首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Business Ethics >Royal Dutch Shell in Nigeria: Where Do Responsibilities End?
【24h】

Royal Dutch Shell in Nigeria: Where Do Responsibilities End?

机译:尼日利亚的荷兰皇家壳牌公司:责任在哪里结束?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

This case study discusses the scope of responsibilities and the basis of legitimacy of multinational corporations (MNC) in a complex operating environment. In January 2013 a precedent was set when Shell was held liable in The Hague for oil pollution in the Niger Delta. The landmark ruling climaxed the ongoing dispute over the scope of Shell's responsibilities for both the company's positive and negative impact. Shell's was considered a forerunner in corporate social responsibility and had even assumed public responsibilities in a context of a public responsibility void. However, the company remained a regular target of civil society activism and legal proceedings concerned with malpractice. The court case attracted international attention for its novelty and increasing media and civil society pressure required immediate action. How can Shell respond to this negative publicity to keep its license to operate? What is the scope of the company's responsibilities in such a controversial human rights context? Students are expected to discuss these questions going beyond a simple moralistic or liability thinking. They are encouraged to take into account the complex structural processes that connect persons and institutions in very different social and geographical positions. The experiences of Shell are an excellent case in point since attention is drawn to the background conditions of globally operating companies, in which the isolation of perpetrators based on causality is not realistic. The case also reveals the particular challenges, which MNCs face in the context of increasing demands to take on public responsibilities while respecting their economic mandate.
机译:本案例研究讨论了在复杂的运营环境中跨国公司(MNC)的职责范围和合法性基础。 2013年1月,壳牌在海牙因尼日尔三角洲的石油污染承担责任,这是一个先例。具有划时代意义的裁决使壳牌对公司的正面和负面影响的责任范围不断发生争议。壳牌被视为企业社会责任的先驱,甚至在公共责任无效的情况下承担了公共责任。但是,该公司仍然是民间社会行动主义和与渎职有关的法律诉讼的常规目标。该法院案件的新颖性以及日益增加的媒体和民间社会压力要求立即采取行动引起了国际关注。壳牌如何应对这种负面宣传,以保持其营业执照?在这种有争议的人权背景下,公司的职责范围是什么?希望学生讨论这些问题,而不仅仅是简单的道德或责任思维。鼓励他们考虑将社会和地理位置迥异的个人和机构联系起来的复杂结构过程。壳牌公司的经验就是一个很好的例子,因为要注意全球运营公司的背景条件,在这些条件下,基于因果关系隔离犯罪者是不现实的。该案例还揭示了跨国公司在遵守经济职责的同时承担起公共责任的要求日益增加的情况下面临的特殊挑战。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号