You are on page 1of 28

The Corporation 1

The Corporation: Is it a Key to Poverty? William Huckabee OM7050 Ethics and Social Responsibility September 11, 2009 Capella University

The Corporation 2 The Corporation: Is it a Key to Poverty? In the light of the current global recession, readers see the results in massive layoffs as businesses try to reduce costs and conserve capital. When costs cannot be controlled, businesses close their doors. These events results in thousands being displaced and turn to social programs for assistance. In the face of layoffs and closures however, government institutions are seeing a decline in tax revenues and are forced to reduce their spending; this places the welfare programs citizens need in jeopardy. This suggests that global poverty levels will increase, creating larger burdens on the already stressed social systems to meet the needs of this population. The Realities of Poverty Poverty is probably one the greatest challenges that the international economies will ever face (Leisinger, 2007). It is suggested that 80% of the worlds population lives on less than $10.00 per day (Shau, 2009, para. 1). Shau suggests that the international poverty line is somewhere around $1.00 per day (para. 7). This figure is much different in the United States. For instance, Cava and Mayer (2007) suggest that the poverty level in America is around $50.00 per day (p. 266) or $18,860 (Velasquez, 2006, p. 314) annually. Furthermore, Pogge (2003) suggests that few citizens realize the harm (p. 2) that poverty is inflicting on the poorer populations of the world and that there are three times more (p. 2) citizens that live below the poverty line than live above it. Further, there are between 955 million (p. 2) and 1.3 billion (Leisinger, 2005, p. 578) in this impoverished group. Unbelievably, the affluent members of the world believe that they are entitled to 81% (Pogge, p. 2) of the worlds product.

The Corporation 3 Further, people in the richest countries tend to downplay the severity and persistence (Pogge, 2003, p. 1) of global poverty. In fact, this population believes that poverty can be eradicated with an occasional donation to the Salvation Army, for example (Pogge). One could postulate that poverty is a product of, and is being fueled by misrule and poor leadership (p. 7) creating economic injustices, which is not congruent with to a thriving society. Mofid (2003) suggests that economic justice is an important part, and possibly a requirement for, a civilized society and injustices in this area accounts for much of Global poverty (p. 24). In contrast, Moyo and Ferguson (2009) suggest that poverty can be created in part because of geographic or natural resource constraints, such as being land-locked (p. 31) with no access to rivers or coastlines for example, to move goods to other nations for trade. Moyo and Ferguson further suggest further that when these two constraints are not in play, poverty is often a result of ethnic differences. For example, Collier (as cited in Moyo and Ferguson) suggest that ethnic differences within the same national boundaries can often affect the economic growth (p. 32) and stability, regardless of the amount of aid that the county receives. Perhaps this is because of the absence of a strong and credible (p. 33) government entity to enforce equity and utility to the group as a whole, versus choosing ethnic sides. A strong government free of corruption and can be trusted to protect property rights and the security of contracts (Moyo and Ferguson, 2009, p.41) will be more congruent for economic growth and the abolishment of poverty. It is governments responsibility to ensure socioeconomic progress (Leisinger, 2007, p. 114). However, even if there were a strong and credible government in place, one could postulate that

The Corporation 4 as large as this problem is, no one entity can assume the responsibility for all duties of society (p. 114). One should consider too that often the government can stifle economic growth; Moyo and Ferguson all this economic distortion (Moyo and Ferguson, p. 20). Moreover, with the continuous struggle to control and reduce poverty, the evidence suggested above indicates that governmental entities do not have the resources or capacity to help cure this societal problem (Leisinger, 2007). Therefore, Leisinger suggests that to rid society of this problem, it will require a coordinated effort between government, civil society, and business (p. 113) to achieve a sustainable decline in poverty. Is Leisingers (2007) proposition the solution to poverty? Friedman (1970) would surely disagree. However, the evidence above suggests that poverty is a difficult realism that governments as well as corporate leaders around the world have become accustomed to and Leisinger (2007) suggests that the corporation is the key. Is the solution to poverty the corporation? It can be postulated that it is because successful corporate operations lead to economic growth, which increases choice, provides more opportunities, and renders development efforts easier for developing countries (Leisinger, 2007, p. 114). This study seeks to find the answer. The Business Stance As with any theory, ethical or otherwise, there are always those that take a particular position to certain theoretical perspectives; this study reveals nothing different. For instance, there are three ways business leaders look at social their

The Corporation 5 responsibilities and their contributions to it such as neo-liberal, stakeholder, and a broader goals perspective (Weyzig, 2009, p.418). Neo-Liberal Perspective As implied earlier, this perspective aligns with Friedmans (1970) view that business is not in the business of supporting or contributing to social welfare programs such as the reduction of poverty, for example. Sure, business should abide by applicable laws and ethical norms of conducting business, such as those related to safe working conditions for employees, employees rights, and the prevention of sexual harassment, and the like, while focusing on the maximization of profits (Friedman). For example, Weyzig (2009) suggests that when left alone, corporations can create greater wealth for society by pursuing the path for profit maximization versus assuming other non-profit related activities such as social welfare programs. The only moral duty a corporation has is to refrain from unfair completion and exercising market power (p. 420), among others. Greenwood (2002) suggest that once affirmative social obligations to society are assigned to corporate entities, the environment can demand more than the firm is capable of providing, can impact the firms profits, and ultimately its survival. Furthermore, Buchholz (1991) agrees with Friedman (1970) in that the sole purpose of a business is to provide goods and services to consumers. Further, firm should maximize the effective and efficient uses of resources in such a way as to offer their products at the lowest possible price, which contributes to the firms profits. In doing so, the firm contributes to and increases the wealth of society (Buchholz, p. 19). Finally, under this perspective, it can be generally accepted that the benefits of the

The Corporation 6 corporate entity and the markets they participate in will be trickled down (Wettstein, 2008, p. 252) to the poorest members of society, effectively relieving corporations from any responsibility (p. 252). Stakeholder Perspective The stakeholder perspective is much different that the neo-liberal view; its focus is on the maximization of profits with the added feature of considering the firms stakeholders in its planning activities, and is often voluntary (Weyzig, 2009, p. 419). Further, Pirsch, Gupta, and Grau (2007) suggests that this theory takes both economic and non-economic (p. 127) into consideration with regard to its survival and success; this is by far much different that the neo-liberal view as described above. For instance, Husted and Allen (2000) suggest that during planning activities, managers must consider the effects of business operations of the firms stakeholders such as customer, consumers, vendors, supply chain, and the community at large (p. 24). Further, it could be speculated that during planning activities, firms adapt to stakeholder concerns by including this group into the planning activities (Shepard, Bets, and OConnell, 1997, p. 1007). Moreover, more companies are engaging dialog in this format to seek and develop responses to the social demands of various stakeholders, which provide unclear signals (Garriga and Mele, 2004, p. 59). Also, Amba-Rao (1993) suggests that this is an accommodative and reactive (p. 554) approach and typically focuses on what the firm should not do and is often negative (p. 418). This format of correspondence with the environment seeks to sensitize and understand the dilemmas the firm faces with regard to stakeholders. The motivation for the stakeholder view goes further than just being accommodative and

The Corporation 7 reactive, however. For example, Pirsch, et al. (2007) suggests that a competitive advantage is obtained by developing a level of trust and loyalty of customers in the firms targeted market, which can, and often does, increase profits. Finally, in order for stakeholders interests to be included in the planning process, they must actively participate in the process; the concern however, is that in third-world countries participation of stakeholders is often thwarted by the lack of education (AmbaRao). Broader Goals Perspective Here is where things get interesting. This perspective takes a firms participation in societal activities well beyond their net present value (Weyzig, 2009, p. 419). This perspective takes the firm from a reactive stance as in the two previous perspectives to an active or proactive stance (p. 419). For instance, firms taking a broader goals perspective actively engage its environment contributing significant resources to sustainable development and poverty reduction (p. 419) activities in the community that the firm resides in. Further this perspective goes beyond behavioral norms and focuses on actions that go beyond the firms legal obligations (Weyzig, 2009, p. 420). For example, Shaw and Barry (2007), suggest that corporate entities have social responsibilities because of their great social and economic power (p. 215) and with that power comes social responsibility (p. 215) Examples of some of the activities that the firm undertakes here are causerelated marketing, community investments (such as constructing or investing is schools, medical activities, and food subsidies for workers, etc.), and partnerships with

The Corporation 8 governments or non-governmental organizations (NGOs) (p. 420). Finally, the net effect of following this perspective is the improvement and harmonization of business actions with society and the improvement of societys quality of life in the broadest possible ways (Shaw and Barry, 2007, p. 215), creating a win-win situation (p. 420) for most firms. The Business Related Ethical Issues of Poverty Firms that globalize, that is, move into developing countries, tend to stimulate the host areas where they operate, whether moving and establishing a presence there or through foreign direct investment (FDI). Globalization, therefore, causes responsibility issues in the relationship between the host country and their citizens (Amba-Rao, 1993), especially in the moral sense. For instance, it is suggested that this relationship can have a significant effect on the standard of living (Amba-Rao, 1993, p. 553) of citizens in the host nation that the firm operates in. This relationship can be beneficial, as in the case where business operations help to raise the standard of living or harmful when a business implements harmful marketing schemes and unethical employment practices (p. 553), for example. Therefore, before entering into a discussion on how or if a corporate entity can be beneficial to the reduction of global poverty, it is necessary to examine the ethical underpinnings of poverty. As suggested earlier, there are three possible ethical theories that form the foundation of such a strategy, which are the utilitarian theory, the theory of justice, and the rights principle (Amba-Rao, 1993).

The Corporation 9 Utilitarian Theory With regard to most activities, and especially corporate activities, this theory is most concerned with the consequences of corporate decisions on society. Velasquez (2006) suggests that when management chooses a course of action to pursue in a business decision, to be ethical, the action should produce the greatest amount of utility (p. 62). This theory of the greatest good, or what Mill (as cited in Sher, 2001) describes as the greatest happiness principle (p. 3) is possibly the strongest argument for corporate involvement. Mill (as cited in Sher, 2001) suggests that the moral foundation for all actions is utility (p. 7). Further, this foundation holds that the consequence of actions are considered to the right as long as the action promotes happiness (p. 7) and where actions detract from happiness, these actions will be wrong (p. 7). Conducting operations that place women and children at risk would not be conducive to Mills utilitarian theory. Mill further suggests that pleasure and the freedom from pain are the only desirable ends (Sher). The only action deemed moral or right, would be the actions taken by the firm to reduce the level of poverty in their area of operations. However, whats missing above is the quality and quantity of the action. Mill (as cited in Sher, 2001) suggests in his utilitarian theory that all human suffering can be conquered by human care and effort (p. 15) through some sacrifice of their own greatest good for the good of others (p. 17), anything else would be a waste of resources. Therefore, one could postulate that by paying decent wages and conducting safe operations, a corporation would be sacrificing profit for employee safety and increase employee livelihood. Finally, Mill suggests that any action that one does for the

The Corporation 10 good or one that creates the greatest happiness must have the interest of the whole at stake (Sher). Justice It could be suggested that globalization of markets has created more unjust in the world than many earlier economic changes of the past (Wettstien, 2008). That being said, justice is the foundation of modern civilized societies (Mofid, 2003, p. 24); however, there are many instances of injustice around the globe in the form of poverty. Further, Hume (2006) agrees and suggests that justice creates utility and supports a civil society (para. 152) and he goes further to suggest that society could not exist without justice. For instance, without justice Hume (2006) suggests that there will be nothing but utter chaos and confusion; what would be the justice of a broken promise or the invasion of the properties of others (para. 153). One could postulate that no justice can be achieved in either activity. Insofar as we enjoy our happiness and welfare (para. 193), Hume suggests that all mankind reaps the benefits of justice because it can lead to the equality. For instance, Hartman (2005) would agree because justice towards mankind can lead to equitable distribution of goods and services (p. 7) as well as wealth. Also, as suggested earlier, protecting property rights and the security of contracts, strong governments would impose more justice in management of day-to-day operations, which will benefit society.

The Corporation 11 Mofid (2003) suggests that fairness and justice are not nice-to-have (p. 28) components of the corporate-society relationships, they are fundamental (p. 28) components that support a sustainable and durable social order (p. 28). However, Velasquez (2006) suggests that this theory is a purely formal perspective based on a logical idea that the distribution of some commodity must be consistent in the way we treat similar situations (p. 89). Rights Rights are based on freedom, justice, and peace (Harman, Shaw, and Stevenson, 2003, p. 199) and are tightly connected to duties (Velasquez, 2006). Rousseau (2005) and Hegel (as cited in Cutris, 2008) would agree. These rights include liberty, security of person, and humane treatment (Harman, et al., 2003, p. 200). Each of these rights implies a duty. Hegel suggests that if one has a right to liberty, others have a duty not to interfere with that right (Curtis, p. 95). In fact, Rousseau suggests that all should be treated equal; that they should enjoy the same rights (para. 90), for example. Further, Rousseau (2005) suggests that no person or state (corporation in this case) should draw (para. 90) any distinction between those who make up the state or community. This suggests that everyone has a right to be treated equal regardless of their status and by failing to treat all equally, the entity would not be supporting the utility of happiness, or as Rousseau suggests, such actions taken by an entity can have no other object than the general good (para. 90).

The Corporation 12 Discussion The evidence above suggests that there are many ethical problems that can be associated with global poverty such as the restriction of rights, inequality in the distributions of a nations wealth or the riches of the affluent as well as the consequence of a firms decisions on a local communitys environment and people. Further, some (Garten, 2002) suggest that the best way to rid the world of poverty, there must be a coalition against poverty, much like one built in the Global War of Terrorism, which is made of a large number of countries that suggest Terrorism will be the downfall of the modern world. Furthermore, Garvey and Newell (2005) suggests that this coordinated effort among business, government, and civil society is the key to achieving lasting human development and to make globalization improve the lifestyles of people. This is clear since the estimated annual cost to significantly reduce global poverty will be $50 billion (Garten, 2002, para. 11) in aid. However, Garten suggests that a tougher stance needs to be taken such as with debt reductions (para. 12) for the poorest nations as an example. Additionally, this coalition should not be made up of governmental bodies alone; in addition to these institutions, this coalition should be made up of a mixture of multinational corporations and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) as well as other non-government related institutions (Garten, 2002). A coalition made of many organizations such as those recommended here, will send a powerful signal that poverty is a menace to the world. Some of the actions that could be taken by this

The Corporation 13 coalition could revolve around trade issues, prevention of disease, and development activities. Trade Restrictions First, trade restrictions can be lifted for the impoverished countries so that they can gain access to more markets. For instance, the World Bank (as cited in Garten, 2002) suggests that tariffs and subsidies that are charged by the richer industrialized nations prevent poorer countries from obtaining access to markets. As a result, corporations are reluctant to invest in these nations as products imported into other nations have a higher cost, which defeat the purpose of investing in an area where labor is cheaper. Further, allowing access to more markets allows the countrys growth to increase in multiple ways. For instance, Moyo and Ferguson (2009) suggest that economic growth as a result of trade occurs in two ways. First, by increasing trade, a firm increases the amounts of good traded in the market and second, by driving up the productivity of the workforce (p. 114). Also, it can be suggested that a country can lose a great deal of revenue because of subsidies, in upwards of $500 billion (p. 115), in the case of Africa (p. 115), for example. Disease Prevention Wettstein (2008) suggests that there are millions are still dying (p. 248) because of poverty related starvation and diseases. Corporate executives can pursue avenues to either reduce the level of poverty related deaths and diseases as well as contributing to the prevention of future outbreaks in countries around the world. Garten (2002) suggests that this is a worthy act in itself (para. 14).

The Corporation 14 Also, Garten suggests that this can be a key (para. 14) activity for the reduction of poverty. For instance, a healthy population can contribute to their own development, inciting a level of success and self-worth. Companies do not have to take this problem on their own, the coalition provides the benefit of being able to have a pool of contributors where a fund is built and maintained to where disease prevention activities can be pulled from. Local Development Development tends to spur growth. However, as mentioned elsewhere in this study, implementing such activity will be difficult. For instance, how is a corporate executive to decide where, when, and what development should take place? Garten (2002) suggests this is as simple as entering into a joint venture with a government entity and conducting research and development activities to determine what development will can benefit the utility of the country and its people, as well as contribute to the profits of the firm. Corporate Social Responsibility Many of the actions suggested above are conducive with what is called corporate social responsibility (CSR). Further, CSR is to business as the generally accepted accounting practices is to accounting. It establishes general accepted relationship, obligations, and duties that relate to the corporate impact on the welfare of society (Robin and Reidenback, 1987, p. 45). Further, CSR is not new; it has been around since 1953 (Garriga and Mele, 2004, p. 51). Since that time, others have pursued this area of research (Pirsch, Gupta, and Grau, 2007; Robins, 2008; Ketola, 2007; among

The Corporation 15 others). Moreover, Robins (2008) suggests that CSR is a concept that generalizes the behavior of a company as being good or bad. However, Jonker and Marberg (2007) suggest that there is more to CSR than just the behavior of the firm. In addition to conduct or actions as suggest by Robins, it is also about the policies that a firm implements with regard to the firms society-related issues (Jonker and Marberg, p. 109). For example, Carroll (as cited in Pirsch, et al. 2007) defines CSR as a construct that encompasses the economic, legal, and discretional expectations that society has of organizations at a given point and time (p. 126). For example, Nelson, Ishikawa, and Geaneotes (2009) suggest that the corporate entity can contribute to the elimination of poverty through creating jobs, improving the livelihoods, and enhancing economic options (p. 7) for those in poverty situations. Further, Nelson, et al. (2009) suggests that in addition to the above contributions, the corporate entity also helps in transferring skills, technologies and quality management and business standards (p. 7). Many of these activities fall in to several components of what CSR can offer. For instance, Table 1 describes some of the high-level components of CSR.

The Corporation 16
Table 1. Components of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Area of Concern Employee Rights Product Safety Ecological Concerns Poverty Social Integration and Ethics Economic Growth
Note. Data in rows 2-5 are from Corporate social responsibility quo vadis? A critical inquiry into a discursive struggle. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, (2007) by J. Jonker and A. Marburg, (p. 109). Data in 6-7 are from Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, (2004), by E. Garriga and D. Mele, (p.52). Data in row 8 are from Reasons to be cheerful? What we know about CSRs Impact. Third World Quarterly, (2007), by M. Blowfield, (p. 689)

Shepard, Betz, and OConnell (1997) suggest that since companies are part of society, or specifically, they are a social institution embedded in communities and the larger society (p. 1004) they may have a significant part in societys survival. For instance, Leisinger (2005) suggests that because corporations are part of society, there are certain actions (see Table 2) that a company should consider when engaging in CSR activities. Enlightened Corporate Social Responsibility Leisinger (2005) suggest that these actions are considered this to be the enlightened definition of CSR (p. 583). Further, this enlightened definition, as it is called, is broken down into three areas of actions or compliance, must do, ought to do, and can do (p. 583). Shepard, et al. (1997) agrees and adds that this is a form of communitarianism (p. 1004), which can be considered important for prosperity in todays fiercely competitive global environment (p. 1004).

The Corporation 17
Table 2 The activities of CSR. Must Do (Minimum Standards) Produce quality products/services Comply with applicable laws and regulations Promote equal and fair wages Provide safe working conditions Engage in profit making Make wise strategic decisions
Note: Data in table is from The corporate social responsibility of the pharmaceutical industry: Idealism without illusion and realism without resignation, (2005), by K. Leisinger, (p. 583).

Ought to Do (Good Corporate Citizen) Avoid questionable practices Being fair and responsible to legitimate concerns of stakeholders Working legitimately beyond legal requirements Good social and environmental conduct

Can Do (Deserving of Public Praise) Corporate philanthropy Contribute to community and neighborhood programs Volunteerism Donations

Further, this compliance ranges from minimal compliance, the must do (Leisinger, 2005, p. 583), to actions that exceed the firms legal and moral obligations, the can do (p. 583). As an example, just complying with ethical norms and abiding by the rules of the game would be an example of must do actions. To take the minimalist perspective on step further, following the guidelines of the Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) by installing shield guards in a manufacturing plant, for example, would be a must do activity. Business Contribution to Society Also, firms that employ CSR as a strategy can make contributions to society in many ways. For instance, employing this strategy, firms contribute to the environment by creating jobs and providing training opportunities for the less fortunate (Boyle and Boguslaw, 2007, p. 106). Also, by establishing a partnership with other firms such as

The Corporation 18 those in the firms supply chain for example, the firm can provide expertise and resources (p. 106) to these firms expanding their social agenda to other localities. Furthermore, firms can further their social agenda as well as benefit their resources by improving the education level of the community by offering scholarship aid and financial support (Boyle and Boguslaw, 2007p. 106) to the youth that are financially stricken in the community that the firm operates in. Additionally, these activities are considered to be directly influencing the firms environment, however, Boyle and Boguslaw suggest that a firm can, and often does, indirectly help in social welfare activities indirectly, by providing FDI into local firms, which often generates economic growth (Frynas, 2008, p. 275). Also, CSR facilitates the protection of the public welfare and private interests in many ways. First, by pursuing legal and ethical means of operating, the firm prohibits the exploitations of workers and society (Cava and Mayer, 2007). Further, by strategic philanthropy, and compliance (Nelson, Ishikawa, and Geaneotes, 2009, p. 6) with local laws and codes, the benefit their reputation and add to the contributions of local development, which creates more markets for the firms products, which increase profits. Therefore there are good reasons to see that CSR is good for both business and society. Furthermore, the evidence suggested above indicates that CSR is an appealing way to help with social welfare issues, however, Buchholz (1991) suggests that this strategy is often hard to implement because there is no real proof (p. 22) that such a program can actually work. For example, Frynas (2008) suggests that there is a lack of empirical evidence and a supporting business case (p. 274) that this strategy is useful

The Corporation 19 to any firms. Although Frynas acknowledges that programs of this type exist, there is just not enough evidence to support such a strategy. Cost and Benefits of Corporate Social Responsibility In addition, this type of program is expensive and often cuts into a firms bottom line, detracting from the earnings of stockholders. Further, the economic performance of the firm has priority over all other social activities, and the reservation of funds for the pursuit of such activities would affect the long-term survival of the firm, which is often measured by the firms level of profit and growth (Buchholz, 1991, p. 22). Even with the difficulties suggested above, Pirsch, et al. (2007) suggest that there is a strong argument for this type of strategy. For instance, Pirsch, et al. suggests that the benefits of such a strategy often outweigh the costs and can be measured in the firms performance. Further, Pirsch et al. suggests that customers tend to display a willingness to purchase products from companies that engage in these activities. Further, engaging in CSR activities can improve the firms image (Pirsch et al., 2007, P. 125), creating a loyal customer following. Loyalty can be translated into higher sales, and higher profits. Further, in areas where the firm operates, this strategy can be translated into higher community support (p. 125) for the company, making tactical operating decisions in that region easier to manage.

The Corporation 20 Acceptance of Corporate Social Responsibility With that said, businesses need to be prepared to accept that they must play more than an economic role in society. As Robins (2007) puts it; businesses should accept a direct responsibility for making the world a better place (p. 330). This suggests that by ignoring CSR a company could be committing suicide (Ketola, 2007). For instance, CSR represents a set of principles by which a company can all but guarantee its survival as well as providing for the protection of the public welfare and private interests, while maintaining its profitability (Logsdon and Wood, 2002). For instance, by incorporating CSR activities into decision-making activities the firm could benefit through an enhanced labor market as well as local markets to purchase raw materials. This translates into higher profits because the local area provides consumers for its goods and services (Mofid, 2003; Cava and Mayer, 2007). Also, the language of economics lacks the moral language necessary to address poverty (Wettstein, 2008). With respect to the developed world, their core values over the years have changed when it comes to discriminatory work practices, human rights, and environmental degradation, among others (Fuentes-Garcia, Nunez-Tabales, and Veroz-Herradon, 2007, p.27). CSR can also be linked to three other factors. First, there had been an increase in regulation by intuitive institutions such as the United Nations, European Union, among others, that requires corporations to work within guidelines that work for the good of society (Fuentes-Garcia, et al., 2007, p. 27). Second, consumers are placing increased pressures of firms to produce green products and to find alternative uses for non-renewable resources (Fuentes-Garcia, et al., 2007, p. 27). Thirdly, Wall Street investors are choosing companies that develop

The Corporation 21 good CSR programs (p. 27) to invest in; this can be typically done through investment tools such as mutual funds and the bonds market. Finally, with the multitude of real life reasons for institutionalizing CSR programs, there are a multitude of ethical reasons behind the CSR programs. Conclusions and Future Research This study looked at poverty, its ethical implications, as well as a possible business solution to poverty. Early in this study it was hypothesized that the solution to poverty is the corporation. This study looked at the business stance, which reflected the three different views of businesss stance to social welfare activities. Of the three views, the broader goals perspective looked most appealing because this perspective includes social issues in business planning, which allows for companies to pursue profit maximization as well as social activities. Further, proven or not, these activities can add to the good of society while preserving, and possibly increasing the firms bottom line. The moral implication of poverty affects society in many different ways. This study hit on the three main topics such as rights, justice, and utilitarianism; there could be more ethical implications such as the ethic of caring, for example. However, these theories seem to work best when looking at the consequence of business planning and operations. Further, when looking to businesss contributions to social welfare, a business can affect more good on justice by creating jobs, thereby, increasing the equality with respect to better income, increased quality of life, and access to better health.

The Corporation 22 Moreover, increased quality of life offers the impoverished populations the opportunity gain their personal liberty, access to property, and increase their personal security levels. Also, as a byproduct of the citizens increased income and welfare, government revenues will increase and will be more able to protect these rights. This suggests that there are significant political implication ties to any solution to poverty and the corporations involvement (Robins, 2008). Once the government is better able to govern, then more companies begin to invest in there areas by either establishing operations in the region, or through FDI. As a company grows, the government works to expand its trading partners, thereby creating more demand for its products, which will increase the nations productivity (Moyo and Ferguson, 2009). This cycle continues creating further economic growth. These coordinated government and corporate activities can be the key to long term economic growth and stability. Therefore, the answer the question posed earlier is that the corporation can be part of the solution to poverty, which supports Garvey and Newells (2005) and Leisingers (2007) suggestions that the solution to poverty is a coordinated effort among business, government, and civil society. Through the actions of these entities, individual rights will be protected, justice will be served through the equal distribution of societys benefits and burdens, and society as a whole will be benefit from the good that is produced as a result of their coordinated effort. Finally, Robins (2008) suggests that future research could be benefited by investigating the possible correlation between CSR expenditures and some financial measure of business success (p. 334). This research could help to

The Corporation 23 prove the link, if any, between CSR activities and the increased social benefit that is realized by the firms environment.

The Corporation 24 References Amba-Rao, S. C. (1993). Multinational corporate social responsibility, ethics, internationals and third world governments: An agenda of for the 1990s. Journal of Business Ethics, 12(7), 553-572. Blowfield, M. (2007). Reasons to be cheerful? What we know about CSRs Impact. Third World Quarterly, 28(4), 683-695. Boyle, M.-E., & Boguslaw, J. (2007). Business, poverty and corporate citizenship. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 26, 101-120. Buchholz, R. A. (1991). Corporate social responsibility and the good society: From economics to ecology. Business Horizons, 34(3), 19-31. Cava, A., & Mayer, D. (2007). Integrative Social Contract Theory and Urban Prosperity Initiatives. Journal of Business Ethics, 72(3), 263-278. Curtis, M. (2008). The great political theories: A comprehensive selection of the crucial ideas in political philosophy from the French Revolution to modern times. (Vol. 2). New York: Harper Perennial Modern Classics. Friedman, M. (Sept. 1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine, 32-33, 122, 124, 126. Frynas, G. J. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and international development: Critical assessment. Corporate Governance, 16(4), 274-281 Fuentes-Garcia, F. J., Nunez-Tabales, J. M., & Veroz-Herradon, R. (2008). Applicability of corporate social responsibility to human resources management: Perspective from Spain. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 27-44.

The Corporation 25 Garriga, E., & Mele, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53, 51-74. Garten, J. E. (2002). Reducing global poverty. The Politics of fortune: A new agenda for business leaders. United States: Harvard Business Press. Garvey, N., & Newell, P. (2005). Corporate accountability to the poor? Assessing the effectiveness of community-based strategies. Development in Practice, 15(3&4), 389-404. Greenwood, M. R. (2002). Ethics and HRM: A review and conceptual analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 36(3), 261-278. Hartman, L. P. (2005). Perspectives in Business Ethics.(3rd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill Irwin. Hartman, L. P., Shaw, B., & Stevenson, R. (2003). Exploring the ethics and economics of global labor standards: A challenge to integrated social contract theory. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(2), 193-220. Hume, D. (2006). An enquiry into the principle of moral. Retrieved September 6, 2009 from http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/h/hume/david/h92pm/complete.html Husted, B. W., & Allen, D. B. (2000). Is it ethical to use ethics as a strategy? Journal of Business Ethics, 27(1/2), 21-31. Jonker, J. & Marberg, A. Corporate social responsibility quo vadis? A critical inquiry into a discursive struggle. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 27, 107-118. Ketola, T. (2008). A holistic corporate responsibility model: Integrating values, discourses, and actions. Journal of Business Ethics, 80, 419-435.

The Corporation 26 Leisinger, K. M. (2005). CSR and the pharmaceutical industry: Idealism without illusion and realism without resignation. Business Ethics Quarterly, 15(4), 577-594. Leisinger, K. M. (2007). Capitalism with a human face: The UN global compact. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 28, 113-132. Logsdon, J. M., & Wood, D. J. (2002). Business citizenship: From domestic to global level of access. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(2), 155-187. Nelson, J., Ishikawa, E., & Geaneotes, A. (2003). Developing inclusive business models: A review f Coca-Colas manual distribution centers in Ethiopia and Tanzanai. International Finance Corporation, World Bank Group. 1-26. Mofid, K. (2003). Business Ethics, corporate social lresponsibilty and globalization for the common good. London: Shepheard-Walwyn, Ltd. Moyo, D., & Ferguson, N. (2009). Dead aid: Why aid is not working and how there is a better way for Africa. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux. Paine, T. (2003). Common sense, rights of man, and other essential writings of Thomas Paine. (200th Anniversary ed.). United States: Signet Classics. Pirsch, J., Gupta, S., & Grau, S. L. (2007). A framework for understanding corporate social responsibility program as a continuum: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Ethics, 70, 125-140. Pogge, T. (2003). World poverty and human rights. Ethics & International Affairs, 19(1), 1-7. Robin, D. P., & Reidenbach, R. E. (1987). Social responsibility, ethics, and marketing strategy: Closing the gap between concept and application. Journal of Marketing, 51(1), 44-58.

The Corporation 27 Robins, F. (2008). Why corporate social responsibility should be popularized but not imposed. Corporate Governance, 8(3), 330-341. Rousseau, J. J. (2005). The social contract, or principles of political right (du contract social) Retrieved September 4, 2009 from University of Adelaide, http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/r/rousseau/jean_jacques/r864s/complete.html Shau, A. (2009). Poverty Facts and Stats. Retrieved September, 10, 2009, from http://www.globalissues.org/article/26/poverty-facts-and-stats Shaw, W. H., & Barry, V. (2007). Corporations. Moral Issues in Business. (10th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thompson Higher Education. Shepard, J. M., Betz, M., & OConnell, L. (1997). The proactive company: Its nature and causes. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(10), 1001-1010. Sher, G. (Ed.). (2001). John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism and the 1868 speech on capital punishment. (2nd ed.). Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. Velasquez, M. G. (2006). Business ethics: Concepts and cases. (6th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson. Wettstein, F. (2008). Let's talk rights: Message for the just corporation-Transforming the economy through the language of rights. Journal of Business Ethics, 78, 247263. Weyzig, F. (2009). Political and economic arguments for corporate social responsibility: Analysis and a proposition regarding the CSR agenda. Journal of Business ethics, 86, 417-428.

The Corporation 28