2009. "Ethical Thinking in Traditional Italian Economia Aziendale and the Stakeholder Management Theory: The Search for Possible Interactions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 89(3), pages 303-318, November.
    10. Tae Wan Kim & Alan Scheller-Wolf, 2019. "Technological Unemployment, Meaning in Life, Purpose of Business, and the Future of Stakeholders," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 160(2), pages 319-337, December.
    11. Séhier, Clément, 2014. "La responsabilité sociale des entreprises dans l’industrie chinoise : une recomposition de la relation salariale ?," Revue de la Régulation - Capitalisme, institutions, pouvoirs, Association Recherche et Régulation, vol. 15.
    12. Krichewsky, Damien, 2011. "Crise et modalités d’élaboration d’un compromis social dans le nouveau capitalisme indien," Revue de la Régulation - Capitalisme, institutions, pouvoirs, Association Recherche et Régulation, vol. 9.
    13. Giuseppe Marcon & Lorenzo Dorigo, 2012. "Stakeholder theory and care management: An inquiry into social enterprises," Working Papers 21, Venice School of Management - Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    14. Tommy Jensen & Johan Sandström, 2013. "In Defence of Stakeholder Pragmatism," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 114(2), pages 225-237, May.
    15. David Silver, 2012. "Citizens as Contractualist Stakeholders," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 3-13, August.
    16. Mara Del Baldo, 2012. "Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance in Italian SMEs: the experience of some “spirited businesses”," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 16(1), pages 1-36, February.
    17. Pies, Ingo & Hielscher, Stefan & Beckmann, Markus, 2008. "Corporate citizenship as stakeholder management: An ordonomic approach to business ethics," Discussion Papers 2008-4, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    18. Francesco Di Maddaloni & Roya Derakhshan, 2019. "A Leap from Negative to Positive Bond. A Step towards Project Sustainability," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-19, June.
    19. Andrew West, 2016. "Applying Metaethical and Normative Claims of Moral Relativism to (Shareholder and Stakeholder) Models of Corporate Governance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 199-215, May.
    20. Franck Aggeri & Aurélien Acquier, 2005. "La théorie des stakeholders permet-elle de rendre compte des pratiques d'entreprise en matière de RSE ?," Post-Print halshs-00645708, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    contractualisme; Freeman; Responsabilité sociale de l’entreprise; théorie des parties prenantes; contractarianism; Corporate social responsibility; Freeman; stakeholder theory; contractualismo; Freeman; Responsabilidad social de las empresas; teoría de la partes involucradas;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B52 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches - - - Historical; Institutional; Evolutionary; Modern Monetary Theory;
    • M14 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Corporate Culture; Diversity; Social Responsibility
    • P12 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Capitalist Economies - - - Capitalist Enterprises

    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:rvr:journl:2011:9173. 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: Pascal Seppecher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://theorie-regulation.org/ .

    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.