The United Nations Global Compact Retrospect and Prospect

This article reviews the interdisciplinary literature on the UN Global Compact. The review identifies three research perspectives, which scholars have used to study the UN Global Compact so far: a historical perspective discussing the Global Compact in the context of UN-business relations, an operat...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inBusiness & society Vol. 52; no. 1; pp. 6 - 30
Main Authors Rasche, Andreas, Waddock, Sandra, McIntosh, Malcolm
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01.03.2013
Sage Publications
SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC
Subjects
Arenas
Business
Corporate governance
Empirical analysis
Gaps
Governance
Historical Development
International organizations
Literature Reviews
Political sociology
Political systems, parties and institutions
Principles
Social responsibility
Sociology
Sociology of organizations and enterprises. Bureaucracy and administration
Sociology of work and sociology of organizations
Studies
Summaries
Sustainability management
United Nations
public–private partnerships
transnational civil society
global governance
United Nations Global Compact
UN-business relations
globalization
Globalization
Governance
Public policy
Trust
Social responsibility
Learning
Sustainability
Sexual inequality
Enterprise
United Nations Organization
Network Analysis
Business
World Economy
Investment
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:This article reviews the interdisciplinary literature on the UN Global Compact. The review identifies three research perspectives, which scholars have used to study the UN Global Compact so far: a historical perspective discussing the Global Compact in the context of UN-business relations, an operational perspective discussing the composition and impact of its participants, as well as a governance perspective discussing the constraints and opportunities of the initiative as an institutionalized arena for addressing global governance gaps. The authors contrast these three perspectives and identify key empirical as well as conceptual scholarly contributions. The remainder of this article contains focused summaries of the articles selected for this Special Issue. All articles are introduced and evaluated against the background of the three research perspectives.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ObjectType-Article-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
ISSN:0007-6503
1552-4205
DOI:10.1177/0007650312459999