Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Books
  3. Capitalism, Corporations and the Social Contract
  • Cited by 44
Publisher:
Cambridge University Press
Online publication date:
June 2013
Print publication year:
2013
Online ISBN:
9781139058926
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139058926
Series:
Business, Value Creation, and Society
Subjects:
Strategic Management, Business Ethics, Management: General Interest, Management
Information

Book description

In whose interests should a corporation be run? Over the last thirty years the field of 'stakeholder theory' has proposed a distinctive answer: a corporation should be run in the interests of all its primary stakeholders - including employees, customers, suppliers and financiers - without contradicting the ethical principles on which capitalism stands. This book offers a critique of this central claim. It argues that by applying the political concept of a 'social contract' to the corporation, stakeholder theory in fact undermines the principles on which a market economy is based. The argument builds upon an extensive review of the stakeholder literature and an analysis of its philosophical foundations, particularly concerning the social contract tradition of John Rawls and his predecessors. The book concludes by offering a qualified version of Milton Friedman's shareholder theory as a more justifiable account of the purpose of a corporation.

Reviews

'Sam Mansell has produced a fine critical analysis of stakeholder theory. He is both a skeptical and a sympathetic critic, a difficult road to follow, yet the results are a fine example of how to give the best possible interpretation of a position, before one begins to criticize it … Mansell’s critique has the potential to make stakeholder theory better and stronger.'

R. Edward Freeman - University of Virginia, from the Foreword

'Mansell offers a thorough but highly readable, a close but wide ranging, and a sympathetic but ultimately critical account of stakeholder theory which renews key debates about the corporation and its objectives.'

Jeremy Moon - International Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility, Nottingham University Business School

'Samuel Mansell tackles a central aspect of the currently fashionable discourse of social responsibility in relation to theories of social contract and justice by interrogating the principles of social justice and fairness that lie underneath the rhetoric of free markets. His careful analysis is required reading for those who want to go beyond the PR sloganizing and tick-box compliance into a re-evaluation of market principles in the democratic society.'

David Weir - Head, School of Business, Leadership and Enterprise, University Campus Suffolk

'Samuel Mansell develops a sustained critique of stakeholder conceptions of the corporation, demonstrating their fundamental incoherence. What makes this book stand out, apart from its rigour and its dispassionate fairness, is its author’s notable philosophical sophistication and, what is even rarer, his historical literacy. These between them allow him (in particular) to subvert the ‘social contract’ fictions on which CSR and stakeholder doctrines rely, without however suggesting that shareholder conceptions are unproblematic, or that there are plausible ‘critical’ alternatives.'

Harro Hopfl - Essex Business School

‘The book should be essential reading not only for those interested in the theory and practice of business administration, but also for political philosophers at large.’

Agustín José Menéndez Source: Political Studies Review

‘A necessary read for scholars interested in the corporate purpose debate … It builds on a wide range of philosophical sources that underpin stakeholder theory or capitalist thinking … [and] takes this debate forward in a significant manner.’

Sébastien Mena Source: Organization Studies

Refine List

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

Contents

Contents
References

References

Agle, B. and Agle, L. 2007. The stated objectives of the Fortune 500: Examining the philosophical approaches that drive America's largest firms. Unpublished Working Paper, University of Pittsburgh
Agle, B. and Mitchell, R. 2008. Introduction: Recent research and new questions, in Agle, B., Donaldson, T., Freeman, R., Jensen, M., Mitchell, R., and Wood, D. (eds.) Dialogue: Toward superior stakeholder theory, Business Ethics Quarterly 18(2): 153–90
Alborn, T. 1998. Conceiving Companies: Joint-Stock Politics in Victorian England. London, Routledge
Alchian, A. and Demsetz, H. 1972. Production, information costs, and economic organization, American Economic Review 61(2): 380–7
Bainbridge, S. 1993. In defense of the shareholder wealth maximization norm: A reply to Professor Green, Washington and Lee Law Review 50(3): 1423–48
Bakan, J. 2004. The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power. London, Constable
Becker, L. 1977. Property Rights: Philosophic Foundations. Boston, Routledge and Kegan Paul
Becker, L. 1992. Places for pluralism, Ethics 102(4): 707–19
Berle, A. and Means, G. 1932. The Modern Corporation and Private Property. New York, Macmillan
Blair, M. 1995.Ownership and Control: Rethinking Corporate Governance for the Twenty-First Century. Washington, DC, The Brookings Institution
Blair, T. 1996. The Singapore speech, 7 January 1996
Boatright, J. 1994. Fiduciary duties and the shareholder–management relation: Or, what's so special about shareholders?Business Ethics Quarterly 4(4): 393–407
Bowen, H. 1953. Social Responsibilities of the Businessman. New York, Harper and Brothers
Bowie, N. 2012. Stakeholder theory: The state of the art, in Book Reviews, Business Ethics Quarterly 22(1): 179–98
British Broadcasting Corporation 2006. Today, British Broadcasting Corporation (broadcast on BBC Radio 4 on Thursday 5 January 2006)
Burton, B. and Dunn, C. 1996. Feminist ethics as moral grounding for stakeholder theory, Business Ethics Quarterly 6(2): 133–47
Callinicos, A. 2003. An Anti-Capitalist Manifesto. Cambridge, Polity Press
Campbell, R. and Kitson, A. 2008. The Ethical Organisation. 2nd edn. Hampshire, Palgrave Macmillan
Carroll, A. 1999. Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct, Business and Society 38(3): 268–95
Child, J. and Marcoux, A. 1999. Freeman and Evan: Stakeholder theory in the original position, Business Ethics Quarterly (9)2: 207–23
Clarke, R. and McGuinness, T. 1987. Introduction, in Clarke, R. and McGuinness, T. (eds.) The Economics of the Firm. Oxford, Blackwell
Coase, R. 1937. The nature of the firm, Economica 4(16): 386–405
Commission of the European Communities 2001. Green Paper ‘Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility’. COM (2001) 366 final, Brussels
Conry, E. 1995. A critique of social contracts for business, Business Ethics Quarterly 5(2): 187–212
Corporate Watch 2006. What's Wrong with Corporate Social Responsibility?London, Corporate Watch
Cragg, W. 2002. Business ethics and stakeholder theory, Business Ethics Quarterly 12(2): 113–42
Crane, A., Matten, D. and Moon, J. 2008. Corporations and Citizenship. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
Cranston, M. 1968. Introduction, in Rousseau, J. and Cranston, M. (trans.) The Social Contract. London, Penguin Books, pp. 9–43
Cruver, B. 2003. Enron: Anatomy of Greed – The Unshredded Truth from an Enron Insider. London, Arrow Books
Darwall, S. 1998. Philosophical Ethics: An Historical and Contemporary Introduction. Boulder, CO, Westview
Dembinski, P. 2009. Finance: Servant or Deceiver? Financialization at the Crossroads. Cook, K. (trans.) Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan
Department for Trade and Industry 2000. Modern company law review for a competitive economy. Consultation Documents, March and November
Dine, J. and Koutsias, M. 2007. Company Law. 6th edn. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan
Donaldson, T. 1982. Corporations and Morality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall
Donaldson, T. 1999. Response: Making stakeholder theory whole, Academy of Management Review 24(2): 237–41
Donaldson, T. and Dunfee, T. 1994. Toward a unified conception of business ethics: Integrative social contracts theory, Academy of Management Review 19(2): 252–84
Donaldson, T. and Dunfee, T. 1995. Integrative social contracts theory: A communitarian conception of economic ethics, Economics and Philosophy 11(1): 85–112
Donaldson, T. and Dunfee, T. 1999. Ties That Bind: A Social Contracts Approach to Business Ethics. Boston, Harvard Business School Press
Donaldson, T. and Preston, L. 1995. The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications, Academy of Management Review 20(1): 65–91
Etzioni, A. 1998. A communitarian note on stakeholder theory, Business Ethics Quarterly 8(4): 679–91
Evans, F. 1908. Evolution of the English joint stock limited trading company (I), Columbia Law Review 8(5): 339–61
Freeman, R. 1984. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. London, Pitman
Freeman, R. 1994. The politics of stakeholder theory: Some future directions, Business Ethics Quarterly 4(4): 409–21
Freeman, R. 1999. Response: Divergent stakeholder theory, Academy of Management Review 24(2): 233–6
Freeman, R. 2008. Ending the so-called ‘Friedman–Freeman’ Debate, in Agle, B., Donaldson, T., Freeman, R., Jensen, M., Mitchell, R., and Wood, D. Dialogue: Toward superior stakeholder theory, Business Ethics Quarterly 18(2): 153–90
Freeman, R. and Evan, W. 1990. Corporate governance: A stakeholder interpretation, Journal of Behavioural Economics 19(4): 337–60
Freeman, R. and Phillips, R. 2002. Stakeholder theory: A libertarian defence, Business Ethics Quarterly 12(3): 331–49
Freeman, R., Wicks, A., and Parmar, B. 2004. Stakeholder theory and ‘the corporate objective revisited’, Organization Science 15(3): 364–9
Freeman, R., Harrison, J., and Wicks, A. 2007. Managing for Stakeholders: Survival, Reputation, and Success. New Haven and London, Yale University Press
Freeman, R., Harrison, J., Wicks, A., Parmar, B., and de Colle, S. 2010. Stakeholder Theory: The State of the Art. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
Friedman, A. and Miles, S. 2006. Stakeholders: Theory and Practice. Oxford, Oxford University Press
Friedman, M. 1962. Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago, The University of Chicago Press
Friedman, M. 13 September 1970. The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine. Online at: www.colorado.edu/studentgroups/libertarians/issues/friedman-socresp-business.html. Accessed 20 August 2012
Garriga, E. and Melé, D. 2004. Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory, Journal of Business Ethics 53: 51–71
Goodpaster, K. 1991. Business ethics and stakeholder analysis, Business Ethics Quarterly 1(1): 53–73
Graafland, J., Eiffinger, S. and Smid, H. 2004. Benchmarking of corporate social responsibility: Methodological problems and robustness, Journal of Business Ethics 53(1–2): 137–52
Gregor, M. 1996. Translator's note on the text, in Kant, I. and Gregor, M. (trans.) The Metaphysics of Morals. Cambridge University Press, pp. xxxii–xxxvi
Hayek, F. 1982. Law, Legislation and Liberty. London, Routledge
Hayek, F. 1988. The Fatal Conceit: The Errors of Socialism. London, Routledge
Hare, R. 1963. A moral argument, in Rachels, J. (ed.) 1998. Ethical Theory 1: The Question of Objectivity. New York, Oxford University Press, pp. 51–7
Harris, J. and Freeman, R. 2008. The impossibility of the separation thesis: A response to Joakim Sandberg, Business Ethics Quarterly 18(4): 541–8
Hart, H. 1955. Are there any natural rights? Philosophical Review 64(2): 175–91
Henderson, D. 2001. Misguided Virtue: False Notions of Corporate Social Responsibility. London, The Institute of Economic Affairs
Heugens, P., van Oosterhout, J. and Kaptein, M. 2006. Foundations and applications for contractualist business ethics, Journal of Business Ethics 68(3): 211–28
Hobbes, T. 1651/1996. Leviathan. Oxford, Oxford University Press
Hodapp, P. 1990. Can there be a social contract with business?Journal of Business Ethics 9(2): 127–31
Honoré, A. 1961. Ownership, in Guest, A. (ed.) Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence. Oxford, Clarendon Press, pp. 107–47
Höpfl, H. and Thompson, M. 1979. The history of contract as a motif in political thought, The American Historical Review 84(4): 919–44
Höpfl, H. 2008. The Critical Issue of Accountability, in Boje, D. (ed.) Critical Theory Ethics for Business and Public Administration. Charlotte, NC, Information Age Publishing
Hunt, B. 1935. The joint-stock company in England, 1800–1825, Journal of Political Economy 43(1): 1–33
Hutton, W. 1997. Stakeholding and Its Critics. London, IEA Health and Welfare Unit
Jackson, K. 1993. Global distributive justice and the corporate duty to aid, Journal of Business Ethics 12(7): 547–51
Jensen, M. 2001. Value maximisation, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Unpublished Working Paper, Harvard Business School
Jensen, M. 2002. Value maximisation, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function, Business Ethics Quarterly 12(2): 235–56
Jensen, M. 2008. Non-rational behaviour, value conflicts, stakeholder theory, and firm behaviour, in Agle, B., T. Donaldson, R. Freeman, M. Jensen, R. Mitchell, and D. Wood, Dialogue: Toward superior stakeholder theory, Business Ethics Quarterly 18(2): 153–90
Jensen, M. and MecklingW. 1976. Theory of the firm: Managerial behaviour, agency costs and ownership structure, Journal of Financial Economics 3(4): 305–60
Jones, C., Parker, M. and ten Bos, R. 2005. For Business Ethics. London, Routledge
Jones, P. 1994. Rights. Basingstoke, Palgrave
Jones, T. and Wicks, A. 1999. Letter to AMR regarding ‘convergent stakeholder theory’, Academy of Management Review 24(4): 621–3
Kaler, J. 2002. Morality and strategy in stakeholder identification, Journal of Business Ethics 39: 91–9
Kaler, J. 2003. Differentiating stakeholder theories, Journal of Business Ethics 46(1): 71–83
Kaler, J. 2006. Evaluating stakeholder theory, Journal of Business Ethics 69(3): 249–68
Kant, I. 1793/1991. On the common saying: ‘This may be true in theory, but it does not apply in practice’, in Kant, I. and Reiss, H. (ed.) Political Writings. 2nd edn. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 61–92
Kant, I. 1797/1996. The Metaphysics of Morals. Gregor, M. (trans.) Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
Keeley, M. 1995. Continuing the social contract tradition, Business Ethics Quarterly 5(2): 241–56
Laplume, A., Sonpar, K., and Litz, R. 2008 Stakeholder theory: Reviewing a theory that moves us, Journal of Management 34(6): 1152–89
Lea, D. 2004. The imperfect nature of corporate responsibilities to stakeholders, Business Ethics Quarterly 14(2): 201–17
Locke, J. 1689/1988. Two Treatises of Government. Student edn. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
Long, R. 2006. Realism and abstraction in economics: Aristotle and Mises versus Friedman, Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics 9(3): 3–23
Mackie, J. 1977. The subjectivity of values, in Rachels, J. (ed.) 1998. Ethical Theory 1: The Question of Objectivity. New York, Oxford University Press, 58–84
Mansell, S. 2010. Business ethics and the question of objectivity: The concept of moral progress in a dialectical framework, in Muhr, S., Sørensen, B. and Vallentin, S. (eds.) Ethics and Organizational Practice: Questioning the Moral Foundations of Management. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, pp. 101–20
Marcoux, A. 2003. A fiduciary argument against stakeholder theory, Business Ethics Quarterly 13(1): 1–24
Marx, K. 1847/1955. The Poverty of Philosophy. Quelch, H. (trans.) London, Martin Lawrence
Marx, K. 1867/1976. Capital: Volume1. Fowkes, B. (trans.) London, Penguin Books
Marx, K. 1867/1995. Capital: A New Abridgement. McLellan, D. (ed.) Oxford, Oxford University Press
McLean, B. and Elkind, P. 2004. The Smartest Guys in the Room: The Amazing Rise and Scandalous Fall of Enron. New York, Penguin Books
McMahon, C. 1995. The political theory of organizations and business ethics, Philosophy and Public Affairs 24(4): 292–313
McNulty, M. 1975. A question of managerial legitimacy, Academy of Management Journal 18(3): 579–88
Mill, J. 1859/1991. On liberty, in Mill, J. and Gray, J. (ed.) On Liberty and Other Essays. Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 5–128
Mill, J. 1861/1991. Utilitarianism, in Mill, J. and Gray, J. (ed.) On Liberty and Other Essays. Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 129–201
Mitchell, A. and Sikka, P. 2005. Taming the Corporations. Essex, Association for Accountancy & Business Affairs
Mitchell, R. 1986. Corporate power, legitimacy, and social policy, Western Political Quarterly 39(2): 197–212
Mitchell, R., Agle, B. and Wood, D. 1997. Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts, Academy of Management Review 22(4): 853–86
Moir, L. 2001. What do we mean by corporate social responsibility?Corporate Governance 1(2): 16–22
Moriarty, J. 2005. On the relevance of political philosophy to business ethics, Business Ethics Quarterly 15(3): 455–73
Munzer, S. 1990. A Theory of Property. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
Nagel, T. 1980. Value, in Rachels, J. (ed.) 1998. Ethical Theory 1: The Question of Objectivity. New York, Oxford University Press, 109–24
Nozick, R. 1974. Anarchy, State and Utopia. Oxford, Blackwell
Oakeshott, M. 2006. Lectures in the History of Political Thought. Exeter, Imprint Academic
Online Etymology Dictionary 2001. Online at: www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=stake&searchmode=none. Accessed 8 January 2009
Oxford English Dictionary Online 2000. 2nd edn. Online at: http://0-dictionary.oed.com.serlib0.essex.ac.uk/entrance.dtl. Accessed 8 January 2009
Parker, M. 2002. Against Management. Cambridge, Polity Press
Phillips, R. 1997. Stakeholder theory and a principle of fairness, Business Ethics Quarterly 7(1): 51–66
Phillips, R. 2003. Stakeholder Theory and Organizational Ethics. San Francisco, Berret-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Phillips, R. and Margolis, J. 1999. Toward an ethics of organizations, Business Ethics Quarterly 9(4): 619–38
Plato. 1994. Republic. Waterfield, R. (trans.) Oxford, Oxford University Press
Porter, M. and Kramer, M. 2002. The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy, Harvard Business Review 80(12): 56–69
Public Relations Unit, European Court of Human Rights 2012. The ECHR in 50 Questions. Online at: www.echr.coe.int/NR/rdonlyres/5C53ADA4-80F8-42CB-B8BD-CBBB781F42C8/0/FAQ_ENG_JANV2012.pdf. Accessed 20 August 2012
Putterman, L. and Kroszner, R. 1996. The economic nature of the firm: A new introduction, in Putterman, L. and Kroszner, R. (eds.) The Economic Nature of the Firm: A Reader. Cambridge and New York, Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–34
Rachels, J. (ed.) 1998. Ethical Theory 1: The Question of Objectivity. New York, Oxford University Press
Rawls, J. 1999. A Theory of Justice. Revised edn. Oxford, Oxford University Press
Reynolds, M. and Yuthas, K. 2008. Moral discourse and corporate social responsibility reporting, Journal of Business Ethics 78(1/2): 47–64
Roberts, J. 2003. The manufacture of corporate social responsibility: Constructing corporate sensibility, Organization 10(3): 249–65
Rothbard, M. 1982. The Ethics of Liberty. New York, New York University Press
Rousseau, J. 1762/1968. The Social Contract. Cranston, M. (trans.) London, Penguin Books
Russell, B. 1935. Science and ethics, in Rachels, J. (ed.) 1998. Ethical Theory 1: The Question of Objectivity. New York, Oxford University Press, 19–27
Sacconi, L. 2004. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) as a Model of ‘Extended’ Corporate Governance. An Explanation Based on the Economic Theories of Social Contract, Reputation and Reciprocal Conformism. Liuc Papers n. 142, Serie Etica, Diritto edn. Economica 10
Sacconi, L. 2006. A social contract account for CSR as an extended model of corporate governance (I): Rational bargaining and justification, Journal of Business Ethics 68(3): 259–81
Scherer, G. and Palazzo, G. 2007. Toward a political conception of corporate responsibility: Business and society seen from a Habermasian perspective, Academy of Management Review 32(4): 1096–1120
Scherer, G. and Palazzo, G. 2011. The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy, Journal of Management Studies 48(4): 899–931
Singer, P. (ed.) 1990. A Companion to Ethics. Oxford, Blackwell
Skinner, Q. 1989. The state, in Goodin, R. and Pettit, P. (eds.) 1997. Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Anthology. Oxford, Blackwell, pp. 3–26
Skinner, Q. 2009. A genealogy of the modern state, Proceedings of the British Academy 162: 325–70
Slinger, G. 1999. Essays on stakeholding, PhD dissertation, Department of Applied Economics, University ofCambridge
Smith, A. 1776/1970. The Wealth of Nations: Books I–III. London, Penguin Books
Smith, R. 2009. Human rights in international law, in Goodhart, M. (ed.) Human Rights: Politics and Practice. New York, Oxford University Press, pp. 26–44
Smith, T. 1999. The efficient norm for corporate law: A neo-traditional interpretation of fiduciary duty, Michigan Law Review 98(1): 214–68
Solomon, R. 1999. Business ethics and virtue, in Frederick, R. (ed.) A Companion to Business Ethics. Maldon, MA, Blackwell, pp. 30–7
Sternberg, E. 2000. Just Business: Business Ethics in Action. 2nd edn. Oxford, Oxford University Press
Sternberg, E. 2004. Corporate Governance: Accountability in the Marketplace. London, Institute of Economic Affairs
Stevenson, C. 1963. The nature of ethical disagreement, in Rachels, J.(ed.) 1998. Ethical Theory 1: The Question of Objectivity. New York, Oxford University Press, 43–50
Stewart, R., Allen, J., and Cavender, J. 1963 The Strategic Plan. Research Report 168, Stanford Research Institute, Long Range Planning Service, Industrial Economics Division
Strong, N. and Waterson, M. 1987. Principals, agents and information, in Clarke, R. and McGuiness, T. (eds.) The Economics of the Firm. Oxford, Blackwell, pp. 18–41
Sundaram, A. and Inkpen, A. 2004. The corporate objective revisited, Organization Science 15(3): 350–63
Tax Justice Network 2005. Tax Us if You Can: The True Story of a Global Failure. London, Tax Justice Network
Tencanti, A., Perrini, F., and Pogutz, S. 2004. New tools to foster corporate socially responsible behaviour, Journal of Business Ethics 53(1/2): 173–90
Toenjes, R. 2002. Why be moral in business? A Rawlsian approach to moral motivation, Business Ethics Quarterly 12(1): 57–72
Van Buren, H., III 2001. If fairness is the problem, is consent the solution? Integrating ISCT and stakeholder theory, Business Ethics Quarterly 11(3): 481–99
Velamuri, S. and Venkataraman, S. 2005. Why stakeholder and stockholder theories are not necessarily contradictory: A Knightian insight, Journal of Business Ethics 61(3): 249–62
Weale, A. 2007. Democracy. 2nd edn. Basingstoke, Palgrave
Wijnberg, N. 2000. Normative stakeholder theory and Aristotle: The link between ethics and politics, Journal of Business Ethics 25(4): 329–42
Williamson, O. 1975. Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. New York, Free Press
Williamson, O. 1985. The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. New York, Free Press
Williston, S. 1888. History of the law of business corporations before 1800 (I), Harvard Law Review 2(3): 105–24
World Business Council for Sustainable Development 1999. Corporate social responsibility: Meeting changing expectations. Online at: www.wbcsd.org.

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Book summary page views

Total views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between #date#. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.