OlsonMancur, The Logic of Collective Action, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1965).
2.
Ibid., p. 2.
3.
Ibid., p. 44.
4.
HardinRussell, “Collective Action as an Agreeable n-Prisoner's Dilemma,”Behavioral Science, vol. 16 (1971), pp. 472–79.
5.
RungeC. Ford, “Institutions and the Free Rider: The Assurance Problem in Collective Action,”Journal of Politics, vol. 46 (1984), pp. 154–81.
6.
Cf. MintzbergHenry, “The Case for Corporate Social Responsibility”, Journal of Business Strategy, vol. 14 (1983), pp. 3–15.
7.
StoneChristopher, Where the Law Ends, (New York, NY: Harper Torchbooks, 1975), p. 112.
8.
In the prisoner's dilemma, two prisoners are interrogated separately about an armed robbery they are charged with committing. Given the strength of the case against them, each can expect to get one year in jail for fire-arms possession, but only so long as neither confesses. The D.A. offers each of them a deal: If either turns state's evidence against the other, all charges against him will be dropped, but his partner will be convicted and will face a ten-year sentence. However, if both confess, both will be convicted and will receive reduced sentences of six years each. Plainly, what is in the narrow self-interest of each prisoner (each is better off confessing no matter what his partner does) is in conflict with what is in their collective interest (between them they serve a total of only two years if neither squeals). See HardinRussell, op. cit., p. 2.
9.
WilsonJames Q., Political Organizations, (New York, NY: Basic Books, 1973), chapter 8.
10.
Ibid., p. 149.
11.
Ibid., p. 151.
12.
LeoneRobert A., “Competition and the Regulatory Boom,” in TellaDorothy, ed., Government Regulation of Business: Its Growth, Impact, and Future, (Washington, D.C.: Chamber of Commerce of the United States, 1979), p. 34.
13.
FooteSusan Bartlett, “Corporate Responsibility in a Changing Legal Environment,”California Management Review, vol. 26 (1984), pp. 217–28.
14.
ArrowKenneth J., “Social Responsibility and Economic Efficiency,”Public Policy, vol. 21 (1973), p. 315.
15.
See Thomas Schelling on “the false dichotomy of voluntarism and coercion,” in “Command and Control,” in McKieJames W., ed., Social Responsibility and the Business Predicament, (Washington, D.C.: Brookings, 1974), p. 103.
16.
The phrase is from Hardin'sGarrett“The Tragedy of the Commons,”Science, vol. 162 (1968), p. 1247.
17.
Schelling, op. cit., p. 103.
18.
GarvinDavid, “Can Industry Self-Regulation Work?”California Management Review, vol. 25 (1983), p. 42.
19.
PorterMichael, Competitive Strategy, (New York, NY: Free Press, 1980), p. 230.
20.
GrumblyThomas P., “Self-Regulation: Private Vice and Public Virtue Revisited,” in BardachEugeneKaganRobert, eds., Social Regulation: Strategies for Reform (San Francisco, CA: Institute for Contemporary Studies, 1982), p. 97.
21.
Garvin, op. cit., p. 155, 156.
22.
ConteChristopher, “Transport Agency's Dole Vows to Restrict Traffic at 6 Busy Airports if Carriers Don't,”Wall Street Journal, August 16, 1984, p. 10.
23.
OlsonMancur, The Rise and Decline of Nations, (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1982), pp. 47–48.
24.
These objections lie at the heart of the complaint that the doctrine of corporate social responsibility provides no operational guidelines to assist managers in making responsible choices. The most sophisticated (but, I think, ultimately unsuccessful) attempt to supply an objective, external standard (located in what they call the public policy process) is PrestonLeePostJames, Private Management and Public Policy, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1975).
25.
See on this point the remarks of Walter A. Haas, Jr., of Levi Strauss quoted in SilkLeonardVogelDavid, Ethics and Profits (New York, NY: Simon & Schuster, 1976), pp. 25–27.
26.
RawlsJohn, A Theory of Justice, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971), pp. 270, 269.
27.
Olson, Rise and Decline, op. cit., pp. 47–48.
28.
ShonfieldAndrew, Modern Capitalism, (New York and London: Oxford University Press, 1965), p. 245.
29.
BaunthalGerard, The Federation of German Industries in Politics, (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1965), pp. 56–57.
30.
BresnickDavid, “The Youth Employment Policy Dance: Interest Groups in the Formulation and Implementation of Public Policy,” paper presented at the American Political Science Association meetings in Denver, September 2–5, 1982, p. 33.
31.
VogelEzra, Japan as Number 1, (New York, NY: Harper Colophon, 1979), chapter 5.
32.
Ibid.
33.
KelmanSteven, Regulating America, Regulating Sweden: A Comparative Study of Occupational Safety and Health Policy, (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1981).
34.
Ibid., p. 6.
35.
Ibid., p. x.
36.
Ibid., pp. 117 and 158–61.
37.
Ibid., pp. 154–55.
38.
Ibid., p. 151, 233.
39.
In Bauer, Pool and Dexter's classic study, a lopsided majority of the businessmen with opinions on the subject supported free trade, but when they contacted members of Conress it was invariably to ask for protection. BauerRaymond A.de S. PoolIthielDexterLewis, American Business and Public Policy: The Politics of Foreign Trade, (New York: Atherton, 1963), p. 221. The doyen of the pluralist school in American political science has recently remarked that “by emphasizing aspects of the self that are enhanced by … segmented gains, organizational pluralism helps to produce in political actors a set of perceptions and beliefs, even a persistent political culture, in which the absence of a common, public or widely shared set of interests is a self-fulfilling prophecy.” DahlRobert A., Dilemmas of Pluralist Democracy, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982), p. 44.
40.
This is, of course, the essence of the argument in Olson's Logic, op. cit. This section draws heavily on WilsonJames Q., Political Organizations, op. cit.; SalisburyRobert H., “Why No Corporatism in America?,” in SchmitterPhilippeLehmbruchGerhard, Trends Toward Corporatist Intermediation, (Beverly Hills: Sage, 1979); and SchmitterPhilippeBrandDonald, “Organizing Capitalists in the United States: The Advantages and Disadvantages of Exceptionalism,” presented at a workshop at the International Institute of Management, Berlin, November 14–16, 1979.
41.
Wilson, op. cit., pp. 146–47, 34, 153–56 and passim.
42.
Ibid., p. 149.
43.
Ibid., p. 153, 161.
44.
Salisbury, op. cit., p. 215. See also Wilson, op. cit., p. 82.