Multinational firms operate in multiple national jurisdictions, making them difficult for any one government to regulate. For this reason the firms themselves are often in charge of their own regulation, increasingly in conjunction with international organizations by way of public-private governance initiatives. Prior research has claimed that such initiatives are too weak to meaningfully change firms’ behavior. Can public-private governance initiatives help firms self-regulate, even if they lack strong monitoring or enforcement mechanisms? I take two steps toward answering this question. First, I introduce a new measure of firms’ performance on ESG (environmental, social, and governance) issues: the extent to which the firms issue public responses to claims of misconduct from civil society actors. Second, I argue that public-private governance initiatives allow firms to benefit from the legitimacy of their public partners, lowering the reputational cost of transparent response. Employing novel data on firm responses to human rights allegations from the Business and Human Rights Resource Center, I find that membership in the largest and most prominent initiative, the United Nations Global Compact, significantly increases firms’ propensity to respond transparently to stakeholder allegations. These results suggest a limited but important role for public-private initiatives in global governance.

中文翻译：

---

公私治理举措和企业对利益相关者投诉的回应

跨国公司在多个国家司法管辖区运营，任何一个政府都难以对其进行监管。出于这个原因，公司本身通常负责自己的监管，并通过公私治理举措越来越多地与国际组织合作。先前的研究声称，此类举措太弱，无法有意义地改变公司的行为。即使缺乏强有力的监督或执行机制，公私治理举措能否帮助企业进行自我监管？我采取两个步骤来回答这个问题。首先，我介绍了一种新的衡量公司在 ESG（环境、社会和治理）问题上的表现的方法：公司对民间社会行为者的不当行为指控发表公开回应的程度。第二，我认为公私治理举措允许公司从其公共合作伙伴的合法性中受益，降低透明响应的声誉成本。使用商业与人权资源中心关于企业对人权指控的回应的新数据，我发现加入最大和最突出的倡议，即联合国全球契约，显着增加了公司对利益相关者指控作出透明回应的倾向。这些结果表明，公私倡议在全球治理中的作用有限但很重要。我发现，加入联合国全球契约这个最大和最突出的倡议，显着增加了公司对利益相关者指控做出透明回应的倾向。这些结果表明，公私倡议在全球治理中的作用有限但很重要。我发现，加入联合国全球契约这一最大和最突出的倡议，大大提高了公司对利益相关者的指控做出透明回应的倾向。这些结果表明，公私倡议在全球治理中的作用有限但很重要。