The corporate social responsibility movement and law's empire: Is there a conflict?

At the heart of corporate governance and social responsibility discourse is recognition of the fact that the modern corporation is primarily governed by the profit maximisation imperative coupled with moral and ethical concerns that such a limited imperative drives the actions of large and wealthy corporations which have the ability to act in influential and significant ways, shaping how our social world is experienced. The actions of the corporation and its management will have a wide sphere of impact over all of its stakeholders whether these are employees, shareholders, consumers or the community in which the corporation is located. As globalisation has become central to the way we think it is also clear that ‘community’ has an ever expanding meaning which may include workers and communities living very far away from Corporate HQ. In recent years academic commentators have become increasingly concerned about the emphasis on what can be called short-term profit maximisation and the perception that this extremist interpretation of the profit imperative results in morally and ethically unacceptable outcomes.1 Hence demands for more corporate social responsibility. Following Cadbury’s2 classification of corporate social responsibility into three distinct areas, this paper will argue that once the legally regulated tier is left aside corporate responsibility can become so nebulous as to be relatively meaningless. The argument is not that corporations should not be required to act in socially responsible ways but that unless supported by regulation, which either demands high standards, or at the very least incentivises the attainment of such standards such initiatives are doomed to failure. The paper will illustrate by reference to various chosen cases that law’s discourse has already signposted ways to consider and resolve corporate governance problems in the broader social responsibility context.3 It will also illustrate how corporate responsibility can and must be supported by legal measures. Secondly, this paper will consider the potential conflict between an emphasis on corporate social responsibility and the regulatory approach.4 Finally, this paper will place the current interest in corporate social responsibility within the broader debate on the relationship between law and non-legally enforceable norms and will present some reflections on the norm debate arising from this consideration of the CSR movement.

Reactivity of sub 1 nm supported clusters: (TiO2)(n) clusters supported on rutile TiO2 (110)

Metal oxide clusters of sub-nm dimensions dispersed on a metal oxide support are an important class of catalytic materials for a number of key chemical reactions, showing enhanced reactivity over the corresponding bulk oxide. In this paper we present the results of a density functional theory study of small sub-nm TiO2 clusters, Ti2O4, Ti3O6 and Ti4O8 supported on the rutile (110) surface. We find that all three clusters adsorb strongly with adsorption energies ranging from -3 eV to -4.5 eV. The more stable adsorption structures show a larger number of new Ti-O bonds formed between the cluster and the surface. These new bonds increase the coordination of cluster Ti and O as well as surface oxygen, so that each has more neighbours. The electronic structure shows that the top of the valence band is made up of cluster derived states, while the conduction band is made up of Ti 3d states from the surface, resulting in a reduction of the effective band gap and spatial separation of electrons and holes after photon absorption, which shows their potential utility in photocatalysis. To examine reactivity, we study the formation of oxygen vacancies in the cluster-support system. The most stable oxygen vacancy sites on the cluster show formation energies that are significantly lower than in bulk TiO2, demonstrating the usefulness of this composite system for redox catalysis.