India’s landmark corporate law reform in 2013 contained a pioneering attempt to mandate corporate spending of 2 percent of average profits on corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives. This chapter explores a puzzle: The CSR requirement could have been written as a CSR tax rather than a CSR spending requirement, so why did the government choose the latter, more heterodox, option? The analysis suggests that the motivation for the reforms reflects a blend of political optics and state capacity or efficiency considerations informed by historical experiences with market-oriented reforms. On the efficiency and state capacity front, the Indian state might not have been as well placed to enforce a CSR tax as Indian firms might have been able to manage a CSR spending requirement in 2013. On the political optics side there was a prevailing perception that the liberalization had primarily benefited only a very small sliver of the country. If corporations were engaged in CSR then it might look like the gains from economic liberalization were beginning to find their way from India Inc. to the general citizenry. This blended account provides interesting insights about this rather unique set of reforms and subsequent developments.

The emergence of “FemTech”, a term used to describe technologically based or enabled applications serving women’s health needs, as a driver of capital investment in the past decade, is a notable development in advancing women’s health. Critics have raised important concerns regarding the pitfalls of FemTech, with privacy concerns being chief among them. This private market, however, should be integrated into creation of systemwide corrections of problems that plague women of color. To do so a derivate FemTech framework (hereinafter the “Framework”) clear limitations must concurrently be overcome to realize its possibilities.

In the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, several corporations signaled their support for reproductive rights by announcing expanded abortion care coverage and/or travel stipends for employees who are forced to travel out of state to receive care, including abortion care. While such moves may be celebrated and recognized as a commitment to pro-choice politics, these decisions require scrutiny and suspicion. This article details why.

Part I of this paper will discuss the corporate response to Dobbs. It will discuss the type of benefits that corporations offered, and the class of employees these benefits were offered to (for instance, “independent contractors” were mostly excluded from availing of these benefits). Part II will discuss the movement for reproductive rights, some of the harms it reinforced, and the criticisms it received from the Reproductive Justice movement. Against this backdrop, Part III will discuss the possible intentions behind corporations conferring these benefits, including those related to staff retention, microeconomic logics, and DEI efforts. It will review them against large corporations’ histories of (not) providing reproductive supports, including a living wage, paid leave, sick leave, and childcare. It will also analyze some of the evidence in the public sphere that shows the roles some of these large corporations have played in supporting antiabortion agendas and politicians. Part IV will discuss the long-term harms that this new crop of workplace policies and benefits might create. Mainly, it will discuss how the provision of abortion care without other reproductive supports reemphasizes a reproductive rights approach despite its criticisms, which were highlighted by the Reproductive Justice movement. For instance, this section will discuss the expanding role corporations are assuming in providing healthcare, and how that may lead to the exclusion of certain historically marginalized classes of workers and people. It will also discuss the impact of these policies on the deprioritization of certain types of care, which have been overlooked for decades, including gender-affirming care and fertility treatments. Part V will suggest a few steps corporations can take to mitigate the harm created by Dobbs.

The chapter maps the evolution of the last thirty years of preferential trade agreements (PTAs) addressing foreign investment. It explains the interactions between PTAs and bilateral investment treaties (BITs). The chapter focuses on key provisions on investment protection, investment liberalisation, and investor–state dispute settlement (ISDS), highlighting in particular novel approaches to each of those three aspects. The chapter also highlights the evolution in the apparent objective(s) of investment disciplines in PTAs and whether such evolution has matched the substance of these disciplines. For this purpose, the chapter also identifies and discusses novel provisions going beyond those traditional aspects of investment protection, liberalisation, and ISDS, such as investment facilitation, corporate social responsibility, and regulatory coherence. The chapter concludes by offering a few suggestions for policymakers going forward.

The chapter explains the importance of stakeholder relations in supporting the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals, focussing on the essence of stakeholder engagement management in financial firms, for in their case, relational capital is of particular importance, given the importance of mutual trust between an entity and its stakeholders. We begin by explaining the concept of interest groups, linked to contract theory and corporate social responsibility. Both the micro context (corporate stakeholder theory) and the macro context (the concept of stakeholder capitalism) are pointed out. Contemporary corporate governance codes emphasise a company’s accountability to a wide range of its stakeholders, which is especially important in the case of financial firms – due to the specific nature of their activities. Therefore, different dimensions of financial institutions’ responsibilities are discussed, stressing those aspects that justify strengthening stakeholder relationship management in those firms. The chapter emphasises the process of managing relationships with stakeholders. The core part is a discussion of the key stages of stakeholder engagement management: from the identification of main interest groups, their analysis and segmentation, prioritisation of stakeholders, and selection of an engagement strategy, to monitoring and evaluation of engagement.

Finance that does not take sustainability seriously is finance that does not take finance seriously. The financial risks of continued unsustainabilities bring sustainability issues into the heart of any well-founded financial decision, whatever view one might have on the role of finance and business in society. In this chapter, the relationship between finance and sustainability is explored through a broadening of the approach to understanding financial risks of unsustainability. This goes beyond the established recognition of the financial risks of climate change – and the emerging recognition of financial risks of biodiversity loss. The analysis presents new risk categories, including the risk of business model change, societal risk and global catastrophic risks. The chapter also exemplifies new categories of unsustainability that should be encompassed in such a broader and systemic approach, including ‘novel entities’ and tax evasion. The chapter concludes with brief reflections on the necessity of and the legal basis for implementing a research-based approach to risks of unsustainability in law and policy reforms and in practice.

In this chapter, I analyse the main trade-offs between the economic value of the firm and its social value, exploring how they are solved through corporate governance and regulatory constraints. To begin with, I show how firms generate social value while also increasing their long-term value under the enlightened shareholder value approach. Thanks to organizational and technological innovation, firms are led to change their business models and organization to enhance environmental and social sustainability and increase long-term profitability. In addition, managers promote their firms’ sustainability in compliance with ethical standards which are part of corporate culture. In similar situations, generating social value may determine pure costs to the enterprise. I argue therefore that the perspective of instrumental stakeholderism appears too narrow, for situations exist where non-economic values are also relevant to the firm. The importance of ethics is especially underlined by CSR and stakeholder theory. Moreover, management studies emphasize the role of corporate governance and organizational theory in the promotion of social value. The board of directors should identify the ethical and cultural values of the firm and monitor their application at all levels. In addition, organizational purpose plays a fundamental role for the ‘intrinsic’ motivation of people in corporations. The international soft law on corporate due diligence further contributes to the design of corporate purpose and to the motivation of managers and employees. Once corporate due diligence is recognized by European hard law through the proposed Directive, specific obligations will arise for companies which will impact their governance and could become a source of civil liability. As a result, the corporate purpose orientation to sustainability will be reinforced by the regulation of environmental and human rights externalities and by the due diligence obligations deriving from it.

Offering two case studies – the economic transformations of Sohar and Duqm – this chapter grounds the book’s argument about Oman’s global labour market in material cases of spatial transformation and the integration into global value chains through which both commodities and labour circulate. The chapter argues that millennial citizen expectations take shape in these developments, from the interaction of ostensible outcomes of economic globalisation, neoliberalism, and government responsibilities of governing hydrocarbon windfalls. Citizen reactions emerge from their perceived right to, or exclusion from, these returns. The chapter further substantiates two points through these cases. First, both neoliberal reform and oil wealth explicitly or implicitly make promises to populations about an improved economic life, which, when unrealised, results in disenfranchisement and discontent. Second, capital needs labour and pursues supplies from the global labour market not only because it is cost effective but deliberately because it is both flexible and controllable. It seeks to avert potential labour disruption and secure seamless operations. Together, these findings show the ways Omani labour organises and the power of labour through the threat of its resistance.

This chapter aims to inform reflection on business self-regulation (or corporate social responsibility, CSR) in addressing climate change by drawing on developments in ‘business and human rights’ and the experience accumulated in the European Union (EU). Despite dissimilarities in addressing the environmental and human right impacts of business operations, there are commonalities around incentives, impacts and regulatory dynamics of CSR that help clarify its expected place in global governance. This analysis revisits long-standing claims about CSR in light of current legal and market evolutions. The main finding is that the notion of CSR has been fundamentally transformed in the last 20 years. What is the change, what are the drivers enabling such change, and what are the expected impacts on corporate compliance and sustainability performance? The analysis contributes to the regulatory governance area, including regarding climate change, and promotes cross-fertilisation among the social and environmental areas in CSR.

In discussing Islamic banking and finance (IBF), I first provide a brief overview of its development in Gulf monarchies, before turning to an investigation of particularities of its form and substance. I address a set of issues related to, on the one hand, the adoption, governance and regulation of IBF and on the other hand, the conformity of its practice with its alleged purposes. My aim is to uncover the actual goals of IBF, that has become prominent in the Gulf (and in the global economy) in recent decades. The analysis shows that IBF is a means for regimes to both appease their restive populations and respond positively to the material interests of key segments of society. Thus, ruling priorities related to enrichment and social management cohere; these are the principal purposes, even though ruling elites cloak their intentions in religiosity and ethical commitments. Like the other institutionalized practices discussed in this book, IBF represents the conjoined instrumentalization of (oil) wealth and Islamic doctrine for the sake of social control, and beyond that, the ongoing political domination and material enrichment of the royal family.

As touched upon in Chapter 1, contemporary commentary on corporate governance can be divided into two main approaches: stakeholder primacy, and the narrower shareholder primacy. This chapter focuses on the first of these objectives. We commence the chapter by pointing out that an approach that accentuates the differences between a shareholder versus a stakeholder theory of the corporation is probably a contradiction and a false dichotomy. We then deal with the important aspect of corporate social responsibility (‘CSR’) and the related issue of disclosure of and reporting on non-financial matters. As part of this discussion we focus on the controversial and highly topical issue of companies exaggerating their image as environmentally friendly corporations (greenwashing) to please investors and to attract more investments, as well as smartening their image on other issues (greenscreening). This chapter then looks at the ‘social licence to operate’ before shifting to CSR and directors’ duties. The chapter concludes by considering the meaning of ‘stakeholders’ and how all corporate stakeholders have vested interests in the sustainability of corporations.