1. You are making a normative argument, taking a normative position on whether the Mectizan drug program is socially responsible. The essay should be guided by a coherent line of argument which argues your position from the get-go
******Question: is the Mectizan program socially responsible, and why/why not?
-The information you need on the case and context can be found in the Powerpoint slide posted with these assignment instructions. This assignment is not a research paper. You do not have to do additional outside research on the issue. (other than what I attached)
-For your convenience, the links in the Powerpoint deck are reproduced here:
http://www.mectizan.org/about/history
www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/hosbjor_presentations_e/21sturchio_e.pdf
https://medium.com/@MSF_access/there-is-no-such-thing-as-free-vaccines-why-we-rejected-pfizers-donation-offer-of-pneumonia-6a79c9d9f32f#.eu7ryb2d0
2. In answering this question, you will need to address the following issues:
What are the normative stakeholder (broad CSR) arguments for the program?
What criticisms, if any, could be made of the program from a right-wing anti-CSR position (or, a stockholder narrow CSR perspective)?
What criticisms, if any, could be made of the program from a left-wing anti-CSR position?
To what extent is the program justified from the perspective of market-failure CSR theory?
*Normative stakeholder theories (Donaldson and Walsh, Stout, who support a broad notion of CSR
*Normative stockholder theories (e.g. Sternberg, Jensen) who support only a narrow notion of CSR
*Left-wing critics of CSR (e.g. Corporate Watch), who strongly disagree with normative stockholder theory but might agree that descriptive and legal stockholder theory are accurate regarding current business practice and law.
Some of these stockholder theorists (e.g. Sternberg) is right-wing critics of broad CSR, while others (e.g. Jensen) is right-wing critics of normative stakeholder based broad CSR but supporters of instrumental broad CSR.
Market-failure CSR theories (e.g. Heath) which support some aspects of broad CSR but not stakeholder theory)
3. -Choose that one or two to argue against, pointing out where the opposing view goes wrong.
-Note that your answer to the topic question may be qualified and nuanced; we are not looking for a simple yes/no answer. However, you should have a thesis and defend it against the strongest counter-arguments. In doing so, you should make use of course materials and concepts that are most relevant to the arguments for and against your thesis.
-Avoid dealing with concepts in vague, overly general terms, eg. “Stakeholder theory says…”. Be specific, eg. “A stakeholder theorist such as Davis would argue…”, referring precisely to the authors’ actual terms and meanings. You must demonstrate your engagement with the distinct concepts/positions of the authors.
