IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/gtw2x.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Public actors without public values: legitimacy, domination and the regulation of the technology sector

Author

Listed:
  • Taylor, Linnet

Abstract

The scale and asymmetry of commercial technology firms’ power over people through data, combined with the increasing involvement of the private sector in public governance, means that increasingly people do not have the ability to opt out of engaging with technology firms. At the same time, those firms are increasingly intervening on the population level in ways that have implications for social and political life. This creates the potential for power relations of domination, and demands that we decide what constitutes the legitimacy to act on the public. Business ethics and private law are not designed to answer these questions, which are primarily political. If people have lost the right to disengage with commercial technologies, we may need to hold the companies that offer them to the same standards to which we hold the public sector. This paper therefore argues for the development of an overarching normative framework for what constitutes non-domination with regard to digital technologies. Such a framework must involve a nuanced idea of political power and accountability that can respond not only to the legality of corporate behaviour, but to its legitimacy.

Suggested Citation

  • Taylor, Linnet, 2020. "Public actors without public values: legitimacy, domination and the regulation of the technology sector," SocArXiv gtw2x, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:gtw2x
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/gtw2x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5e858c3ed0e35401e9b49152/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/gtw2x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Scharpf, Fritz Wilhelm, 2009. "Legitimacy in the multilevel European polity," MPIfG Working Paper 09/1, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    2. Guido Palazzo & Andreas Scherer, 2006. "Corporate Legitimacy as Deliberation: A Communicative Framework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 66(1), pages 71-88, June.
    3. Geert Demuijnck & Björn Fasterling, 2016. "The Social License to Operate," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 136(4), pages 675-685, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Veronica Devenin & Constanza Bianchi, 2018. "Soccer fields? What for? Effectiveness of corporate social responsibility initiatives in the mining industry," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(5), pages 866-879, September.
    2. Andersen, Sophie Esmann & Johansen, Trine Susanne, 2021. "Corporate citizenship: Challenging the corporate centricity in corporate marketing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 686-699.
    3. Vitaliy Roud & Thomas Wolfgang Thurner, 2018. "The Influence of State‐Ownership on Eco‐Innovations in Russian Manufacturing Firms," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 22(5), pages 1213-1227, October.
    4. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    5. Irene Chu & Mai Chi Vu, 2022. "The Nature of the Self, Self-regulation and Moral Action: Implications from the Confucian Relational Self and Buddhist Non-self," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(1), pages 245-262, September.
    6. Islam, Muhammad Azizul & Deegan, Craig & Haque, Shamima, 2021. "Corporate human rights performance and moral power: A study of retail MNCs’ supply chains in Bangladesh," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    7. Antonio Martos-Pedrero & David Jiménez-Castillo & Francisco Joaquín Cortés-García, 2022. "Examining drivers and outcomes of corporate social responsibility in agri-food firms," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 68(3), pages 79-86.
    8. Amal Aouadi & Sylvain Marsat, 2018. "Do ESG Controversies Matter for Firm Value? Evidence from International Data," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 151(4), pages 1027-1047, September.
    9. 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.
    10. Petia Kostadinova, 2015. "Improving the Transparency and Accountability of EU Institutions: The Impact of the Office of the European Ombudsman," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(5), pages 1077-1093, September.
    11. Gagalyuk, Taras & Chatalova, Lioudmila & Kalyuzhnyy, Oleksandr & Ostapchuk, Igor, 2021. "Broadening the scope of instrumental motivations for CSR disclosure: An illustration for agroholdings in transition economies," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 24(4), pages 717-737.
    12. Niedziałkowski, Krzysztof & Shkaruba, Anton, 2018. "Governance and legitimacy of the Forest Stewardship Council certification in the national contexts – A comparative study of Belarus and Poland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 180-188.
    13. Giorgia Miotto & Marc Polo López & Josep Rom Rodríguez, 2019. "Gender Equality and UN Sustainable Development Goals: Priorities and Correlations in the Top Business Schools’ Communication and Legitimation Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, January.
    14. Andrew Crane & Sarah Glozer, 2016. "Researching Corporate Social Responsibility Communication: Themes, Opportunities and Challenges," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(7), pages 1223-1252, November.
    15. Jia Xu & Jiuchang Wei & Liangdong Lu, 2019. "Strategic stakeholder management, environmental corporate social responsibility engagement, and financial performance of stigmatized firms derived from Chinese special environmental policy," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(6), pages 1027-1044, September.
    16. Wang, Quan-Jing & Wang, Hai-Jie & Chang, Chun-Ping, 2022. "Environmental performance, green finance and green innovation: What's the long-run relationships among variables?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    17. Mutch, Nicola & Aitken, Robert, 2009. "Being fair and being seen to be fair: Corporate reputation and CSR partnerships," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 92-98.
    18. Anselm Schneider, 2015. "Reflexivity in Sustainability Accounting and Management: Transcending the Economic Focus of Corporate Sustainability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 127(3), pages 525-536, March.
    19. Arno Kourula & Guillaume Delalieux, 2016. "The Micro-level Foundations and Dynamics of Political Corporate Social Responsibility: Hegemony and Passive Revolution through Civil Society," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(4), pages 769-785, June.
    20. Haas, Peter M., 2018. "Preserving the epistemic authority of science in world politics," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2018-105, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:osf:socarx:gtw2x. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.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.