Not Just the Warm, Fuzzy Feeling You Get from Buying Free-Range Eggs …

  • Andy Scerri


In the 1980s and 1990s, political parties began to enunciate new discourses in their appeals to citizens. In short, across the postindustrial states, the major parties began in earnest to place modernist concerns with self-realization at the centre of their public representations and, eventually, their social policies. Indeed, where the normalizing of the subpolitics of risk helped to cement new institutional arrangements of citizenship in horizontal governance networks, what was regarded at the time as a ‘new’ form of Third Way politics, ostensibly steering a course ‘between’ Left and Right, brought with it new types of social and political participation and new ‘stakeholder’ citizenship rights and duties. My point is that, although differing in important ways across different states, the major parties began in the 1990s to underplay appeals to citizens as the bearers of ‘liberal’ civil and political rights and duties and especially ‘social’ rights and duties in relation to the welfare state. Rather, the major parties took up new calls to ‘stakeholder’ citizens as the bearers of rights to wellbeing and security from risk and duties to be independent in relation to opportunities to participate in society. Later in this chapter, I look more closely at three examples of contemporary social practice — corporate social and environmental responsibility, green consumerism and the political use of liveability indices — and find that the new citizenship is indeed premised upon a holistic cultural ideology, as well as non-contractualism, non-territorialism, the dissolution of the public-private split and ethico-moral awareness of environmental problems such as risk or, even, ecospace.


Corporate Social Responsibility Political Participation Environmental Responsibility Global Reporting Initiative Triple Bottom Line 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    See, for example, S. Jenkins, Thatcher and Sons: A Revolution in Three Acts (London: Penguin Books, 2006);Google Scholar
  2. D. Sassoon, One Hundred Years of Socialism: The West European Left in the Twentieth Century (London: I.B. Tauris, 2010);Google Scholar
  3. J. Olsen, M. Koss, and D. Hough, ‘From Pariahs to Players? Left Parties in National Governments’, in Left Parties in National Governments, ed. J. Olsen, M. Koss, and D. Hough (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. T. Frank, What’s the Matter with Kansas? (New York: Vintage Books, 2004);Google Scholar
  5. C. Hamilton, ‘What’s Left? The Death of Social Democracy’, Quarterly Essay, no. 21 (2006). J.C. Alexander, The Performance of Politics: Obama’s Victory and the Democratic Struggle for Power (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 2.
    2. See S. Buckler and D.P. Dolowitz, ‘Theorizing the Third Way: New Labour and Social Justice’, Journal of Political Ideologies 5, no. 3 (2000); H. Dean, ‘Popular Discourse and the Ethical Deficiency of “Third Way” Conceptions of Citizenship’, Citizenship Studies 8, no. 1 (2004); A. Giddens, The Third Way (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1998); J. Clarke, ‘New Labour’s Citizens: Activated, Empowered, Responsibilized, Abandoned?’, Critical Social Policy 25, no. 4 (2005); B. Burkitt and F. Ashton, ‘The Birth of the Stakeholder Society’, Critical Social Policy 16, no. 49 (1996);Google Scholar
  7. A. Giddens, ‘The Politics of Climate Change: National Responses to the Challenge of Global Warming’ (London: Policy Network, 2008);Google Scholar
  8. A. Giddens, The Politics of Climate Change (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2009).Google Scholar
  9. 3.
    A. Callinicos, Equality, Themes for the 21st Century (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2000), 41.Google Scholar
  10. 4.
    R. Prabhakar, ‘Stakeholding: Does It Possess a Stable Core?’, Journal of Political Ideologies 8, no. 3 (2003): 347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 6.
    T. Turner, ‘Shifting the Frame from Nation-State to Global Market’, Social Analysis 46, no. 2 (2002): 56, 68–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 7.
    G. Kelly, D. Kelly, and A. Gamble. Stakeholder Capitalism (London: Macmillan, 1997), 44, 228.Google Scholar
  13. 9.
    A. Supiot, ‘Law and Labour: A World Market of Norms?’, New Left Review I, no. 39 (2006): 109, 18.Google Scholar
  14. 11.
    N. Boles, Which Way’s Up: The Future for Coalition Britain and How to Get There (London: Biteback Publishers, 2010), 9; Prime Minister’s Off ice, ‘Government Launches ‘Big Society’ Programme’, Office of the Prime Minister,; P. Totaro, ‘Britain Surprises with Carbon Plan’, The Age, May 21 2011.Google Scholar
  15. 13.
    L. Dumont, German Ideology: From France to Germany and Back (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1994 [1991]), 9.Google Scholar
  16. 14.
    P. Alston, ed., Labour Rights as Human Rights (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005);Google Scholar
  17. S. Deakin and F. Wilkinson, The Law of the Market: Industrialization, Employment, and Legal Evolution (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. M. Freedland, The Personal Employment Contract (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003). P. Dwyer, ‘Conditional Citizens? Welfare Rights and Responsibilities in the Late 1990s’, Critical Social Policy 18, no. 4 (1998); Handler, ‘Reforming/Deforming Welfare’; P. Harris, ‘From Relief to Mutual Obligation: Welfare Rationalities and Unemployment in 20th-Century Australia’, Journal of Sociology 37, no. 1 (2001); Jessop, ‘The Changing Governance of Welfare: Recent Trends In Its Primary Functions, Scale and Modes of Coordination’; R. Sainsbury, ‘21st Century Welfare — Getting Closer to Radial Benefit Reform’, Public Policy Research 17, no. 2 (2010).Google Scholar
  19. 15.
    P. Rosanvallon, The New Social Question: Rethinking the Welfare State (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000 [1995]), 211.Google Scholar
  20. 16.
    B. Zimmerman, ‘Pragmatism and the Capability Approach: Challenges in Social Theory and Empirical Research’, European Journal of Social Theory 9, no. 4 (2006): 468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 17.
    van Steenbergen, ‘Towards a Global Ecological Citizen’, 47, 143–4; B.S. Turner, ‘The Erosion of Citizenship’, British Journal of Sociology 52, no. 2 (2001): 199.Google Scholar
  22. 18.
    J. Martinez-Alier, The Environmentalism of the Poor: A Study of Ecological Conflicts and Valuation (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2002), 5–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 19.
    J. Barry, ‘Ecological Modernization’, in Debating the Earth, ed. J.S. Dryzsek and D. Schlosberg (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 311.Google Scholar
  24. 20.
    J.S. Dryzek, Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 143;Google Scholar
  25. —, Politics of the Earth, 2nd ed . (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 167;Google Scholar
  26. also, J. S. Dryzek et al., Green States and Social Movements: Environmentalism in the United States, United Kingdom, Germany and Norway (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 23.
    J. Elkington, Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom-Line of 21st Century Business (Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers, 1997);Google Scholar
  28. —, The Chrysalis Economy (Oxford: Capstone Press, 2001).Google Scholar
  29. 26.
    A. Salmon, La Tentation Éthique Du Capitalisme (Paris: La Découverte 2007);Google Scholar
  30. —, Moraliser Le Capitalisme (Paris: CNRS Éditions, 2009).Google Scholar
  31. 27.
    Fiona Haddock, ‘Socially Responsible Companies: Corporate Angels’, Global Finance 13, no. 12 (1999): 24, 25.Google Scholar
  32. 28.
    G. Atkinson, ‘Measuring Corporate Sustainability’, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 43, no. 2 (2000): 237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 29.
    Gilding, P. (2002) Single Bottom Line Sustainability, The Sydney Papers, no volume given: 53–60.Google Scholar
  34. 30.
    See, for example, A. Lagan, ‘a Revolution to Find Value in Common Ground’, Australian Financial Review, 29 May 2003, 23; S. Zuboff, ‘Evolving: A Call to Action’, Fast Company Social Capitalists Issue, no. 78 (2004): 97; R. Kelly, ‘Community Values Create Value’, Business Review Weekly, 16 January 2003, 447; C. Juniper and M. Moore, ‘Synergies and Best Practices of Corporate Partnerships for Sustainability’, Corporate Environmental Strategy 9, no. 3 (2002), 267–9;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. R.P. Hill and D.L. Stephens, ‘The Compassionate Organisation in the 21st Century’, Organizational Dynamics 32, no. 4 (2003); 331–41;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. M. Benioff and K. Southwick, Compassionate Capitalism: How Corporations Can Make Doing Good an Integral Part of Doing Well (New York: Career Press, 2003).Google Scholar
  37. 35.
    W. Lazonick and M. O’Sullivan, ‘Maximizing Shareholder Value: A New Ideology for Corporate Governance’, Economy and Society 29, no. 1 (2000); C. Stoney and D. Winstanley, ‘Stakeholding: Confusion or Utopia? Mapping the Conceptual Terrain’, Journal of Management Studies 38, no. 5 (2001): 608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 37.
    See A. Scerri, ‘Paradoxes of Increased Individuation and Public Awareness of Environmental Issues’, Environmental Politics 18, no. 4 (2009): 476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    T.P. Lyon and J.W. Maxwell, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility and the Environment: A Theoretical Perspective’, Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 2, no. 2 (2008): 252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    P.R. Portney, ‘The (Not So) New Corporate Social Responsibility: An Empirical Perspective’, Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 2, no. 2 (2008): 262, italics in original.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 43.
    See M.L. Parry et al., eds., Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007).Google Scholar
  42. 44.
    A.P.J. Mol and G. Spaargaren, ‘Environment, Modernity and the Risk-Society’, International Sociology 8, no. 4 (1993): 357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 47.
    M. Schudson, ‘The Troubling Equivalence of Citizen and Consumer’, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 608 (2006): 193–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 48.
    G. Spaargaren, and A.P.J. Mol, ‘Greening Global Consumption: Redefining Politics and Authority’, Global Environmental Change 18, no. 2 (2008): 358, emphasis added.Google Scholar
  45. 49.
    E.F. Isin, ‘The Neurotic Citizen’, Citizenship Studies 8, no. 3 (2004): 226; Mol and Spaargaren, ‘Environment, Modernity and the Risk-Society’ 443–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 52.
    K. Hobson, ‘Bins, Bulbs and Shower Timers: On the “Techno-Ethics” of Sustainable Living’, Ethics, Place & Environment 9, no. 3 (2006): 321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. —, ‘Thinking Habits into Action: The Role of Knowledge and Process in Questioning Household Consumption Practices’ Local Environment $18, no. 1 (2003): 95–112, 110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 53.
    V. Timmer and N-K Seymoar, ‘Vancouver Working Group Discussion Paper’, in The World Urban Forum 2006 (Vancouver: UN Habitat — International Centre for Sustainable Cities, 2005);Google Scholar
  49. National Endowment for the Arts, The NEA 1965–2000: A Brief Chronology of Federal Support for the Arts (Washington DC: NEA, 2000).Google Scholar
  50. 54.
    R. Veenhoven, ‘Happiness as an Indicator in Social Policy Evaluation: Some Objections Considered’, in Between Sociology and Sociological Practice, ed. K. Mesman Schultz et al. (Nijmegen: Institute for Applied Social Sciences, 1993); R. Veenhoven and J. Ehrhardt, ‘The Cross-National Pattern of Happiness: Test of Predictions Implied in Three Theories of Happiness’, Social Indicators Research 34, no. 1 (1995).Google Scholar
  51. 57.
    F. Fischer, Democracy & Expertise: Reorienting Policy Inquiry (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 58.
    See, for example, N. Casey, ‘Melbourne Benchmarking and Liveability’ (Melbourne: City of Melbourne, 2009);Google Scholar
  53. —, ‘Melbourne City Research: International City Comparisons’ (Melbourne: City of Melbourne, 2011).Google Scholar
  54. 61.
    A. Desrosières, ‘Historiciser L’action Publique: L’Etat, Le Marche Et Les Statistiques’, in Historicites de l’action publique, ed. P. Laborier and D. Trom (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2003); P. Le Galès and A. Scott, ‘Une Revolution Bureaucratique Britannique? Autonomie Sans Controle Ou “Freer Markets, More Rules”’, Revue Française de Sociologie 49, no. 2 (2008); W. Espeland and M. Sauder, ‘Rankings and Reactivity: How Public Measures Recreate Social Worlds’, American Journal of Sociology 113, no. 1 (2007).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Andy Scerri 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andy Scerri

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations