Las Casas Institute, Blackfriars Hall

Evaluation research favours goal‐based evaluation. However, the achievement of the stated goals of interventionists, problem solvers or program managers is not a sufficient condition for a good decision or a successful program implementation. The value of a program, an intervention or a decision is determined not only by the achievement of its stated goals but also by its intrinsic ethical value and its performance for the stakeholders. Hence a program or a decision can be considered as successful if it meets the applying ethical norms, works well in achieving its stated goals, and produces satisfying results for the stakeholders.

St. Francis was hostile to money and material wealth. He was also against exploitation or misuse of natural creatures and promoted voluntary poverty, sharing, and universal brotherhood. This paper examines the implications of St. Francis's views for economics. It is argued that St. Francis's views imply the substantive notion of the term " economic " and favor material sufficiency instead of financial efficiency. Pope Francis's encyclical letter " Laudato si' " is consistent with and supports St. Francis's views, which emphasize the frugality of consumption and acknowledging the intrinsic value of nature. The overall vision of St. Francis can be characterized as " The Commonwealth of Life " based on a God-centered, spiritual way of living and acting. The paper suggests that the models of a sufficiency-oriented community economy are relevant for realizing St. Francis's legacy in today's reality of climate change described by climate scientists as the " Hothouse Earth " pathway.

Mainstream economics employs a rather simplified picture of economic systems. Economic actors are grouped into three categories, namely individuals/households, firms, and the state. Among these actors only monetized transactions are considered. The ultimate goal of the economy is defined as maximization of individual income or financial wealth. 

In the reality of the 21st century the working of the economy is far more complex. Economic actors represent diverse types and the monetized transactions are only one form of the interactions among them. The paper suggests that we should minimally consider the following types of economic actors: individuals, organizations, communities, networks, and robots (or algorithms).

Among economic actors at least four basic types of interactions can be identified: market exchange, bureaucratic coordination, ethical transaction, and aggressive action. Different types of interactions may be combined but “crowding in” and “crowding out” effects may happen among them. For example, market exchange may crowd out ethical transaction or bureaucratic coordination may crowd out market exchange.

The ultimate goal of the economic system is not to produce material gains but to provide livelihood for those who are involved. Just and sustainable prosperity can be considered as the ultimate goal of the economy against which the performance of any economic system should be measured.

The discipline and the movement of business ethics (BE) has at least three decades of history. BE has elaborated concepts and theories, and provided empirical evidences. It has its academic journals, departments, professors. However, BE as a movement and as a practice has failed to deliver the expected results: it would be bold to say that business nowadays is more ethical or sustainable than it was 30 years ago.
What are the reasons of this failure? We do not think that the reason is that BE is still not good enough; that the BE community should further work on its project, refining its concepts, analytical tools and organizational solutions. We believe that the reasons of the failure lay in some deeply rooted features of today’s corporation-ruled business world. BE has failed to realize systemic features of modern business and therefore missed its target. BE targeted corporations as the main actors in the globalized economy and aimed at making them  responsible. This effort failled beacuse corporations and, more generally, the mainstream business world dominated by global corporations cannot become truely ethical in any deep sense. Therefore the social, ethical and environmental problems caused by corporations require a different kind of treatment based on law, politics and social institutions.

Buddhism points out that emphasizing individuality and promoting the greatest fulfillment of the desires of the individual conjointly lead to destruction. The book promotes the basic value-choices of Buddhism, namely happiness, peace and permanence. Happiness research convincingly shows that not material wealth but the richness of personal relationships determines happiness. Not things, but people make people happy. Western economics tries to provide people with happiness by supplying enormous quantities of things and today’s dominating business models are based on and cultivates narrow self-centeredness. But what people need are caring relationships and generosity. Buddhist economics makes these values accessible by direct provision. Peace can be achieved in nonviolent ways. Wanting less can substantially contribute to this endeavor and make it happen more easily. Permanence, or ecological sustainability, requires a drastic cutback in the present level of consumption and production globally. This reduction should not be an inconvenient exercise of self-sacrifice. In the noble ethos of reducing suffering it can be a positive development path for humanity.

Executive compensation has long been a prominent topic in the management literature. A main question that is also given substantial attention in the business ethics literature—even more so in the wake of the recent financial crisis—is whether increasing levels of executive compensation can be justified from an ethical point of view. Also, the relationship of executive compensation to instances of unethical behavior or outcomes has received considerable attention. The purpose of this paper is to explore the social, ecological, and existential costs of economic incentives, by discussing how relying on increasing levels of executive compensation may have an adverse effect on managerial performance in a broad sense. Specifically, we argue that one-dimensional economic incentives may destroy existential, social, and systemic values that influence the manager's commitment to ensure responsible business conduct, and have negative spillover effects that may reduce the manager's performance. There are well-documented findings that demonstrate that reliance on sources of extrinsic motivation (such as economic incentives) may displace intrinsic motivation. Our perspective is a holistic one, in the sense that we will explore the influence of sources of extrinsic motivation on the manager's intrinsic commitment to different types of values. We will in particular investigate how it may influence the manager's ethical reflection and behavior or lack thereof.

Albert Bandura is the doyen of the psychology profession. He is well-known for his theory of social learning and self-efficacy. His new book on moral disengagement can be considered a breakthrough in moral psychology and ethics. It shows how the psychological mechanisms of moral disengagement work in business, politics and social life, and how these practices have implications for ethical conduct.

The book describes an ambitious vision for reorienting ecological economics as we know it. Peter G. Brown (McGill University Montreal), Peter Timmerman (York University Toronto) and their team put forward a new ethical foundation for redirecting and reformulating ecological economics in response to the rapid decline of the richness of life processes on Earth. They believe that the original premise of ecological economics is valid; namely, that the human economy should be considered as embedded in and part of natural ecology.

The book concerns one big issue: How can business schools educate future business leaders to make ethical decisions? This is really a challenge as business schools focus on one-dimensional rationality and cognitive intelligence. They teach the ’Homo oeconomicus’ model and related theories (agency theory, profit or shareholder maximization) which promote individual, self-interested behavior. Not unsurprisingly business schools  produce graduates who are more selfish and morally disengaged than non-business graduates. (Grant 2013) Today there is a strong imbalance in business education between teaching abstract, rational concepts and providing opportunities for personal, moral growth. The whole person education is only a dream in business school settings. (Illes and Zsolnai 2015)

The paper explores Buddhist economics as a major alternative to the Western economic mindset. Buddhism is centred on want negation and purification of the human character. Buddhist economics , developed by Schumacher, Payutto, Welford and others, challenges the basic principles of modern Western economics: (1) profit-maximisation, (2) cultivating desires, (3) introducing markets, (4) instrumental use of the world, and (5) self-interest-based ethics. Buddhist economics proposes alternative principles such as minimising suffering, simplifying desires, non-violence, genuine care, and generosity. It is suggested that Buddhist economics is not a system but a strategy, which can be applied in any economic setting.

The ‘Europe–Asia Dialogue on Business, Ethics and Spirituality’ proved to be a successful step in a long journey. The Business Ethics Center of the Corvinus University of Budapest and European SPES Forum in Leuven are committed to continuing the Europe–Asia dialogue. We believe that Europe and Asia can get many inspirations from each other, especially if they return to and apply creatively their own spiritual foundations.

Presents a normative model of responsible choice which is consistent with the main psychological theories of human choice behaviour. Identifies different aspects of complex economic choices, namely a deontological aspect, a goal achievement aspect, and a stakeholder aspect. Defines responsible choice as choosing the least worst alternative in the multidimensional space of deontological, instrumental, and external values. Demonstrates that the responsible choice model elaborated falls into the rational choice model under specific circumstances.

The purpose of this paper is to derive operational principles from environmental ethics for business organizations to achieve sustainability. The paper uses principles of environmental ethics to redefine business sustainability in an ethically meaningful way.
The paper analyses different levels on which business affects the natural environment. Individual biological creatures are affected by business via hunting, fishing, agriculture, animal testing, etc. Natural ecosystems are affected by business via mining, regulating rivers, building, polluting the air, water and land, etc. The Earth as a whole is affected by business via exterminating species, contributing to climate change, etc.
Business has a natural, non‐reciprocal responsibility toward natural beings affected by its functioning. At the level of individual biological creatures, awareness‐based ethics is adequate for business. At the level of natural ecosystems, ecosystem ethics is relevant for business. At the level of the Earth as a whole, Gaian ethics applies to business.
A business activity system can be considered acceptable if: its aggregate impact on animal welfare is non‐negative;, its aggregate impact on ecosystem health is non‐negative; and its aggregate impact on the living planet is non‐negative. By satisfying the above criteria, business can performs its duty: not to harm nature or allow others to come to harm.

The current and prevailing paradigm of intensive agricultural production is a straightforward example of the mainstream way of doing business. Mainstream enterprises are based on a negativistic view of human nature that leads to counter-productive and unsustainable behaviours producing negative impact for society and the natural environment. If we want to change the course, then different players are needed, which can flourish thanks to their capacity to serve others and creating values for all the participants in the network in which they are embedded. In the article, through the analysis of the Slow Food movement and the use of recent theoretical and empirical contributions in behavioural sciences and psychology, we support the collaborative enterprise model as an alternative to the still prevailing, mainstream business models. Evidence shows that caring and responsible efforts of economic agents are acknowledged and reciprocated even in highly competitive markets.

The  rational  choice  model  has  been  criticised  both  on  normative  and  descriptive
grounds. It is obvious that self-interest maximising is not a universal rather a specific pattern of human choice behaviour. In economic and political life a great variation in people’s choice behaviour can be found. Using a broader analytic framework than the standard rational choice modelling, a rich typology can be established to reveal the basic characteristics of choices that different people can make in different choice situations.

Ecology and environmental issues are almost completely lacking in socioeconomics. Results of environmental sciences demonstrate that nature plays an important role in the life of individuals and collectivities. Etzioni’s I & We paradigm can be enlarged to include Mother Nature.

Instead of the currently prevailing competitive model, a more collaborative strategy is needed to address the concerns related to the unsustainability of today’s business. This article aims to explore collaborative approaches where enterprises seek to build long-term, mutually beneficial relationships with all stakeholders and want to produce sustainable values for their whole business ecosystem. Cases here analyzed demonstrate that alternative ways of doing business are possible. These enterprises share more democratic ownership structures, more balanced and broader governance systems, and a more comprehensive view of organizational goals and performance
– which goes beyond the narrow concept of financial bottom line and into a stronger and systematic care of the needs and requirements of the different stakeholder
groups. Thanks to this evidence and different theoretical and empirical contributions, we suggest that the strength and sustainability of enterprises come from their ability to fit into the environmental, social, and cultural context in which they operate. By creating values for all stakeholders, enterprises can involve them and gain deep support based on their commitment. This may lead to superior performance from a multiple-bottom-line perspective.

The book is reclaiming economics as a moral science. It argues that ethics is a relevant and inseparable aspect of all levels of economic activity, from individual and organizational to societal and global. Taking ethical considerations into account is needed in explaining and predicting the behavior of economic agents as well as in evaluating and designing economic policies and mechanisms.

The unique feature of the book is that it not only analyzes ethics and economics on an abstract level, but puts behavioral, institutional and systemic issues together for a robust and human view of economic functioning. It sees economic “facts” as interwoven with human intentionality and ethical content, a domain where utility calculations and moral considerations co-determine the behavior of economic agents and the outcomes of their activities.

The book employs the personalist approach that sees human persons – endowed with free will and conscience – as the basic agents of economic life and defines human flourishing as the final end of economic activities. The book demonstrates that economics can gain a lot in meaning and also in analytical power by reuniting itself with ethics.