A Janus-faced food industry? : ethical reflections on corporate responsibility for health

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).</p

Workplace Democracy: Collective wisdom as a catalyst for corporate climate action?

The field of business ethics has shown an increasing interest in the responsibilities of firms in taking climate action, (cf. Dietz et al., 2018; Heede, 2014). Especially multistakeholder initiatives are heralded as inclusive platforms in which public and private actors together can provide democratically legitimate solutions for taking effective (global) climate action (cf. Arnold, 2016; Bziuk, 2022; Hormio, 2017; Scherer et al., 2016; Tempels et al., 2017). Although this is promising, the effectiveness of these (political) efforts of firms to tackle climate change are doubted (Coen et al., 2022; Dietz et al., 2021), and on a normative level PCSR is criticized for lacking pluralism and being predominantly libertarian and exclusive of marginalised stakeholders (Djelic & Etchanchu, 2017; Fougère & Solitander, 2020; Hussain & Moriarty, 2018; Mäkinen & Kasanen, 2014; Mäkinen & Kourula, 2012; Moog et al., 2015; Pek et al., 2023). Therefore, we strive to diversify PCSR by exploring the merits of workplace democracy for corporate responsibility in the context of climate change. Both academic and societal debate, democratisation of work has gained significant momentum (Ferreras et al., 2022; Frega & Herzog, 2020; Krüger, 2023; Malleson, 2023; Quijoux, 2020; Reinecke & Donaghey, 2021; Stehr, 2023). Drawing on arguments about the epistemic benefits of democratic decision making and insights from feminist standpoint epistemology, we show that democratically governed firms will make better decisions regarding corporate climate policies and the involvement of other stakeholders, and as such the democratisation of firms can play a crucial role in combating climate change

Food Vendor Beware! On Ordinary Morality and Unhealthy Marketing

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

Big Food’s Ambivalence: Seeking Profit and Responsibility for Health

In this article, we critically reflect on the responsibilities that the food industry has for public health. Although food companies are often significant contributors to public health problems (e.g., obesity, type 2 diabetes), the mere possibility of corporate responsibility for public health seems to be excluded in the academic public health discourse.We argue that the behavior of several food companies reflects a split corporate personality, as they contribute to public health problems and simultaneously engage in activities to prevent them.By understanding responsibility for population health as a shared responsibility, we reassess the moral role of the food industry from a forward-looking perspective on responsibility and ask what food companies can and should do to promote health

Understanding political responsibility in corporate citizenship: towards a shared responsibility for the common good

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 co-responsibilities 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.</p

Programmation télévisuelle familiale et temps de la télévision

Contains fulltext : 221408.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)26 p

Societal impacts of regenerative medicine : reflections on the views of orthopedic professionals

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

Societal impacts of regenerative medicine : reflections on the views of orthopedic professionals

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