Moral landscapes - Understanding agency in corporate responsibility initiatives

Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management

Volumn 16, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 228-236

  Larssaether, Stig ^a   Nijhof, André ^b  

^a NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Norway)

^b NYENRODE BUSINESS UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Actor networks; Corporate social responsibility; Distributed agency; Moral landscapes; Science technology studies; Sustainability

Indexed keywords

EID: 69549113450     PISSN: 15353958     EISSN: 15353966     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/csr.205     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Akrich M. 1992. The description of technical objects. In Shaping society/building society. Studies in sociotechnical change, Bijker W, Law J (eds). The MIT Press: London, England and Cambridge, Massachusetts; 205-224.
2. Bakker de F. 2001. Product oriented environmental management; A study of capability building, stakeholder orientation and continuous improvement regarding products' environmental characteristics in firms.Twente University Press: Enschede.
3. Bendell J. 2006. Serving systemic transformations; The Lifeworth Review of 2005, www.lifeworth.net [13 May 2007].
4. Callon M, Latour B. 1981. Unscrewing the big Leviathan: how actors macro-structure reality and how sociologists help them to do so. In Advances in social theory and methodology, Cetina K, Cicourel A (eds). R& Kegan Paul: London; 277-303.
5. Callon M. 1998. The laws of the market.Oxford: Blackwell.
6. Cerin P. 2002. Communication in corporate environmental reports. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 9(1): 46-65.
7. Dulsrud A, Beckstrøm JR. 2005. À6 sette pris pà6 hylleplassen. SIFO rapport nr. 2-2005.
8. European Environmental Agency. 2007. State of the Environment Report No. 2. http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/state_of_environment_report_2007_2 [3 March 2009].
9. Gibson JJ. 1979. The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin: Boston.
10. Gowri A. 2004. When responsibility cant do it. Journal of Business Ethics 54(1): 33-50.
11. Hille J. 2004. Grønn mat pà6 vent. rapport 4-2004.
12. Jelsma J. 2003. Innovating for sustainability: involving users, politics and technology. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Sciences 16(2): 103-116.
13. Latour B. 1986. The powers of association. In Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge? Law J. (ed.). Routledge & Kegan Paul: London; 264-280.
14. Latour B. 1987. Science in action. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.
15. Latour B. 1992. Where are the missing masses? The sociology of a few mundane artefacts. In Shaping technology/building society.Studies in sociotechnical change, Bijker W, Law J (eds). MIT Press: Cambridge; 225-258.
16. Latour B. 1999. Pandora's hope. Essays on the reality of science studies. Harvard University Press: Cambridge MA, London UK.
17. Latour B. 2004. Politics of nature: how to bring the sciences into democracy. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.
18. Lauring J, Thomsen C. 2009. Collective ideals and practices in sustainable development: Managing corporate identity. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 16(1): 38-47.
19. Lie M, Sørensen KH. 1996. Making technology our own? Domesticating technology into everyday life. Scandinavian University Press: Oslo.
20. Oskarsson K, von Malmborg F. 2005. Integrated management systems as a corporate response to sustainable development. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 12(3): 121-128.
21. Oudshoorn NEJ, Brouns MLM, van Oost ECJ. 2005. Diversity and distributed agency in the design and use of medical video- communication technologies. In Inside the politics of technology. Agency and normativity in the co-production of technology and society, Harbers H (ed.). Amsterdam University Press: Amsterdam; 85-105.
22. Putnam L, Pacanowsky M. 1983. Communication and organizations: An iInterpretive approach. Sage: Beverly Hills, CA.
23. Rosenau J. 2005. Globalisation and governance: Sustainability between fragmentation and integration, In Governance and sustainability; New challenges for states, companies and civil society, Petschow U, Rosenau J, Weizsacker EU v (eds). Greenleaf Publishing: Sheffield.
24. Sørensen KH. 2006. Domestication: the enactment of technology. In Domestication of media and yechnology, Berker T, Hartmann M, Punie Y, Ward K (edsOpen University Press: London.
25. Stalder F. 2000. Beyond constructivism: towards a realistic realism. A review of Bruno Latour's Pandora's hope. The Information Society 16(3): 245-247.
26. UN 2009. The Global Compact Network; Participants and Stakeholders, http://www.unglobalcompact.org/AboutTheGC/ [April 15, 2009].
27. Underhill P. 1999. Why we buy: the science of shopping. Orion: London.
28. UNEP.2002. Industry as a partner for sustainable development: Full set of 22 sector reports, United Nations Environment Programme, EarthPrint Ltd: www.uneptie.org/outreach/wssd/contributions/sector_reports/reports.htm [13 January 2007].
29. Valsiner J. 1987. Culture and the development of children's action. A cultural-historical theory of developmental psychology. John Wiley & Sons Ltd: New York.
30. Visscher K, Rip A. 2003. Coping with chaos in change processes. Creativity and Innovation Management 12(2): 121-128.
31. Waddington CH. 1975. The evolution of an evolutionist. Cornell University Press: Ithaca, NY.
32. Welford R. 1997. Hijacking environmentalism: Corporate responses to sustainable development. Earthscan: London.
33. White AL. 2004. Lost in transition? The future of corporate social responsibility. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship Winter 2004 (16): 19-24.