Author:
Claassen Rutger,Gerbrandy Anna
Abstract
ABSTRACT:Demands have been growing upon firms to take actions in the interests of workers, the environment, local communities, and others. Firms sometimes have felt they could best discharge such responsibilities by cooperating with other firms. This, however, is suspect from the point of view of a purely economic interpretation of competition law, since interfirm agreements may raise prices and thus lower welfare for consumers. Should competition law remain focused on competition enhancing economic welfare, or be reformed to allow for acts of cooperation that are socially beneficial? To answer this question, the article provides a philosophical reevaluation of the deep-seated view that firms are merely private actors. It argues that demands of political legitimacy should also be addressed at firms cooperating together, and that standard views of democratic accountability should be broadened, introducing a model of delegated, sequential decision making which allows regulatory agencies and parliaments to control interfirm agreements.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Economics and Econometrics,Philosophy,General Business, Management and Accounting
Reference62 articles.
1. The European Commission’s Decision in GE/Honeywell and the Question of the Goals of Antitrust Law;Schmitz;University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law,2002
2. Accountable to Whom? Rethinking the Role of Corporations in Political CSR
3. “Antitrust Treatment of Cartels: A Comparative Survey of Competition Law Exemptions in the United States, the European Union, Australia and Japan.”;Bos;Global Studies Law Review,2002
4. Are Rawlsian Considerations of Corporate Governance Illiberal? A Reply to Singer
5. Is anything more Important than Consumer Welfare (in Article 81 EC)? Reflections of a Community Lawyer
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献