A market-based rationale for holding corporations accountable for the purpose of societal benefit

Corporations have a different role in market societies than individuals because they are a means to an end. Societies can enforce expectations that corporations create value by requiring that both revenues exceed expenses (profit) and societal benefits exceed societal costs (purpose). The profitability requirement is enforced by markets, while the purpose requirement can be enforced by laws, regulation, and ethical customs. As a result, corporations can, and often do, benefit society. However, not all corporations are equally subject to societal constraints because some corporations achieve a level of autonomy that enables them to subvert the societal constraints that require other firms to deliver net societal benefits. We argue that holding all corporations accountable for this purpose is consistent with the benefits that are understood to derive from markets and competition. By identifying what allows some corporations to resist accountability for purpose, we discuss potential ways to reinforce market mechanisms requiring corporations to achieve societal benefit.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Long Range Planning
Published
2026-01-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2026.102609
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
25.65
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A market-based rationale for holding corporations accountable for the purpose of societal benefit

David Souder, Dhvani Badwaik, SCOTT G. JOHNSON
1 citations
Long Range Planning
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
25.65
article

A market-based rationale for holding corporations accountable for the purpose of societal benefit

David Souder, Dhvani Badwaik, SCOTT G. JOHNSON
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Corporations have a different role in market societies than individuals because they are a means to an end. Societies can enforce expectations that corporations create value by requiring that both revenues exceed expenses (profit) and societal benefits exceed societal costs (purpose). The profitability requirement is enforced by markets, while the purpose requirement can be enforced by laws, regulation, and ethical customs. As a result, corporations can, and often do, benefit society. However, not all corporations are equally subject to societal constraints because some corporations achieve a level of autonomy that enables them to subvert the societal constraints that require other firms to deliver net societal benefits. We argue that holding all corporations accountable for this purpose is consistent with the benefits that are understood to derive from markets and competition. By identifying what allows some corporations to resist accountability for purpose, we discuss potential ways to reinforce market mechanisms requiring corporations to achieve societal benefit.

Long Range PlanningVol. 59(2)
Iowa State University (US), University of Rhode Island (US), Michigan State University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
25.65
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

A market-based rationale for holding corporations accountable for the purpose of societal benefit — David Souder, Dhvani Badwaik, et al. · Long Range Planning (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS