Corporate Social Responsibility

In “Defending Sweatshops,” Jagdish Bhagwati’s recognizes the existence of a “Corporate Social Responsibility,” but does not define its meaning aside from excluding higher wages for sweatshop workers. My understanding of “CSR” is that businesses owe their existence, and therefore their ability to profit, to society. Because of the nature of this relationship, businesses have certain obligations to society that they must fulfill. Bhagwati writes, “Rewarding workers who are already doing better than their equally impoverished brethren is not my idea of what I would do by way of my CSR; and you should not be able to browbeat me into saying that your way should be my way.” If Bhagwati accepts my definition of “CSR,” I will argue that Bhagwati’s acknowledgment of a “CSR,” followed by his statement that “you” (society) cannot browbeat business into “your” way simply does not work.

            Bhagwati acknowledges that business owe society for their existence and must fulfill certain obligations. With this in mind, it makes little sense for Bhagwati to argue that society cannot argue for its way to be his way. If an organization or government can gather enough societal support to demand that businesses pay employees more respectable wages, than businesses should accept this as part of their obligation to society. Organizations representing the interest of society are responsible for establishing the rules of social responsibility that businesses owe, not businesses. I believe it is more reasonable to put faith in these organizations to establish those responsibilities than businesses themselves, because while businesses will want to maximize their profits while doing the least they can to benefit society, groups advocating for more difficult obligations are doing so with the purpose of benefiting society as a whole. Setting unreasonable responsibilities would be detrimental, and only those they believe are worthwhile and fair would be put in place.