The ethics of negotiation

Sherwood, Charles N.C. (2023) The ethics of negotiation. PhD thesis, London School of Economics and Political Science.

Text - Submitted Version Download (1MB)

Abstract

I argue for the following: (1) Negotiation is a social construct whereby the parties seek to resolve differences and promote cooperation through a process rooted in mutual consent. (2) Negotiation is a feature of imperfect markets. Where there is a negotiated agreement, there is typically a significant cooperative surplus and, instead of a single market price, a range of possibilities as to how that cooperative surplus may be divided between the parties. The purpose of negotiation is to determine exactly where in that range agreement is reached. (3) The fairness of a negotiated agreement is wholly determined by the fairness of the process that leads to that agreement; and the fairness of the process is itself wholly determined by the adequacy of the constraints applied to that process. This makes negotiation an instance of pure procedural justice. In this regard, negotiation is to be clearly distinguished from judgment or binding arbitration. (4) Negotiated agreement itself implies some degree of consent. But beyond that there are pro tanto obligations on negotiators to (a) behave honestly and, in particular, not lie, (b) seek mutually beneficial outcomes, whereby their counterparties are left no worse off than they would be in the event of a failure to agree, and (c) avoid the abuse of extreme asymmetric negotiating leverage, that characterises a combination of monopoly, monopsony or cartel with essential goods and services, and discriminatory pricing. (5) These constraints are both necessary and sufficient to deliver a fair process and, therefore, a fair outcome. (6) Such constraints can be seen, in part, as attempts to counter market failure and compensate for shortfalls in consent. (7) A further constraint, related to the broader demands of distributive justice, is not called for. Such a requirement is the primary responsibility of society as a whole. To the extent that it does fall on any individual, it takes the form of a separate and narrower duty to aid that can, in cases of dire need, take precedence and require that negotiations cease. (8) The fact that these moral constraints leave the outcome of most negotiations less than fully determined is not a weakness, but a strength of this account. It properly captures the character of a negotiation as a cooperative but also partially adversarial process, during the course of which a fair outcome is constructed – importantly, an outcome that is not predetermined.

Item Type:	Thesis (PhD)
Additional Information:	© 2023 Charles N.C. Sherwood
Library of Congress subject classification:	B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > B Philosophy (General) B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BJ Ethics
Sets:	Departments > Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method
Supervisor:	Alexander, J Mckenzie and Voorhoeve, Alex
URI:	http://etheses.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/4547

Actions (login required)

Record administration - authorised staff only