Florian Wettstein

Much of the research on corporate human rights responsibility has been dealing with the clarification both of the foundations and justification of such responsibility as well as of the parameters of corporate human rights violations and the prevention thereof. This contribution, on the other hand, deals with the aftermath of corporate human rights violations, that is, with the still neglected topic of corporate human rights remedy. More specifically, the paper addresses non-material, that is, symbolic or moral dimensions of remedy-provision and the role that corporations can and ought to play in providing it. It presents four different limitations of the current remedy discussion, which are at the heart of that neglect. Based on this, it develops a typology of moral reparation and introduces symbolic remedies as a means for such reparatory efforts.

Recent months have heralded a surge in companies publicly taking a stand on social and political issues such as gay marriage legislation. This paper argues that such "corporate political advocacy" raises new conceptual challenges, which have not been accounted for in existing theories of the firm. Furthermore, it poses normative challenges not yet addressed in current theories of corporate responsibility. And lastly, it poses practical challenges and dilemmas for managers who are confronted with it in their own organizations. This article addresses all three challenges: first, it defines corporate political advocacy and distinguishes it from other, perhaps more familiar forms of corporate political involvement. Second, it attempts to make normative sense of corporate advocacy by depicting it as an element of corporate responsibility. Third, it reflects on the practical implications deriving for managers dealing with this issue in practice.