Theory of Socio-Political and Legal Responsibility of Business in Western Sociology and Ideology: Role and Purpose

The article defines the main provisions, the role, significance and nature of the theory of socio-political and legal responsibility of business in the system of Western ideology and political science. The author examines various periods of its formation, development and distribution, the relationship with traditional Western concepts, including the theory of the corporate state. The article presents the main types of the theory of corporate responsibility, such as: classical (traditional) and modern (managerial), complete and limited, internal and external, general and private, legal and compensatory theories of social and political responsibility of business, including other less significant varieties of the theory of socio-political and legal responsibility of business in Western sociological and political science literature, as well as the forms and methods of application of this theory. The author formulates the main goals and purpose of the social and political responsibility of business and addresses the issues of expanding the socio-political power of big business. The research methodology is based on the analysis and comparison of the opinions of various Western sociologists and political scientists on the theory of the socio-political and legal responsibility of business, considering the purpose of this theory from different sides.

1. Быков И. К. Буржуазные концепции «социальной ответственности бизнеса» // США. Экономика, политика, идеология. – 1976. – № 1.

2. Матузов Н. И., Ушанова Н. В. Возможность и действительность в российской правовой системе. – Саратов, 2010.

3. American Business Law Journal. – 1980. – N 2. – P. 259–267.

4. Bower J. On the Amoral Organization // The Corporate Society / ed. by R. Marris. – New York, 1984.

5. Campbell Т., Miller S. (eds.). Human Rights and the Moral Responsibilities of Corporate and Public Sector Organisations. – L., 2004.

6. Daubler W. Corporate Social Responsibility: A Way to make Deregulation more Acceptable? // Blanpain R., Hendrickx Fr. (eds.). Labour Law between Change and Tradition. – New York, 2011.

7. Davis R., Robert L. Business, Society and Environment. – New York, 1985.

8. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, 15 U.S.C., § 78 (Supp. 11, 1979).

9. Martin-Ortega О., Eiroglu M. The European Corporate Social Responsibility Strategy // Orbie J., Fortell L. (eds.). European Umion and the Social Dimention of Globalization. How the EU influences the World. – New York, 2009.

10. McGee R. Legal Ethics, Business Ethics and International Trade: Some neglected issues // Cardozo. Journal of International and Comparative Law. – 2002. – N 1. – P. 109–211.

11. Poddling Influence // Time. – 1986. – March 3. – P. 24–25.

12. Rockefeller D. Adress Delivered to the Advertising Council // Los Angeles Time. – 1971. – Jan.

13. Social Responsibilites of Business Corporations. – New York, 1971.

14. The Social Conscience of Business / ed. by Ph. Sparer. – Memphis, 1974.

15. The Wall Street Journal. – 1991. – February 27.

16. Time. – 1986. – April 14. – P. 54–55.

17. Votaw D., Sothi S. The Corporate Dilemma. Traditional Values Versus Contemporary Problems. – New York, 1973.

18. Zimmerman J. Irish State – Sponsored Bodies: The Fractionalization of Authority and Responsibility // Planning and Administration. – 1985. – P. 39–52.