Advertisement

Theory and Society

, Volume 48, Issue 1, pp 131–166 | Cite as

The business-class case for corporate social responsibility: mobilization, diffusion, and institutionally transformative strategy in Venezuela and Britain

  • Rami KaplanEmail author
  • Daniel Kinderman
Article
  • 96 Downloads

Abstract

Scholars studying the global diffusion of “corporate social responsibility” (CSR) practices and the associated rise of privatized forms of economic governance have tended to shift attention away from the role of corporations in motivating these processes to the one played by nonbusiness forces seeking social control of corporations. We bring corporate power back in by turning the spotlight to the agency of business classes, the business entities capable of pursuing transcorporate, societal-level, macro-political endeavors. Building on a comparative investigation of two of the world’s earliest mass CSR adoptions, in postwar Venezuela and Britain, we argue that business classes responding to anti-capitalist challenges were the original diffusers of CSR practices and, interrelatedly, promoters of CSR-based, privatized forms of regulation and governance. Organized by peak business associations, the purpose of these “business-class CSR mobilizations” was to weaken the state in its relation to corporations and increase the control of business over social trends. We discuss the contribution of our historical perspective and analytical approach to a more complete and balanced picture of the global rise of CSR in late capitalism.

Keywords

Business class Corporate social responsibility Diffusion Governance Power Regulation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are indebted to Tim Bartley, Gregory Jackson, Phil Jones and David L. Levy for their very helpful comments and suggestions. We are grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their feedback, and to Karen Lucas and Janet Gouldner for their guidance in the review process. The paper also benefitted from feedback from the audiences at the Business School and Center of Area Studies at the Free University of Berlin as well as conference participants at the 2015 meeting of the Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics, the 2015 European Sociological Association meeting, and the 2017 meeting of the American Sociological Association. Finally, we would like to thank our interviewees for their time and valuable insights.

Compliance with ethical standards

Funding

This research was supported by the Israel Science Foundation (Grant No. 393/14), the Dahlem Research School at Freie Universität Berlin, and the Minerva Stiftung of the Max-Planck-Gesellschaft.

References

  1. Abbott, K. W., & Snidal, D. (2009). The governance triangle: Regulatory standards institutions and the shadow of the state. The Politics of Global Regulation, 44.Google Scholar
  2. Akard, P. J. (1992). Corporate mobilization and political power: The transformation of U.S. economic policy in the 1970s. American Sociological Review, 57, 597–615.Google Scholar
  3. Alexander, R. J. (1969). The Communist Party in Venezuela. Stanford: Hoover Institution Press.Google Scholar
  4. Ashridge Center for Business and Society. (2005). Catalogue of CSR activities: A broad overview. Hertfordshire.Google Scholar
  5. Auld, G., Bernstein, S., & Cashore, B. (2008). The new corporate social responsibility. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 33, 413–435.Google Scholar
  6. Barley, S. R. (2010). Building an institutional field to corral a government: A case to set an agenda for organization studies. Organization Studies, 31, 777–805.Google Scholar
  7. Baron, D. P. (2001). Private politics, corporate social responsibility, and integrated strategy. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 10(1), 7–45.Google Scholar
  8. Barker, C. (2008). Some reflections on student movements of the 1960s and early 1970s. Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais, 81, 43–91.Google Scholar
  9. Barnett, M., & Duvall, R. (2005). Power in international politics. International Organization, 59(1), 39–75.Google Scholar
  10. Bartley, T. (2005). Corporate accountability and the privatization of labor standards: Struggles over codes of conduct in the apparel industry. Research in Political Sociology, 14, 211–244.Google Scholar
  11. Bartley, T. (2007a). Institutional emergence in an era of globalization: The rise of transnational private regulation of labor and environmental conditions. American Journal of Sociology, 113(2), 297–351.Google Scholar
  12. Bartley, T. (2007b). How foundations shape social movements: The construction of an organizational field and the rise of Forest certification. Social Problems, 54(3), 229–255.Google Scholar
  13. Bartley, T. (2018a). Rules without rights: Land, labor, and private Authority in the Global Economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Bartley, T. (2018b). Transnational corporations and global governance. Annual Review of Sociology., 44, 145–165.Google Scholar
  15. Beckett, A. (2009). When the lights went out : Britain in the seventies. London: Faber.Google Scholar
  16. Beder, S. (2002). Global spin: The corporate assault on environmentalism (2nd ed.) Devon Green.Google Scholar
  17. Bennett, A., & Elman, C. (2006). Qualitative research: Recent developments in case study methods. Annual Review of Political Science, 9(455–476), 455–476.Google Scholar
  18. BIM. (1974a). Code of best practice incorporating the code of conduct with supporting guides to good management practice. London: British Institute of Management.Google Scholar
  19. BIM. (1974b). The British public company: Its role, responsibilities and Accountabiliy. London: British Institute of Management.Google Scholar
  20. Blank, D. E. (1973). Politics in Venezuela. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
  21. Boies, J. (1989). Money, business, and the state: Material interests, fortune 500 corporations, and the size of political action committees. American Sociological Review, 54, 821–833.Google Scholar
  22. Bonilla, F. (1967). The National Perspectives of Venezuelan elites. In F. Bonilla & J. A. S. Michelena (Eds.), A strategy for research on social policy (pp. 175–211). Cambridge: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
  23. Boswell, J., & Peters, J. (1997). Capitalism in contention: Business leaders and political economy in modern Britain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Brammer, S., Jackson, G., & Matten, D. (2012). Corporate social responsibility and institutional theory: New perspectives on private governance. Socio-Economic Review, 10(1), 3–28.Google Scholar
  25. Brammer, S., Millington, A., & Rayton, B. (2007). The contribution of corporate social responsibility to organizational commitment. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(10), 1701–1719.Google Scholar
  26. Burris, V. (1987). The political partisanship of big business: A study of corporate political action committees. American Sociological Review, 52, 732–744.Google Scholar
  27. Burris, V. (1992). Elite policy-planning networks in the United States. Research in Politics and Society, 4(111–34).Google Scholar
  28. Burris, V. (2005). Interlocking directorates and political cohesion among corporate elites. American Journal of Sociology, 111(1), 249–283.Google Scholar
  29. Burris, V. (2008). The interlock structure of the policy-planning network and the right turn in U.S. state policy. Research in Political Sociology, 17, 3–42.Google Scholar
  30. Carroll, W. K. (2010). The making of a transnational capitalist class. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  31. Cashore, B. W., Auld, G., & Newsom, D. (2004). Governing through markets: Forest certification and the emergence of non-state authority. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  32. CBI. (1973a). Company affairs committee: National Conference on interim report. London: Confederation of Business Industry. 200-C-3-COM-2-15-NatConfppr. Coventry, UK: Modern Records Centre, Warwick University.Google Scholar
  33. CBI. (1973b). The responsibilities of the British public company: Final report of the company affairs committee. London: Confederation of Business Industry.Google Scholar
  34. Cheit, E. F. (1964). The new place of business. In E. F. Cheit (Ed.), The business establishment (p. 152). New York: John Woley & Sons.Google Scholar
  35. Chorev, N. (2005). Making and remaking state institutional arrangements: The case of U.S. trade policy in the 1970s. Journal of Historical Sociology, 18(1/2), 3–36.Google Scholar
  36. Chorev, N. (2007). Remaking US trade policy: From protectionism to globalization: Cornell University press.Google Scholar
  37. Clawson, D., & Neustadtl, A. (1989). Interlocks, PACs, and corporate conservatism. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 749–773.Google Scholar
  38. Clawson, D., Neustadtl, A., & Bearden, J. (1986). The logic of business Unity: Corporate contributions to the 1980 congressional elections. American Sociological Review, 51(6), 797–811.Google Scholar
  39. Collins, R. M. (1981). The business response to Keynes (pp. 1929–1964). New York: Columbia Press.Google Scholar
  40. Culpepper, P. D. (2011). Quiet politics and business power: Corporate control in Europe and Japan. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Cutler, C. A. (2006). Transnational Business Civilization, Corporations, and the Privatization of Global Governance. In C. May (Ed.), Global Corporate Power: Lynne Rienner Publishers.Google Scholar
  42. Darlington, R., & Lyddon, D. (2001). Glorious summer: Class struggle in Britain 1972. Bookmarks.Google Scholar
  43. Dividendo. (1964). Estatutos del Dividendo Voluntario Para La Cumunidad. Caracas.Google Scholar
  44. Dividendo. (1966). Annual Report. Caracas.Google Scholar
  45. Dividendo. (1967a). Annual Report. Caracas.Google Scholar
  46. Dividendo. (1967b). Organizaciones Voluntarias de Accion Social: Catatlogo. Caracas.Google Scholar
  47. Domhoff, G. W. (1978). The powers that be: Processes of ruling-class domination in America. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  48. Domhoff, G. W. (2014). Who rules America? The triumph of the corporate rich. McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  49. Dreiling, M., & Darves, D. (2011). Corporate Unity in American trade policy: A network analysis of corporate-dyad political action. American Journal of Sociology, 116(5), 1514–1563.Google Scholar
  50. Dreiling, M. C. (2000). The class embeddedness of corporate political action: Leadership in defense of the NAFTA. Social Problems, 47(1), 21–48.Google Scholar
  51. DTI. (1973). Company law reform. London: Department of Trade and Industry.Google Scholar
  52. Epstein, E. (1976). The social role of business Enterprise in Britain: An American perspective: Part I. Journal of Management Studies, 13(3), 213–233.Google Scholar
  53. Epstein, E. (1977). The social role of business Enterprise in Britain: An American perspective: Part II. Journal of Management Studies, 14(3), 281–316.Google Scholar
  54. Ermann, M. D. (1978). The operative goals of corporate philanthropy: Contributions to the public broadcasting service, 1972-1976. Social Problems, 25(5), 504–514.Google Scholar
  55. Fairbrother, M. (2014). Economists, capitalists, and the making of globalization: North American free trade in comparative-historical perspective. American Journal of Sociology, 119(5), 1324–1379.Google Scholar
  56. Fleming, P., Roberts, J., & Garsten, C. (2013). In search of corporate social responsibility: Introduction to special issue. Organization, 20(3), 337–348.Google Scholar
  57. Fones-Wolf, E. A. (1994). Selling free Enterprise: The business assault on labor and liberalism, 1945–1960. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  58. Fooks, G., Gilmore, A., Collin, J., Holden, C., & Lee, K. (2013). The limits of corporate social responsibility: Techniques of neutralization, stakeholder management and political CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 112, 283–299.Google Scholar
  59. Friedmann, J. (1965). Venezuela: From doctrine to dialogue. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Galaskiewicz, J. (1991). Making corporate actors accountable: Institution-building in Minneapolis-St. Paul. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 293–310). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  61. George, A., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  62. Gerring, J. (2007). Case study research: Principles and practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Hacker, J. S., & Pierson, P. (2002). Business power and social policy: Employers and the formation of the American welfare state. Politics and Society, 30(2), 277–325.Google Scholar
  64. Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Hoffman, A. J. (1999). Institutional evolution and change: Environmentalism and the US Cemichal Industry. Academy of Management Journal, 42(4), 351–371.Google Scholar
  66. Hoffman, P. G. (1947). The survival of free enterprise. Harvard Business Review, 25(1), 21–27.Google Scholar
  67. Haufler, V. (2001). A public role for the private sector: Industry self-regulation in a global economy. Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.Google Scholar
  68. Haugaard, M. (2003). Reflections on seven ways of creating power. European Journal of Social Theory, 6, 87–113.Google Scholar
  69. Heemskerk, E. M., Fennema, M., & Carroll, W. K. (2016). The global corporate elite after the financial crisis: Evidence from the transnational network of interlocking directorates. Global Networks, 16(1), 68–88.Google Scholar
  70. Henderson, D. (2001). Misguided virtue: False notions of corporate social responsibility: New Zealand business roundtable.Google Scholar
  71. Himmelstein, J. L. (1990). To the right: The transformation of American conservatism. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  72. Himmelstein, J. L. (1997). Looking good and doing good: Corporate philanthropy and corporate power. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  73. Hirschman, D., & Reed, I. A. (2014). Formation stories and causality in sociology. Sociological Theory, 32(4), 259–282.Google Scholar
  74. IOD. (1973). Guidelines for directors. London: Institute of Directors.Google Scholar
  75. Jacobs, D. (1988). Corporate economic power and the state: A longitudinal assessment of two explanations. American Journal of Sociology, 93, 852–881.Google Scholar
  76. Jayasuriya, K. (2005). Economic Constitutionalism, Liberalism and the New Welfare Governance, Perth.Google Scholar
  77. Jenkins, J. C., & Eckert, C. M. (2000). The right turn in economic policy: Business elites and the new conservative economics. Sociological Forum, 15(2), 307–338.Google Scholar
  78. Kaplan, R. (2015). Who has been regulating whom, business or society? The mid-20th-century institutionalization of ‘corporate responsibility’ in the USA. Socio-Economic Review, 13(1), 125–155.Google Scholar
  79. Kaplan, R., & Kinderman, D. (2017). The business-led globalization of CSR: Channels of diffusion from the U.S. into Venezuela and Britain, 1962–1981. Business & Society, Online First.Google Scholar
  80. Kaplan, R., & Lohmeyer, N. (2018). The politics of the privatization of governance in a CME: Non-settlement dynamics and state enforcement in Germany, 2001–2010. Working papers series on corporate social responsibility the School of Business and Economics. Berlin: Freie Universität Berlin.Google Scholar
  81. Kinderman, D. (2012). Free us up so we can be responsible!’ The co-evolution of corporate social responsibility and neo-liberalism in the UK, 1977–2010. Socio-Economic Review, 10, 29–57.Google Scholar
  82. Kinderman, D. (2015). Explaining the rise of national corporate social responsibility: The role of global frameworks, world culture, and corporate interests. In K. Tsutsui & A. Lim (Eds.), Corporate social responsibility in a globalizing world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  83. King, A. A., & Lenox, M. J. (2000). Industry self-regulation without sanctions: The chemical industry’s responsible care program. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 698.Google Scholar
  84. King, B. G., & Pearce, N. A. (2010). The contentiousness of markets: Politics, social movements, and institutional change in markets. Annual Review of Sociology, 36(249–267).Google Scholar
  85. Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (2000). Did socialism fail to innovate? A natural experiment of the two Zeiss companies. American Sociological Review, 65(2), 169–190.Google Scholar
  86. Korteweg, A. C. (2003). Welfare reform and the subject of the working mother: Get a job, a better job, then a career. Theory and Society, 32, 445–480.Google Scholar
  87. Labour. (1973). Report of the 72ed Annual Conference of the Labour Party. Blackpool: The Labour Party.Google Scholar
  88. LeBaron, G., & Rühmkorf, A. (2017). The domestic politics of corporate accountability legislation: Struggles over the 2015 UK modern slavery act. Socio-Economic Review.Google Scholar
  89. Lent, A. (2001). British social movements since 1945. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  90. Levy, D. L. (1997). Environmental management as political sustainability. Organization and Environment, 10(2), 126–147.Google Scholar
  91. Levy, D. L., & Kaplan, R. (2008). CSR as global governance: Strategic contestation in global issue arenas. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. S. Siegel (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  92. Levy, D. L., Brown, H. S., & Jong, M. d. (2011). The contested politics of corporate governance: The case of the global reporting initiative. Business and Society, 49(1), 88–115.Google Scholar
  93. Levy, D. L., Reinecke, J., & Manning, S. (2016). The political dynamics of sustainable coffee: Contested value regimes and the transformation of sustainability. Journal of Management Studies, 53, 364–401.Google Scholar
  94. Lim, A., & Tsutsui, K. (2012). Globalization and commitment in corporate social responsibility: Cross-National Analyses of institutional and political-economy. American Sociological Review, 77, 69–98.Google Scholar
  95. Lim, A., & Tsutsui, K. (2015). The social regulation of the economy in the global context. In K. Tsutsui & A. Lim (Eds.), Corporate social responsibility in a globalizing world. Cambridge Press.Google Scholar
  96. Lipschutz, R. D. W. (2005). Globalization and global politics: Regulation for the rest of us. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  97. Locke, R. M. (2013). The promise and limits of private power: Promoting labor standards in a global economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  98. Lodge, G. C. (1970). Top priority: Renovating our ideology. Harvard Business Review, 48(5), 43–55.Google Scholar
  99. Lowe, P., & Goyder, J. (1983). Environmental groups in politics. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  100. Lowes, B., & Luffman, G. (1977). A view from the engine room: Junior Managers' attitudes towards corporate social responsibility. Management Decision, 15(6), 494–503.Google Scholar
  101. Mahoney, J. (2010). AFTER KKV: The new methodology of qualitative research. World Politics, 62(1), 120–147.Google Scholar
  102. Maracay. (1963). Seminarion Internacional de Ejecutivos. Maracay: Foundacion Creole.Google Scholar
  103. Marinetto, M. (1998). Corporate social involvement: social, political and environmental issues in Britain and Italy. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  104. Marques, J. C. (2016). Industry business associations: Self-interested or socially conscious? Journal of Business Ethics, Online pre-publication.Google Scholar
  105. Martin, C. J., & Swank, D. (2012). The political construction of business interests: Coordination, growth, and equality. Cambridge, UK/New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  106. Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). Implicit' and 'Explicit' CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 404–424.Google Scholar
  107. Mayer, F., & Gereffi, G. (2010). Regulation and economic globalization: Prospects and limits of private governance. Business and Politics, 12(3), 1–25.Google Scholar
  108. McDonnell, M.-H., King, B. G., & Soule, S. A. (2015). A dynamic process model of private politics: Activist targeting and corporate receptivity to social challenges. American Sociological Review, 80(3), 654–678.Google Scholar
  109. Melrose-Woodman, J., & Kverndal, I. (1976). Towards Social Responsibility: Company Codex of Ethics and Practice, Management Survey Report, No. 28. London.Google Scholar
  110. Meyer, J. W., Pope, S., & Isaacson, A. (2015). Legitimating the transnational Corporation in a Stateless World Society. In K. Tsutsui & A. Lim (Eds.), Corporate social responsibility in a globalizing world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  111. Michelena, J. A. S. (1971). The illusion of democracy in dependent nations. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
  112. Mills, C. W. (2000/1956). The power elite. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  113. Mizruchi, M. S. (1989). Similarity of political behavior among large American corporations. American Journal of Sociology, 95(401–24), 401–424.Google Scholar
  114. Mizruchi, M. S. (1992). The structure of corporate political action: Interfirm relations and their consequences. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  115. Mizruchi, M. S. (2013). The fracturing of the American corporate elite: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  116. Moog, S., Spicer, A., & Böhm, S. (2015). The politics of multi-stakeholder initiatives: The crisis of the Forest stewardship council. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(3), 469–493.Google Scholar
  117. Mun, E., & Jung, J. (2017). Change above the Glass Ceiling: Corporate Social Responsibility and Gender Diversity in Japanese Firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, Online Access.Google Scholar
  118. Murphy, D. F., & Bendell, J. (1999). Partners in Time? Business, NGOs and sustainable development.Google Scholar
  119. Murray, J. (2017). Interlock globally, act domestically: Corporate political Unity in the 21st century. American Journal of Sociology, 122(6), 1617–1663.Google Scholar
  120. Najam, A. (1999). World business Council for Sustainable Development: The greening of business or a greenwash? In H. O. Bergson, G. Parmann, & O. B. Thommesen (Eds.), Yearbook of international cooperation in environment and development (pp. 65–75). London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  121. Offe, C. (1972). Advanced capitalism and the Welfare State. Politics & Society, 2(4).Google Scholar
  122. Phillips-Fein, K. (2009). Invisible hands: The Businessmen's crusade against the new Deal. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  123. Pope, S., & Lim, A. (2017). International organizations as mobilizing structures: World CSR associations and their disparate impacts on members’ CSR practices, 2000–2016. Social Forces, 95(4), 1725–1756.Google Scholar
  124. Pope, S., & Meyer, J. W. (2016). Local variation in world society: Six characteristics of global diffusion. European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology, 3(2–3), 280–305.Google Scholar
  125. Prais, S. J. (1974). A new look at the growth of industrial concentration. Oxford Economic Papers, 26(2), 273–288.Google Scholar
  126. Rivas, C. M. (2003). Responsabilidad social de empresarios y empresas en Venezuela durante el siglo XX. Caracas: Strategos Consultores.Google Scholar
  127. Rodríguez-Garavito, C. A. (2005). Global governance and labor rights: Codes of conduct and anti-sweatshop struggles in global apparel factories in Mexico and Guatemala. Politics and Society, 33(2), 203–333.Google Scholar
  128. Rose, N., & Miller, P. (1992). Political power beyond the state: Problematics of government. British Journal of Sociology, 43, 173–205.Google Scholar
  129. Rowe, J. K. (2005). Corporate social responsibility as business strategy. In R. D. Lipschutz & J. K. Rowe (Eds.), Globalization, governmentality and global politics: Regulation for the rest of us? New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  130. Roy, W. G. (1981). The vesting of interests and the determinants of political power: Size, network structure, and mobilization of American industries, 1886-1905. American Journal of Sociology, 86(6), 1287–1310.Google Scholar
  131. Rupert, M. (2000). Ideologies of globalization. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  132. Schneider, V. (2000). Global economic governance by private actors: The international chamber of commerce. In J. Greenwood & H. Jacek (Eds.), Organized business and the new global order. London: Macmillan Press.Google Scholar
  133. Shamir, R. (2004). The De-radicalization of corporate social responsibility. Critical Sociology, 30(3), 669–689.Google Scholar
  134. Shamir, R. (2011). Socially responsible private regulation: World- culture or world-capitalism? Law & Society Review, 45(2), 313–336.Google Scholar
  135. Sklair, L., & Miller, D. (2010). Capitalist globalization, corporate social responsibility and social policy. Critical Social Policy, 30(4), 1–24.Google Scholar
  136. Skocpol, T., & Somers, M. (1980). The uses of comparative history in macrosocial inquiry. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 22(2), 174–197.Google Scholar
  137. Smith, M. A. (2000). American business and political power. Chicago and London: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  138. Smith, T. (1979). The politics of the corporate economy. Oxford: Martin Robertson.Google Scholar
  139. Taylor, B. (1973). A code of practice for corporate responsibilities? Journal of General Management, 1(1), 6–12.Google Scholar
  140. TUC. (1973). Industrial democracy: Interim report by the TUC general council. London: Trade Union Congress.Google Scholar
  141. Tugwell, F. (1975). The politics of oil in Venezuela. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  142. Turner, V. M. (1979). The Venezuelan Business Community: Social Responsibility and the Accomodation of Business to a Changing Political Environment. Unpublished dissertation. In Boston college.Google Scholar
  143. Useem, M. (1984). The inner circle. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  144. Vogel, D. (2010). The private regulation of global corporate conduct: Achievements and limitations. Business and Society, 49(1), 68–87.Google Scholar
  145. Walker, E. T. (2009). Privatizing participation: Civic change and the organizational dynamics of grassroots lobbying firms. American Sociological Review, 74(1), 83–105.Google Scholar
  146. Walker, E. T. (2014). Grassroots for hire: Public Affairs Consultants in American Democracy. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  147. Walker, E. T., & Rea, C. M. (2014). The political mobilization of firms and industries. Annual Review of Sociology, 40, 281–304.Google Scholar
  148. Webley, S. (1975). Corporate social responsibility. London: Report on a survey conducted on behalf of Public Relations Consultants’ Association.Google Scholar
  149. Weinstein, J. (1968). The corporate ideal in the Liberal state: 1900–1918. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  150. Werner, T. (2012). Public forces and private politics in American big business. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  151. Wilks, S. (2013). The political power of the business corporation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  152. Zeitlin, M., Neuman, W. L., & Ratcliff, R. E. (1976). Class segments: Agrarian property and political leadership in the capitalist class of Chile. American Sociological Review, 41(6), 1006–1029.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Sociology, Political Science and Communicationthe Open University of IsraelRaananaIsrael
  2. 2.Department of Political Science & International RelationsUniversity of DelawareNewarkUSA

Personalised recommendations