CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 270Corporate Social Responsibility ReportingCorporate Social Responsibility and SustainabilityEthics in Business and Education

Discourse ethics and social accountability: The ethics of SA 8000

Open access
Gilbert, Dirk Ulrich, Rasche, Andreas·2007·Business Ethics Quarterly
DOI 10.5840/beq200717230
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Based on theoretical insights of discourse ethics as developed by Jürgen Habermas, we delineate a proposal to further develop the institutionalization of social accounting in multinational corporations (MNCs) by means of “Social Accountability 8000” (SA 8000). First, we discuss the cornerstones of Habermas's discourse ethics and elucidate how and why this concept can provide a theoretical justification of the moral point of view in MNCs. Second, the basic conception, main purpose, and implementation procedure of SA 8000 are presented. Third, we critically examine SA 8000 from a Habermasian perspective, and discuss advantages and drawbacks of the initiative. Fourth, to address the drawbacks, we introduce a “discourse-ethically” extended version of SA 8000. We show that this approach is theoretically well-founded and able to overcome some of the current deficits of the certification initiative. We demonstrate that the extended version of SA 8000 can be successfully applied on a cross-cultural basis, and that our findings have significant implications for other international ethics initiatives.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5840/beq200717230

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The need to implement long-term systemic perspectives is accentuated in most literatures on CSR and sustainability.

    “the need to implement long-term systemic perspectives is accentuated in most literatures on CSR and sustainability (e.g., Gilbert & Rasche, 2007;Gladwin, Kennelly, & Krause, 1995;Slawinski & Bansal, 2018; see also Winkler, Etter, & Castelló, 2019).”

    From Timely hypocrisy? Hypocrisy temporalities in CSR communication (2020) · cites this paper as Gilbert & Rasche, 2007

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 63 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Gilbert, D. U., & Rasche, A.
Affiliations
  • Universität Hamburg (DE)
  • Copenhagen Business School (DK)
ORCID
Venue
Business Ethics Quarterly
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2007-04
Volume
17
Issue
2
Pages
187-216
ISSN
  • 1052-150X (ISSN-L)
  • 2153-3326
DOI
10.5840/beq200717230
OpenAlex
W2119456955
Cited by
270
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 23
FWCI
33.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 2854 d)
Locations
  • Business Ethics Quarterly (publishedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainability
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Ethics in Business and Education
Keywords
discourse ethics, Jürgen Habermas, SA8000, social accountability, multinational corporations, corporate social responsibility, certification standards, moral perspective, cross-cultural application

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review