ArticleProMarket (Stigler Center, University of Chicago Booth School of Business)

A Pro-Market Framework for Driving Decarbonization: Part II

ProMarket Contributors, 2025

https://www.promarket.org/2025/10/30/a-pro-market-framework-for-driving-decarbonization-part-ii/

Part II extends the pro-market argument, examining governance safeguards and institutional design to prevent rent-seeking in climate policy. It stresses regulatory clarity, competition policy alignment, and safeguards against policy capture to ensure emissions-reduction efforts remain innovation-driven and economically efficient.

Notes on Related Topics

Legal Risk or Uncertainty (A) – Poorly structured rules create litigation and compliance instability.
Systemic Risk (A) – Market distortions can ripple through sectors.

Back to showcase

More Resources

Articles (99)

Books (15)

Reports (109)

Tools (21)

Videos (116)

Presentations (2)

Websites (17)

Items per page

21 – 40 of 380 results showing

ReportISHR

Business frameworks and actions to support human rights defenders: a retrospective and recommendations

2025

This report reviews over a decade of efforts to protect human rights and human rights defenders, emphasizing the long-standing, widely recognized field in which a variety of actors—including businesses, civil society, investors, and UN bodies—play distinct roles. It highlights progress, ongoing challenges, and the need for businesses to remember the rationale and stay committed to responsible engagement in supporting human rights defenders.

ArticleFinancial Times

Business school teaching case study: How does a multinational become a B Corp?

Gernot Wagner, 2025

This case examines the challenges multinationals face in pursuing B Corp certification, using Danone as an example. It highlights aligning global operations, governance, and stakeholder engagement with rigorous social and environmental standards, and raises the broader question: What is responsible influence on public policy for companies that have committed to sustainability?

ArticleFinancial Times

Business School Teaching Case: The Farming Subsidy Debate

Rajat Panwar, 2025

This teaching case by Rajat Panwar of Oregon State University, explores the tensions faced by companies such as Singapore’s Olam, in whether to continue to advocacy for farm subsidies that benefit the industry but undermine biodiversity and raise questions about their sustainability commitments. The case challenges students to consider how, even when companies are clear about their interests in nature, taking a public stance is politically sensitive.

ArticleThe Conversation (Canada)

Businesses Have a Moral Responsibility to Stand Up to Autocrats

David Silver, University of British Columbia, 2025

Philosopher David Silver argues that corporations are not merely profit-seeking entities but moral agents responsible for defending liberal democracy when authoritarian leaders pressure them to comply. Drawing on his book Corporations and Persons: A Theory of the Firm in Democratic Society, Silver contends that businesses must resist coercion, act collectively, and uphold ethical duties that sustain free markets and democratic institutions.

ArticleJournal of Democracy

Can Capitalism Save Democracy?

Semuhi Sinanoglu, Lucan A. Way, Steven Levitsky, 2025

The article explains that capitalism and open markets can strengthen democracy by fostering pluralism, competition, and opportunities for independent groups to operate outside government control. It argues the bigger risk is when governments capture businesses through regulation, which reduces that independence and weakens democracy.

ReportWorld Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD)

CEO Briefing — Business Breakthrough Barometer 2025

WBCSD, 2025

This CEO-focused briefing summarizes the Business Breakthrough Barometer’s global findings, highlighting executive insights on transition readiness, policy uncertainty, geopolitical friction, and system transformation. It distills what CEOs see as the barriers and accelerators to achieving net-zero, circularity, and nature-positive systems—and clarifies where business seeks clearer policy, capital signals, and collaborative pathways.

ArticleCovington & Burling LLP

Corporate Political Disclosure Shareholder Proposals Draw Surprising Support

Covington Public Policy & Political Law Practice, 2025

This Covington client alert reports that shareholder proposals for greater corporate political spending transparency received unusually strong support in 2025, averaging 42% compared to 26% in 2024. The alert highlights rising investor expectations shaped by the CPA-Zicklin Index and warns companies to balance transparency with legitimate confidentiality, emphasizing the governance risks of insufficient disclosure and unexamined political expenditures.

Shape

ReportThe Erb Institute CPR Taskforce

Corporate Political Responsibility Caselets for the Classroom

2025

Twelve short cases to help business educators spark discussion around management dilemmas related to corporate political responsibility. Each caselet includes a few public articles, possible discussion question and links to relevant Principles for Corporate Political Responsibility. Supports the more in-depth report, Bringing CPR into the Business Classroom, by Gabriel Correa Acosta, also available in this Showcase.

ReportCenter for Political Accountability

Corporate Political Spending: What are the Real Risks?

2025

This CPA report explains how opaque political spending—including through third-party groups—can expose companies to legal, reputational, operational, and financial risks. It underscores the importance of consistent governance and transparency across all political giving, noting that these risks apply regardless of issue or party .

ArticleAspen Institute Business & Society Program

Corporate Voice and Democratic Responsibility in 2025

Alicia Bonner & Neal Kemkar, 2025

This Aspen Business & Society Summit report explores how business leaders can safeguard democracy as political risk rises. It argues that corporate silence or partisanship threatens both markets and legitimacy, urging principled, collective action and authentic corporate voice grounded in values, courage, and preparedness—core dimensions of Corporate Political Responsibility that sustain healthy civic and economic systems.

ArticleSalon

Deliberative democracy: Sounds boring — but it just might save us

Paul Rosenburg with James Fishkin, 2025

Paul Rosenburg interviews James Fishkin, the Janet M. Peck Chair in International Communication at Stanford University where he is Professor of Communication, Professor of Political Science (by courtesy) and Director of the Deliberative Democracy Lab. Fishkin recounts a wide range of real-world deliberation experiments—including on energy and climate—that achieved policy progress by integrating representative citizen groups, expert input, and structured facilitation. The interview outlines the design conditions for those breakthroughs, which can be a source of best practices for civil society organizations, and potentially, companies.

ArticleUC Berkeley Democracy Policy Lab, Goldman School of Public Policy

Delivering on the Promises of “We the People”: Political Psychology Foundations for American Democracy Policy

David C. Wilson et al., 2025

This large-scale study of the political psychology of American democracy explores how identity, belonging, trust, and “human flourishing” shape civic engagement and perceptions of democracy. Findings reveal polarization rooted in disconnection and call for democracy policies that strengthen belonging, civic learning, and local trust—paralleling CPR’s emphasis on legitimacy, accountability, and system stewardship for a resilient democracy.

ReportGovernance Studies at Brookings

Democracy Playbook 2025: Seven Pillars to Defend Democracy in 2025 and Beyond

Edited by Norman Eisen & Jonathan Katz, 2025

This third edition of the Democracy Playbook offers evidence-based best practices for reversing democratic backsliding, to help citizens and stakeholders reclaim good governance, transparency, and the rule of law, and strengthen democratic resilience. It outlines how the business sector has historically supported these efforts by fighting corruption (Pillar 3) through actions like opposing state capture, supporting anti-corruption laws, and protecting whistleblowers, in addition to making democracy deliver (Pillar 7) through fair wages, labor rights, and investment in underserved communities. It calls on companies to continue this role, emphasizing that democratic stability is essential for reducing risk and sustaining long-term economic opportunity.

ReportColumbia Center on Sustainable Investment

Distinguishing Among Climate Change-Related Risks

Lisa Sachs, Denise Hearn, Matt Goldklang, and Perrine Toledano, 2025

Recognizing that climate-related risks are complicated, this brief disaggregates climate risks into three categories (planetary, economic, and financial) to then map those risks to which stakeholders are best positioned to address them. The article explains the importance of this disaggregation to facilitate intended outcomes and avoid unintended consequence.

ReportNational Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine

Effects of Human-Caused Greenhouse Gas Emissions on U.S. Climate, Health, and Welfare

2025

A study by a broad, independent panel of U.S.-based researchers to consider newly available scientific evidence on whether greenhouse gas emissions threaten human health and welfare in the United States, considering actual observed changes and human impacts compared to projected changes and impacts. Illustrates a "third side" perspective in reconsidering open questions, and offered without compensation as part of the National Academies' mission to advise government decision-making.

ReportMajority Action

Emerging Technologies, Evolving Responsibilities: Why Investors Must Act to Mitigate AI’s System-Level Impacts

Divya Sundar et al., 2025

Majority Action’s white paper warns that unchecked AI development is driving climate damage, inequality, and democratic backsliding—non-diversifiable system-level risks that threaten portfolios and the economy alike. It urges long-term investors to adopt responsible AI guardrails that limit externalized harms, promote climate and labor equity, and preserve democratic stability. The report frames investor stewardship as a critical mechanism for AI accountability and system resilience.

WebsiteResources for the Future

Evidence in a Time of Policy Extremes: Launching the If/Then Series from Resources for the Future

Carlos Martin, 2025

Resources for the Future's new series, If/Then, focuses on providing rapid, independent economic insights on the consequences of policy choices, drawing from both new and prior research. In a highly polarized environment, it aims to fill critical information gaps by making credible evidence accessible in real time to policymakers, businesses, and stakeholders navigating fast-moving debates.

ReportOxford Martin School, University of Oxford

Examining AI Safety as a Global Public Good: Implications, Challenges, and Research Priorities

Kayla Blomquist et al, 2025

This publication frames AI safety as a critical global public good, highlighting challenges in balancing innovation with robust safety measures, ensuring international cooperation, and promoting equity so AI benefits align with sustainable development goals. It calls for clear accountability alongside shared responsibility through collaborative governance to manage AI risks worldwide

ArticleMaslansky + Partners

Five Corporate Communication Strategies that Won’t Work in 2025

Lee Carter, 2025

The authors believe it is imperative to stay in the conversation about changes to the business environment because of this new administration, but we need to move on from “Making the Problem Too Big”, “Ignoring Popular Sentiment”, “Failing to Find Common Ground”, “Not Telling Your Story”, and “Talking About All the Good You’re Doing in the World.”

ArticleHarvard Business Review

Getting Strategic About Sustainability

Jason Jay, Kate Isaacs and Hong Linh Nguyen, 2025

This article presents a framework leaders can use to better focus their sustainability strategies. It consists of four lenses: the business value lens (What affects our bottom line?), the stakeholder influence lens (What are people trying to tell us?), the science and technology lens (What does the data tell us about our impact and future?), and the purpose lens (What do we stand for?). The framework is intended to help leaders balance external pressures with internal priorities and objective data with stakeholder perceptions.

Share.

Do you have a resource to recommend for The CPR Hub? Please reach out and we will review it for future updates!

Contact Us

Receive Updates from The CPR Hub

Learn about new tools, insights and events to help you consider how CPR can help your company, clients or members.

Stay in the loop.