- Radboud University Nijmegen, Institute for Management Research, Faculty Memberadd
The responsibility of the food and beverage industry for noncommunicable diseases is a controversial topic. Public health scholars identify the food and beverage industry as one of the main contributors to the rise of these diseases. We... more
The responsibility of the food and beverage industry for noncommunicable diseases is a controversial topic. Public health scholars identify the food and beverage industry as one of the main contributors to the rise of these diseases. We argue that aside from moral duties like not doing harm and respecting consumer autonomy, the food industry also has a responsibility for addressing the structural injustices involved in food-related health problems. Drawing on the work of Iris Marion Young, this article first shows how food-related public health problems can be understood as structural injustices. Second, it makes clear how the industry is sustaining these health injustices, and that due to this connection, corporate actors share responsibility for addressing food-related health problems. Finally, three criteria (capacity, benefit, and vulnerability) are discussed as grounds for attributing responsibility, allowing for further specification on what taking responsibility for food-related health problems can entail in corporate practice.
Research Interests: Business Ethics, Philosophy, Political Philosophy, Corporate Social Responsibility, Social Justice, and 8 morePublic Health Ethics, Public Health Policy, Corporate Governance & Corporate Responsibility, Food and Nutrition, Public Health, Food ethics, Feminism and Social Justice, and Ethics and Corporate Social Responsability
Food and beverage firms are frequently criticised for their impact on the spread of non-communicable diseases like obesity and diabetes type 2. In this article we explore under what conditions the sales and marketing of unhealthy food and... more
Food and beverage firms are frequently criticised for their impact on the spread of non-communicable diseases like obesity and diabetes type 2. In this article we explore under what conditions the sales and marketing of unhealthy food and beverage products is irresponsible. Starting from the notion of ordinary morality we argue that firms have a duty to respect people’s autonomy and adhere to the principle of non-maleficence in both market and non-market environments. We show how these considerations are relevant when thinking about immoral behaviour in the food and beverage industry, and identify under what conditions sales and marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages to adults and children is wrong. Based on this analysis we argue that firms should take into account: whether consumers are able to identify manipulative marketing, the degree of manipulation, as well as the negative impact a product has on health. We hold that for the food industry to act responsible it should re-evaluate the marketing of unhealthy products to adults and refrain from marketing to children. We conclude this study by making several recommendations on how the food industry should interact with consumers and highlight what changes need to be made in corporate practice.
Research Interests:
In this article, we explore the debate on corporate citizenship and the role of business in global governance. In the debate on political corporate social responsibility it is assumed that under globalization business is taking up a... more
In this article, we explore the debate on corporate citizenship and
the role of business in global governance. In the debate on
political corporate social responsibility it is assumed that under
globalization business is taking up a greater political role. Apart
from economic responsibilities firms assume political
responsibilities taking up traditional governmental tasks such as
regulation of business and provision of public goods. We contrast
this with a subsidiarity-based approach to governance, in which
firms are seen as intermediate actors who have political coresponsibilities in society endowed upon them by (inter)national
governmental institutions. We argue that both approaches face
conceptual and empirical problems, and do not make clear the
content and scope of political corporate responsibility. Based on
Iris Marion Young’s account of political responsibility we argue
that corporate actors and governmental actors have a shared
responsibility to tackle societal problems. Taking political
corporate responsibility not only entails engaging in private action
or engaging in public–private partnerships, but it also includes
aiding governmental actors to remedy injustice or even create
public institutions where they do not yet exist. By adding this
perspective we contribute to the debate on responsibility in
corporate citizenship and clarify the political role business can
play in global governance.
the role of business in global governance. In the debate on
political corporate social responsibility it is assumed that under
globalization business is taking up a greater political role. Apart
from economic responsibilities firms assume political
responsibilities taking up traditional governmental tasks such as
regulation of business and provision of public goods. We contrast
this with a subsidiarity-based approach to governance, in which
firms are seen as intermediate actors who have political coresponsibilities in society endowed upon them by (inter)national
governmental institutions. We argue that both approaches face
conceptual and empirical problems, and do not make clear the
content and scope of political corporate responsibility. Based on
Iris Marion Young’s account of political responsibility we argue
that corporate actors and governmental actors have a shared
responsibility to tackle societal problems. Taking political
corporate responsibility not only entails engaging in private action
or engaging in public–private partnerships, but it also includes
aiding governmental actors to remedy injustice or even create
public institutions where they do not yet exist. By adding this
perspective we contribute to the debate on responsibility in
corporate citizenship and clarify the political role business can
play in global governance.
Research Interests: Business Ethics, Subsidiarity, Corporate Governance, Governance, Corporate Citizenship, and 9 morePolitical Responsibility, Public Private Partnerships, Iris Marion Young, Public Goods, CSR Business and Society, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), CSR and Business Ethics, Political Csr, and (Political) CSR and Corporate Citizenship
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
As the amount of clinical studies in orthopedic regenerative medicine (RM) is increasing, it is time to take into account its impact on society. A total of 36 biomedical professionals working at the front row of orthopedic RM were... more
As the amount of clinical studies in orthopedic regenerative medicine (RM) is increasing, it is time to take into account its impact on society. A total of 36 biomedical professionals working at the front row of orthopedic RM were interviewed to explore their attitudes, opinions and expectations regarding the societal impacts of RM. Professionals mainly recognized the societal impacts of counteraction of aging, prevention of disease and social justice. The ‘soft’ sides of these impacts were hardly mentioned. Whereas they did not perceive themselves in the position to mitigate these impacts, professionals should take up their role as actor and become involved in the societal debate. This is important as they can co-shape the societal impacts during the developmental process of technologies and thereby stimulate responsible innovation
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Food-related non-communicable diseases (NCDs) such as obesity, type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases are key threats to public health. Yet, the responsibility for food-related health harms is contested. While traditionally viewed as... more
Food-related non-communicable diseases (NCDs) such as obesity, type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases are key threats to public health. Yet, the responsibility for food-related health harms is contested. While traditionally viewed as mainly an individual responsibility or a governmental responsibility, fingers are nowadays also pointed at the food and beverage industry, as many firms are producing and marketing unhealthy products that contribute to the rise of obesity and other food-related NCDs. Yet, does the behaviour of the industry and the impact its products have on public health also give reason for moral concern? Are these firms doing anything wrong? Are there normative considerations on the basis of which it can be argued that food and beverage firms have a responsibility for public health?
This thesis explores the moral grounds for firms in the food and beverage industry to address food-related public health problems, and simultaneously reflects upon what taking responsibility for these problems could entail in practice.
Drawing on debates in business ethics, political philosophy, and public health ethics, it is argued that food and beverage firms have distinct responsibilities for food-related health problems, and that these responsibilities spring from considerations of non-maleficence, respect for autonomy and justice.
The thesis makes clear how responsibility for public health can be understood as an essentially shared responsibility, and outlines what taking responsibility could entail for various firms in the food and beverage industry (e.g. healthy innovation, pro-health marketing, and political lobbying for a level playing field) and makes recommendations on what kind of behaviour firms should no longer engage in (e.g. marketing unhealthy products to children and teenagers and lobbying against public health regulation).
This thesis explores the moral grounds for firms in the food and beverage industry to address food-related public health problems, and simultaneously reflects upon what taking responsibility for these problems could entail in practice.
Drawing on debates in business ethics, political philosophy, and public health ethics, it is argued that food and beverage firms have distinct responsibilities for food-related health problems, and that these responsibilities spring from considerations of non-maleficence, respect for autonomy and justice.
The thesis makes clear how responsibility for public health can be understood as an essentially shared responsibility, and outlines what taking responsibility could entail for various firms in the food and beverage industry (e.g. healthy innovation, pro-health marketing, and political lobbying for a level playing field) and makes recommendations on what kind of behaviour firms should no longer engage in (e.g. marketing unhealthy products to children and teenagers and lobbying against public health regulation).
Research Interests:
The responsibility of the food and beverage industry for noncommunicable diseases is a controversial topic. Public health scholars identify the food and beverage industry as one of the main contributors to the rise of these diseases. We... more
The responsibility of the food and beverage industry for noncommunicable diseases is a controversial topic. Public health scholars identify the food and beverage industry as one of the main contributors to the rise of these diseases. We argue that aside from moral duties like not doing harm and respecting consumer autonomy, the food industry also has a responsibility for addressing the structural injustices involved in food-related health problems. Drawing on the work of Iris Marion Young, this article first shows how food-related public health problems can be understood as structural injustices. Second, it makes clear how the industry is sustaining these health injustices, and that due to this connection, corporate actors share responsibility for addressing food-related health problems. Finally, three criteria (capacity, benefit, and vulnerability) are discussed as grounds for attributing responsibility, allowing for further specification on what taking responsibility for food-related health problems can entail in corporate
practice.
practice.