Social Responsibility in Developing New Biotechnology : Interpretations of Responsibility in the Governance of Finnish Biotechnology

The object of the dissertation is to analyse the concept of social responsibility in relation to research and development of new biotechnology. This is done by examining the relevant actors – researchers, administrators, decision-makers, experts, industry, and the public – involved in the Finnish governance of biotechnology through their roles and responsibilities. Existing practises of responsibility in biotechnology governance, as well as the discourses of responsibility – the actors’ conceptions of their own and others responsibilities – are analysed. Three types of responsibility that the actors have assumed are formulated, and the implications of these conceptions to the governance of new biotechnology are analysed. From these different types of responsibility adopted and used by the actors, theoretical models called responsibility chains are constructed. The notion of responsibility is under-theorised in sociology and this research is an attempt to create a mid-range theory of responsibility in the context of biotechnology governance. The research aims to increase understanding of the governance system from a holistic viewpoint by contributing to academic debates on science and technology policy, public understanding of science, commercialisation of research, and corporate social responsibility. With a thorough analysis of the concept of responsibility that is derived from empirical data, the research brings new perspectives into these debates by challenging many normative ideas embedded in discourses. For example, multiple roles of the public are analysed to highlight the problems of consumerism and citizen participation in practise, as well as in relation to different policy strategies. The research examines also the contradictory responsibilities faced by biotechnology researchers, who balance between academic autonomy, commercialisation of research, and reflecting social consequences of their work. Industries responsibilities are also examined from the viewpoint of biotechnology. The research methodology addresses the contradictions between empirical findings, theories of biotechnology governance, and policies in a novel way, as the study concentrates on several actors and investigates both the discourses and the practises of the actors. Thus, the qualitative method of analysis is a combination of discourse and content analysis. The empirical material is comprised of 29 personal interviews as well as documents by Finnish and multinational organizations on biotechnology governance.

Corporate Environmental Responsibility in Demand Networks (summary section only)

Research on corporate responsibility has traditionally focused on the responsibilities of companies within their corporate boundaries only. Yet this view is challenged today as more and more companies face the situation in which the environmental and social performance of their suppliers, distributors, industry or other associated partners impacts on their sales performance and brand equity. Simultaneously, policy-makers have taken up the discussion on corporate responsibility from the perspective of globalisation, in particular of global supply chains. The category of selecting and evaluating suppliers has also entered the field of environmental reporting. Companies thus need to tackle their responsibility in collaboration with different partners. The aim of the thesis is to further the understanding of collaboration and corporate environmental responsibility beyond corporate boundaries. Drawing on the fields of supply chain management and industrial ecology, the thesis sets out to investigate inter-firm collaboration on three different levels, between the company and its stakeholders, in the supply chain, and in the demand network of a company. The thesis is comprised of four papers: Paper A discusses the use of different research approaches in logistics and supply chain management. Paper B introduces the study on collaboration and corporate environmental responsibility from a focal company perspective, looking at the collaboration of companies with their stakeholders, and the salience of these stakeholders. Paper C widens this perspective to an analysis on the supply chain level. The focus here is not only beyond corporate boundaries, but also beyond direct supplier and customer interfaces in the supply chain. Paper D then extends the analysis to the demand network level, taking into account the input-output, competitive and regulatory environments, in which a company operates. The results of the study broaden the view of corporate responsibility. By applying this broader view, different types of inter-firm collaboration can be highlighted. Results also show how environmental demand is extended in the supply chain regardless of the industry background of the company.

The struggle for protection of environmental refugees: who's responsibility? Discourses from the United Nations and Non-governmental organizations

This thesis identifies, examines and problematizes some of the discourses that have so far come to light on the issue of protection for environmental refugees. By analyzing the discourses produced by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and two non-governmental organizations - the Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF) and Equity and Justice Working Group Bangladesh (EquityBD), I examine the struggling discourses that have emerged about how protection for environmental refugees has been interpreted. To do this, I rely on Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe's theory and method of discourse analysis. The results show that responsibilization is the main point of struggle in the discussions on the protection of environmental refugees. As a floating signifier, it was utilized by the discourses produced by the UNCHR and the selected NGOs in contingent ways and with different political objectives. The UNHCR discourse responsibilized both the environmental refugees for their own protection and the individual states. The EJF and EquityBD, by contrast, allocated responsibility for the protection of environmental refugees to the international community. These contingent understandings of responsibilization necessitated different justifications. While the EJF discourse relied on humanitarianism for the assistance of environmental refugees, the EquityBD discourse constructed a rights based, more permanent solution. The humanitarian based discourse of the EJF was found to be inextricably linked with the neoliberal discourse produced by the UNHCR. Both these discourses encouraged environmental refugees to stay in their homelands, undermining the politics of protection. Another way in which protection was undermined was by UNHCR's discourse on securitization. In this context, climate change induced displacement became threat to developed countries, the global economy and transnational classes. The struggling discourses about who/what has been allocated responsibility for the protection of environmental refugees also meant that identities of the displaced be constructed in specific ways. While the UNHCR discourse constructed as voluntary migrants and predators, the EJF and EquityBD discourses portrayed them as victims. However, even though the EJF discourse constructed them as victims, their reliance on humanitarianism could also be interpreted as a way of giving the environmental refugee a predator like identity. These discourses on responsibilization and identity formation clashed with each other in the aim of achieving a hegemonic position in discussions and debates about the protection of environmental refugees.

CSR in forest industry – Case study of reporting and implementation of social responsibility in three international companies

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has become increasingly important topic in forest industries, and other global companies, in recent years. Globalisation, faster information delivery and demand for sustainable development have set new challenges for global companies in their business operations. Also the importance of stakeholder relations, and pressure to become more transparent has increased in the forest industries. Three dimensions of corporate responsibility economic, environmental and social, are often included in the concept of CSR. Global companies mostly claim that these dimensions are equally important. This study analyses CSR in forest industry and has focus on reporting and implementation of social responsibility in three international companies. These case-companies are Stora Enso, SCA and Sappi, and they have different geographical base, product portfolios and therefore present interesting differences about forest industry strategy and CSR. Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) has created the most known and used reporting framework in CSR reporting. GRI Guidelines have made CSR reporting a uniform function, which can also be measured between companies and different sectors. GRI Guidelines have also made it possible to record and control CSR data in the companies. In recent years the use of GRI Guidelines has increased substantially. Typically CSR reporting on economic and environmental responsibility have been systematic in the global companies and often driven by legistlation and other regulations. However the social responsibility has been less regulated and more difficult to compare. Therefore it has previously been often less focused in the CSR reporting of the global companies. The implementation and use of GRI Guidelines have also increased dialogue on social responsibility issues and stakeholder management in global companies. This study analyses the use of GRI´s framework in the forest industry companies´ CSR reporting. This is a qualitative study and the disclosure of data is empricially analysed using content analysis. Content analysis has been selected as a method for this study because it makes it possible to use different sources of information. The data of this study consists of existing academic literature of CSR, sustainability reports of thecase-companies during 2005-2009, and the semi-structured interviews with company representatives. Different sources provide the possibility to look at specific subject from more than one viewpoint. The results of the study show that all case-companies have relatively common themes in their CSR disclosure, and the differences rise mainly from their product-portfolios, and geographic base. Social impacts to local communities, in the CSR of the companies, were mainly dominated by issues concerning creating wealth to the society and impacting communities through creation of work. The comparability of the CSR reporting, and especially social indicators increased significally from 2007 onwards in all case-companies. Even though the companies claim that three dimensions of CSR economic, environmental and social are equally important economic issues and profit improvement still seem to drive most of the operations in the global companies. Many issues that are covered by laws and regulations are still essentially presented as social responsibility in CSR. However often the unwelcome issues in companies like closing operations are covered just briefly, and without adequate explanation. To make social responsibility equally important in the CSR it would demand more emphasis from all the case-companies. A lot of emphasis should be put especially on the detail and extensiveness of the social reponsibility content in the CSR.

The struggle for protection of environmental refugees: who's responsibility? Discourses from the United Nations and Non-governmental organizations

This thesis identifies, examines and problematizes some of the discourses that have so far come to light on the issue of protection for environmental refugees. By analyzing the discourses produced by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and two non-governmental organizations - the Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF) and Equity and Justice Working Group Bangladesh (EquityBD), I examine the struggling discourses that have emerged about how protection for environmental refugees has been interpreted. To do this, I rely on Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe's theory and method of discourse analysis. The results show that responsibilization is the main point of struggle in the discussions on the protection of environmental refugees. As a floating signifier, it was utilized by the discourses produced by the UNCHR and the selected NGOs in contingent ways and with different political objectives. The UNHCR discourse responsibilized both the environmental refugees for their own protection and the individual states. The EJF and EquityBD, by contrast, allocated responsibility for the protection of environmental refugees to the international community. These contingent understandings of responsibilization necessitated different justifications. While the EJF discourse relied on humanitarianism for the assistance of environmental refugees, the EquityBD discourse constructed a rights based, more permanent solution. The humanitarian based discourse of the EJF was found to be inextricably linked with the neoliberal discourse produced by the UNHCR. Both these discourses encouraged environmental refugees to stay in their homelands, undermining the politics of protection. Another way in which protection was undermined was by UNHCR's discourse on securitization. In this context, climate change induced displacement became threat to developed countries, the global economy and transnational classes. The struggling discourses about who/what has been allocated responsibility for the protection of environmental refugees also meant that identities of the displaced be constructed in specific ways. While the UNHCR discourse constructed as voluntary migrants and predators, the EJF and EquityBD discourses portrayed them as victims. However, even though the EJF discourse constructed them as victims, their reliance on humanitarianism could also be interpreted as a way of giving the environmental refugee a predator like identity. These discourses on responsibilization and identity formation clashed with each other in the aim of achieving a hegemonic position in discussions and debates about the protection of environmental refugees.

Factors affecting perceptions of corporate social responsibility implementation: an emphasis on values

This dissertation is a broad study of factors affecting perceptions of CSR issues in multiple stakeholder realms, the main purpose being to determine the effects of the values of individuals on their perceptions regarding CSR. It examines perceptions of CSR both at the emic (observing individuals and stakeholders) and etic levels (conducting cross-cultural comparison) through a descriptive-empirical research strategy. The dissertation is based on quantitative interview data among Chinese, Finnish and US stakeholder groups of industry companies (with an emphasis on the forest industries) and consists of four published articles and two submitted manuscripts. Theoretically, this dissertation provides a valuable and unique philosophical and intellectual perspective on the contemporary study of CSR `The Harmony Approach to CSR'. Empirically, this dissertation does values assessment and CSR evaluation of a wide variety of business activities covering CSR reporting, business ethics, and three dimensions of CSR performance. From the multi-stakeholder perspective, this dissertation use survey methods to examine the perceptions and stakeholder salience in the context of CSR by describing, comparing the differences between demographic factors as well as hypothetical drivers behind perceptions. The results of study suggest that the CSR objective of a corporation's top management should be to manage the divergent and conflicting interests of multiple stakeholders, taking others than key stakeholders into account as well. The importance of values as a driver of ethical behaviour and decision-making has been generally recognized. This dissertation provides more empirical proof of this theory by highlighting the effects of values on CSR perceptions. It suggests that since the way to encourage responsible behaviour and develop CSR is to develop individual values and cultivate their virtues, it is time to invoke the critical role of moral (ethics) education. The specific studies of China and comparison between Finland and the US contribute to a common understanding of the emerging CSR issues, problems and opportunities for the future of sustainability. The similarities among these countries can enhance international cooperation, while the differences will open up opportunities and diversified solutions for CSR in local conditions.

Individuals' Responsibility in Corporations

I discuss role responsibly, individual responsibility and collective responsibility in corporate multinational setting. My case study is about minerals used in electronics that come from the Democratic Republic of Congo. What I try to show throughout the thesis is how many things need to be taken into consideration when we discuss the responsibility of individuals in corporations. No easy and simple answers are available. Instead, we must keep in mind the complexity of the situation at all times, judging cases on individual basis, emphasizing the importance of individual judgement and virtue, as well as the responsibility we all share as members of groups and the wider society. I begin by discussing the demands that are placed on us as employees. There is always a potential for a conflict between our different roles and also the wider demands placed on us. Role demands are usually much more specific than the wider question of how we should act as human beings. The terminology of roles can also be misleading as it can create illusions about our work selves being somehow radically separated from our everyday, true selves. The nature of collective decision-making and its implications for responsibility is important too. When discussing the moral responsibility of an employee in a corporate setting, one must take into account arguments from individual and collective responsibility, as well as role ethics. Individual responsibility is not a separate or competing notion from that of collective responsibility. Rather, the two are interlinked. Individuals' responsibilities in collective settings combine both individual responsibility and collective responsibility (which is different from aggregate individual responsibility). In the majority of cases, both will apply in various degrees. Some members might have individual responsibility in addition to the collective responsibility, while others just the collective responsibility. There are also times when no-one bears individual moral responsibility but the members are still responsible for the collective part. My intuition is that collective moral responsibility is strongly linked to the way the collective setting affects individual judgements and moulds the decisions, and how the individuals use the collective setting to further their own ends. Individuals remain the moral agents but responsibility is collective if the actions in question are collective in character. I also explore the impacts of bureaucratic ethic and its influence on the individual. Bureaucracies can compartmentalize work to such a degree that individual human action is reduced to mere behaviour. Responsibility is diffused and the people working in the bureaucracy can come to view their actions to be outside the normal human realm where they would be responsible for what they do. Language games and rules, anonymity, internal power struggles, and the fragmentation of information are just some of the reasons responsibility and morality can get blurry in big institutional settings. Throughout the thesis I defend the following theses: ● People act differently depending on their roles. This is necessary for our society to function, but the more specific role demands should always be kept in check by the wider requirements of being a good human being. ● Acts in corporations (and other large collectives) are not reducible to individual actions, and cannot be explained fully by the behaviour of individual employees. ● Individuals are responsible for the actions that they undertake in the collective as role occupiers and are very rarely off the hook. Hiding behind role demands is usually only an excuse and shows a lack of virtue. ● Individuals in roles can be responsible even when the collective is not. This depends on if the act they performed was corporate in nature or not. ● Bureaucratic structure affects individual thinking and is not always a healthy environment to work in. ● Individual members can share responsibility with the collective and our share of the collective responsibility is strongly linked to our relations. ● Corporations and other collectives can be responsible for harm even when no individual is at fault. The structure and the policies of the collective are crucial. ● Socialization plays an important role in our morality at both work and outside it. We are all responsible for the kind of moral context we create. ● When accepting a role or a position in a collective, we are attaching ourselves with the values of that collective. ● Ethical theories should put more emphasis on good judgement and decision-making instead of vague generalisations. My conclusion is that the individual person is always in the centre when it comes to responsibility, and not so easily off the hook as we sometimes think. What we do, and especially who we choose to associate ourselves with, does matter and we should be more careful when we choose who we work for. Individuals within corporations are responsible for choosing that the corporation they associate with is one that they can ascribe to morally, if not fully, then at least for the most part. Individuals are also inclusively responsible to a varying degree for the collective activities they contribute to, even in overdetermined contexts. We all are responsible for the kind of corporations we choose to support through our actions as consumers, investors and citizens.