Ethics in Transaction Cost Economics

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Veiga, M. R. da
Publication Date: 2019
Other Authors: Major, M.
Language: eng
Source: Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
Download full: http://hdl.handle.net/10071/18911
Summary: This paper provides Aristotelian virtue ethics analysis of decisions regarding the UN internal oversight governance structures focused on Transaction Cost Economics (TCE) theory. We explore “probity” and “independence” transactions’ attributes through historical narrative case based research to answer to the question – Why consecutive decisions to strengthen internal oversight structures did not relieve “probity” hazards? Our analysis shows that, at the UN, increased oversight governance structures, i.e. incentives, did not relieve probity/ethics hazards as predicted in TCE (Williamson, 1999). It follows that executive powers’ as well as overseers’ systematically trumpeted the UN “rules of the game”, breaching probity/ethics, disregarding the oversight independence prerogative as well as the UN Charter failing to contribute to the “common good” and to protect the UN mission. It also follows that, as it stands by now, the internal oversight mechanism design is deffective insofar as the UN Charter, positions the Secretary-General in constant conflict of interest empowering he/she with both executive and judiciary powers. We apply Williamson’s Public and Private Bureaucracies TCE for the first time. It results that it should be modified to include “virtue ethics” behavioral assumption as a transaction costs’ reduction device and explanatory framework for ethical failures abandoning the opportunism behavioral assumption.
id RCAP_458a61e80a1b3604086ee24d8f6f6f4f
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.iscte-iul.pt:10071/18911
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
repository_id_str https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/7160
spelling Ethics in Transaction Cost EconomicsVirtual ethicsTCEOversightUnited NationsThis paper provides Aristotelian virtue ethics analysis of decisions regarding the UN internal oversight governance structures focused on Transaction Cost Economics (TCE) theory. We explore “probity” and “independence” transactions’ attributes through historical narrative case based research to answer to the question – Why consecutive decisions to strengthen internal oversight structures did not relieve “probity” hazards? Our analysis shows that, at the UN, increased oversight governance structures, i.e. incentives, did not relieve probity/ethics hazards as predicted in TCE (Williamson, 1999). It follows that executive powers’ as well as overseers’ systematically trumpeted the UN “rules of the game”, breaching probity/ethics, disregarding the oversight independence prerogative as well as the UN Charter failing to contribute to the “common good” and to protect the UN mission. It also follows that, as it stands by now, the internal oversight mechanism design is deffective insofar as the UN Charter, positions the Secretary-General in constant conflict of interest empowering he/she with both executive and judiciary powers. We apply Williamson’s Public and Private Bureaucracies TCE for the first time. It results that it should be modified to include “virtue ethics” behavioral assumption as a transaction costs’ reduction device and explanatory framework for ethical failures abandoning the opportunism behavioral assumption.DINÂMIA'CET - IUL2019-11-18T17:26:23Z2019-01-01T00:00:00Z20192019-11-18T17:25:20Zconference objectinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10071/18911eng978-989-781-145-6Veiga, M. R. daMajor, M.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiainstacron:RCAAP2024-07-07T03:24:29Zoai:repositorio.iscte-iul.pt:10071/18911Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireinfo@rcaap.ptopendoar:https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/71602025-05-28T18:22:53.328632Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Ethics in Transaction Cost Economics
title Ethics in Transaction Cost Economics
spellingShingle Ethics in Transaction Cost Economics
Veiga, M. R. da
Virtual ethics
TCE
Oversight
United Nations
title_short Ethics in Transaction Cost Economics
title_full Ethics in Transaction Cost Economics
title_fullStr Ethics in Transaction Cost Economics
title_full_unstemmed Ethics in Transaction Cost Economics
title_sort Ethics in Transaction Cost Economics
author Veiga, M. R. da
author_facet Veiga, M. R. da
Major, M.
author_role author
author2 Major, M.
author2_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Veiga, M. R. da
Major, M.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Virtual ethics
TCE
Oversight
United Nations
topic Virtual ethics
TCE
Oversight
United Nations
description This paper provides Aristotelian virtue ethics analysis of decisions regarding the UN internal oversight governance structures focused on Transaction Cost Economics (TCE) theory. We explore “probity” and “independence” transactions’ attributes through historical narrative case based research to answer to the question – Why consecutive decisions to strengthen internal oversight structures did not relieve “probity” hazards? Our analysis shows that, at the UN, increased oversight governance structures, i.e. incentives, did not relieve probity/ethics hazards as predicted in TCE (Williamson, 1999). It follows that executive powers’ as well as overseers’ systematically trumpeted the UN “rules of the game”, breaching probity/ethics, disregarding the oversight independence prerogative as well as the UN Charter failing to contribute to the “common good” and to protect the UN mission. It also follows that, as it stands by now, the internal oversight mechanism design is deffective insofar as the UN Charter, positions the Secretary-General in constant conflict of interest empowering he/she with both executive and judiciary powers. We apply Williamson’s Public and Private Bureaucracies TCE for the first time. It results that it should be modified to include “virtue ethics” behavioral assumption as a transaction costs’ reduction device and explanatory framework for ethical failures abandoning the opportunism behavioral assumption.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019-11-18T17:26:23Z
2019-01-01T00:00:00Z
2019
2019-11-18T17:25:20Z
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv conference object
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10071/18911
url http://hdl.handle.net/10071/18911
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 978-989-781-145-6
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv DINÂMIA'CET - IUL
publisher.none.fl_str_mv DINÂMIA'CET - IUL
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
collection Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
repository.mail.fl_str_mv info@rcaap.pt
_version_ 1833597371430207488