Year: 2026
Type: article
Abstract: Much philosophical literature on sweatshop ethics assumes that the individual branded marketers that sell consumer goods either employ sweatshop workers or can strongly influence the conditions under which those workers labor. This oversimplification misidentifies the rationale for and details of the responsibilities of big buyers for the labor standards in their supply chains. Throughout this article, we illustrate how philosophers’ “vertical integration” and “control” assumptions distort our understanding of the internal dynamics within supply chains. Under the more realistic assumption that big buyers have “constrained influence” over labor conditions in their supply chains, we show that big buyers retain the responsibility to work toward social upgrading goals. However, fulfilling such a responsibility requires big buyers to collectively cede power to third parties in supply chains in formalized and accountable ways. Recent developments in transnational industrial agreements, such as the International Accord, are examples of this commitment.
Source: Business Ethics Quarterly
Authors: Ewan Kingston, Maria Carnovale
Language: English
Subfield: Strategy and Management
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: hybrid
Estimated APC paid: $3,550
OpenAlex ID: W7123692058