경제윤리의 관점에서 바라본 자본주의의 미래와 기업의 사회적 책임

• 영문명: The Future of Capitalism and Corporate Social Responsibility from the Perspective of Economic Ethics
• 발행기관: 한국인사조직학회
• 저자명: 정재호(Jaiho Chung) 장하성(Hasung Jang)
• 간행물 정보: 『인사조직연구』인사조직연구 제21권 제3호, 35~67쪽, 전체 33쪽
• 주제분류: 경제경영 > 경영학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2013.09.30

국문 초록

2008년 전세계 경제를 침체에 빠뜨린 글로벌 금융위기는 자본주의 경제체제의 지속가능성에 대해서 다시 생각하게 되는 계기를 마련해주었다. 본 논문은 자본주의의 미래와 기업의 사회적 책임이라는 주제를 중심으로 다음과 같은 세 가지 질문에 대해서 논의한다. 첫째, 자본주의의 총체적 위기인가? 아니면 특정 자본주의 형태의 위기인가? 둘째, 자본주의가 위기를 극복하기 위해 새롭게 탈바꿈한다면 미래의 새로운 자본주의는 어떤 모습일까? 셋째, 지속 가능한 새로운 자본주의에서는 기업의 사회적 책임 중 어떤 부분이 강조되어야 하는가? 이 글은 먼저 글로벌 금융위기는 자본주의의 총체적 위기가 아니라 신자유주의에 기반한 시장만능주의의 위기이며 시장메커니즘을 중시하는 영미식 자유시장경제 자본주의의 위기임을 주장한다. 또한 새로운 자본주의에서는 시장 실패의 문제를 극복하기 위해서 경제주체들의 경제윤리 함양이 필수적임을 주장한다. 마지막으로 새로운 자본주의에서의 기업의 사회적 책임은 기업이 정의(justice)의 원칙에 따라서 사회에 끼치는 외부성(externality)을 적극적으로 내부화 하는 것이며 경제생태계의 건강한 성장을 위해서 시장의 다양한 이해관계자들과 상생하는 것임을 주장한다. 결론적으로 새로운 자본주의의 모습은 경제구성원들이 정의와 협동의 테두리를 벗어나지 않는 범위 안에서 자신의 이익을 마음껏 추구하는 자본주의다.

영문 초록

The global financial crisis has spurred many researchers to re-examine the nature of capitalism and its role in contributing to financial market instability, destruction of the natural environment, and income inequality. There seems to be a new urgency to remedy the weaknesses of capitalism while retaining faith in market operations. Yet the authors of this study maintain that varieties of capitalism simultaneously coexist in the world, and argue that the global financial crisis was a crisis of one type of market capitalism: Liberal Market Economies (LME). LMEs is built on the principle of free markets and has a special advantage of maximizing economic efficiency compared to coordinated market economies (CMEs) that emphasize stakeholder and welfare equality. However, LMEs have their own limitations and are especially vulnerable to negative externalities. As the financial crisis demonstrated, deregulation plus the careless and greedy behaviour of Wall Street actors can cause catastrophic market failure. While the authors suggest that those actors’ behaviour be considered a negative externality, the impact raises questions about the role of social responsibility in efficient market operations. To this point, this paper considers the future of capitalism in light of corporate social responsibility. First, we distinguish between the different types of capitalism and explain the financial crisis through this framework. Second, we discuss the literature and possible avenues down which capitalism could possibly evolve, post-crisis. Finally, we consider how to define social responsibility in the context of a new sustainable capitalism. In response to the failure of Keynesian economic policy to arrest stagflation during the 1970s, neo-liberalism provided a platform for LMEs in the literature and in political economic practice. Since 2009, however, people have started to question the principle of deregulation based on neo-liberal philosophy, and the ability of the market to really operate as an omnipotent mechanism. The financial crisis was surely a case of inefficient resource allocation, i.e. market failure. While we do not make a radical argument that LMEs need to be discarded, we explore the possibility that market failure is indeed a deeply rooted feature of capitalism, and examine remedies for such failures. The system of capitalism has continually evolved and morphed in order to survive (Kaletsky, 2010). Taking the evolutionary perspective, we argue that capitalism is a self-adapting system, but that restoration of economic ethics is the key to its next phase of evolution. We first focus on the concept of externality, as the presence of externalities is the most well known reason why markets fail. Neo-classical economists maintain that market failure caused by externalities can be addressed by establishing property rights according to the Coase Theorem. Our discussion questions the feasibility of creating additional markets through property rights allocation of public resources such as clean air and other private externality resources. Instead, we argue that we have to address the problems caused by externality through restoration of economic ethics. Next, we attempt to define economic ethics. Borrowing from Adam Smith’s Theory of Moral Sentiments, a lesser-known but essential precursor to The Wealth of Nations, we examine the role of justice in a sound market economy. Narrowly defining justice as abstaining from doing our neighbor any positive harm, Smith contends that justice is more essential to the existence of society than beneficence, promoting happiness. In this paper, we argue that market agents’ failure to abide by moral justice is the root cause of negative externality and resultant market failure in today’s capitalism. We note that the failure of neo-classical economic analyses to account for the virtue of justice is because neo classical economics’ homo economicus principle disregards it. In the neo-

목차

<초록>

Ⅰ. 서론

Ⅱ. 자본주의의 정의(定義)와 개념

Ⅲ. 자본주의의 여러 가지 형태

Ⅳ. 자본주의 위기론

Ⅴ. 자본주의는 어떻게 진화할 것인가?

Ⅵ. 새로운 자본주의에서의 기업의 사회적 책임

Ⅶ. 결론

참고문헌

Abstract

키워드

시장의 실패 경제윤리 외부성 죄수의 딜레마 정의 상생 market failure economic ethics externality prisoner’s dilemma justice win-win capitalism