Search results

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the functioning of the French Law No 2017-399 relating to the duty of vigilance of parent companies and ordering companies, a law defended by labor unions and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) as an answer to the ineffectiveness of corporate social responsibility (CSR) mechanisms of multi-national corporation.

The authors try to determine to what extent the new mechanisms brought by this law could improve or not the failure of existing CSR mechanisms.

The authors find out that internal weaknesses of the law, which is based on voluntary CSR instruments and without penalties, internal mechanisms of the French judicial system or external economic factors, might considerably limit the effectiveness of the law.

Even if for the first time, French judges might be asked to evaluate the reasonableness of the CSR practices of firms, one of the paradoxical effects of this law might be to institutionalize soft law mechanisms such as CSR certification or reporting, the proponents of this law precisely wanted to get rid of at the origin.

Le premier qui, ayant enclos un terrain, s'avisa de dire: “Ceci est à moi” et trouva des gens assez simples pour le croire, fut le vrai fondateur de la société civile. Que de crimes, de guerres, de meurtres, que de misères et d'horreurs n'eût point épargnés au genre humain celui qui, arrachant les pieux et comblant le fossé, eût crié à ses semblables: “Gardez-vous d’écouter cet imposteur; vous êtes perdus et vous oubliez que les fruits sont à tous, et que la terre n'est à personne!– J.J. Rousseau (Discours sur l'origine et les fondements de l'inégalité parmi les hommes, 1755)The first man who, having enclosed a piece of ground, bethought himself of saying ‘This is mine’, and found people simple enough to believe him, was the real founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars, and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: Beware of listening to this imposter; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody.–J. J. Rousseau (Discours sur l'origine et les fondements de l'inégalité parmi les hommes, 1755, translated by G. D. H. Cole)

Purpose – In management literature, the influence that nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) can have on reforming multinational corporations' practices is traditionally depicted as significant. Few studies have emphasized the limits that NGOs face. The aim of this chapter is to:1.Describe how the positive view of NGO influence is implicitly built on a neo-Tocquevillian understanding of civil society and an explicit utilization of Habermasian ideas of civil society and communication.2.Reveal the limitations of the ability of NGOs alone to affect the negative aspects related to corporate activity and capitalism in general, building on existing critical work on civil society.

Design/methodology/approach – We review the existing mainstream literature on NGO–business relationships and compare it to the less developed body of critical research on the subject.

Findings – We found that current mainstream research on NGO–business relationships are implicitly referring to a specific positive conception of civil society believing in the power of civil society to reform society (Neo-Tocquevillian Belief).

We then propose critical alternative conceptions of civil society, to allow the development of further research in a more critical perspective, insisting on the limits of the ability of NGOs to mitigate the worst effects of neoliberalism.

Originality/value – The value of this chapter lies in the presentation of the implicit assumptions on which mainstream research on NGO–business relationships are based today. The chapter identifies possible alternative theoretical orientations for future research for doctoral students or researchers.