Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Industrial Democracy are two paradigmatic approaches to transnational labour governance. They differ considerably with regard to the role accorded to the representation of labour. CSR tends to view workers as passive recipients of corporate‐led initiatives, with little attention paid to the role of unions. Industrial Democracy centres on labour involvement: those affected by governance need to be part of it. Examining the Bangladesh Accord and Alliance as governance responses to the 2013 Rana Plaza disaster, this article offers a comparative perspective of how Industrial Democracy‐oriented and CSR‐oriented initiatives translate into differences in implementation. The article highlights that while CSR can foster effective problem‐solving in the short run, Industrial Democracy is necessary to build governance capacities involving workers in the long run.
Donaghey et al. (Thu,) studied this question.