University of Kent.
Università degli Studi di Cagliari.
Br J Sociol. 2017 Jun;68(2):254-272. doi: 10.1111/1468-4446.12249. Epub 2017 Mar 28.
The corporate pursuit of social goals - known as Corporate Social Responsibility or 'CSR' - has been subject to critique on a number of grounds. However, a hitherto underexplored potential consequence of CSR has been suggested in a recent paper by C. Garsten and K. Jacobsson ('Post-Political Regulation: Soft Power and Post-political Visions in Global Governance' (2013), Critical Sociology 39: 421-37). They suggest that CSR is part of an international trend towards 'post-political' governance discourses, where an emphasis on different actors' common goals obscures conflicts of interest, subverting the open political conflict necessary for a well-functioning democracy. This paper examines whether such post-political discourses - including an outright denial of conflict of interest - can be found within the alcohol and gambling industries, where conflicts of interest are likely to be particularly acute given the addictive nature of the goods/services in question. Based on interviews with CSR professionals in these industries in Italy, the UK, and at EU-level, we do indeed find evidence of a post-political discourse. In these discourses, alcohol/gambling industry staff deny potential conflicts of interest on the basis that any small benefits from sales to a small number of addicts are seen to be outweighed by the reputational damage that addicts cause. Crucially, however, this coexists with another, less post-political discourse, where addictions CSR professionals emphasize 'common ground' as a basis for CSR, while accepting some instances of possible conflict of interest. Here interviewees make considerable efforts to differentiate good (sustainable) from bad (short-term) self-interest in order to stress the genuineness of their own actions. We conclude the paper by considering whether CSR embedded within a 'common ground' discourse still hides conflicts of interests and subverts democratic debate, or overcomes the problems identified by Garsten and Jacobsson.
企业对社会目标的追求——被称为企业社会责任或“CSR”——在许多方面都受到了批评。然而,最近 C. Garsten 和 K. Jacobsson 的一篇论文中提出了 CSR 一个尚未被充分探讨的潜在后果(“后政治监管:全球治理中的软实力和后政治愿景”(2013 年),《批判社会学》39:421-37)。他们认为,CSR 是国际上“后政治”治理话语趋势的一部分,这种话语强调不同行为者的共同目标,掩盖了利益冲突,破坏了民主运作所必需的公开政治冲突。本文探讨了这种后政治话语——包括对利益冲突的断然否认——是否存在于酒精和赌博行业中,鉴于所讨论的商品/服务的成瘾性质,这些行业中利益冲突很可能特别尖锐。基于对意大利、英国和欧盟层面这些行业的 CSR 专业人士的采访,我们确实发现了后政治话语的证据。在这些话语中,酒精/赌博行业的员工否认潜在的利益冲突,理由是少量的销售收益给少数瘾君子带来的好处,被认为超过了瘾君子造成的声誉损害。然而,至关重要的是,另一种不太后政治的话语也同时存在,在这种话语中,成瘾 CSR 专业人士强调“共同点”作为 CSR 的基础,同时接受某些可能存在利益冲突的情况。在这里,受访者为了强调自己行为的真实性,做出了很大的努力来区分良好(可持续)和不良(短期)的自身利益。最后,我们通过考虑嵌入“共同点”话语中的 CSR 是否仍然隐藏利益冲突并破坏民主辩论,或者克服 Garsten 和 Jacobsson 提出的问题,来结束本文。