Open Journal Systems

A logical response to corporate social responsibility

Robert Kowalski

Article ID: 43
Vol 1, Issue 2, 2016, Article identifier:

VIEWS - 1011 (Abstract) 739 (PDF)

Abstract

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is argued to be a flawed concept in the same way as sustainable development in that it seeks to combine two aspects which are incommensurable. Nevertheless CSR contains an expanding space for social and environmental concerns under the guise of stakeholder management which undoubtedly influences the commercial bottom line. It is proposed that the concept of corporate citizenship is separated from what is now termed corporate social responsiveness to encompass truly ethical and normative considerations which in business should be manifested by a wholehearted acceptance of the need for regulation, lobbying for the universality of that regulation and an avoidance of undue influence on government. Proper roles for the three partners in society, namely government, commerce and civil society are explored together with the nature of citizenship.

Keywords

corporate citizenship, environmental sustainability, ethics, oxymoron, stakeholder management

Full Text:

PDF



References

1. Balcerowicz L, 2013, The post-socialist transition in a comparative perspective: the lessons. Proceedings of the 19th International Farm Management Congress Vol.3,: Transforming Agriculture — Between Policy, Science and the Consumer, July 21–26, 2013, Warsaw, Poland.

2. Barque C, 1993, The End of Economics?. London: Zed Books.

3. Bauman Z, 2000, Liquid Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.

4. Bendell J, (eds) 2000a, Civil regulation: a new form of democratic governance for the global economy?, in Terms for Endearment. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing Limited, 239–254.

5. Bendell J, (ed) 2000b, Introduction: working with stakeholder pressure for sustainable development. in Terms for Endearment. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing Limited, 14–29.

6. Bichler S and Nitzan J, 2012, Capital as power: toward a new cosmology of capitalism. Real-World Economics Review, vol.61: 65–84.

7. Brinkerhoff J M, 2002, Partnership for International Development: Rhetoric or Results? Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.

8. Browne J, Nuttall R and Stadlen T, 2015, Connect – How Companies Succeed by Engaging Radically With Society, London: Virgin Books.

9. Carroll A B, 1991, The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, vol.34(4): 39–48.

10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G.

11. Carroll A B, 1999, Corporate social responsibility: evolution of a definitional construct. Business and Society, vol.38(3): 268–295. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/000765039903800303.

12. Contu A and Girei E, 2013, NGOs management and the value of ‘partnerships’ for equality in international development: what’s in a name?. Human Relations, vol.67(2): 205–232.

13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0018726713489999.

14. Craig Smith N, 2003, Corporate social responsibility: not whether, but how?, in London Business School, Centre for Marketing Working Paper, 03–701.

15. Crewe E and Harrison E, 1998, Whose Development? An Ethnography of Aid. London: Zed Books.

16. Dahlsrud A, 2008, How corporate social responsibility is defined: an analysis of 37 definitions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, vol.15(1): 1–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/csr.132.

17. Donaldson T, 1982, Corporations and Morality, Philosophy Documentation Center, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

18. Douthwaite R, (eds) 1999, Is it possible to build a sustainable world?, in Critical Development Theory. Dhaka: The University Press, 157–177.

19. Drucker P F, 1984, The new meaning of corporate social responsibility. California Management Review, vol.58(2): 53–63.

20. Eriksson M B, 2005, The Paternalism of Partnership. London: Zed Books.

21. Espejo R, 2004, The footprint of complexity: the embodiment of social systems. Kybernetes, vol.33(3/4): 671–700.

22. Esteva G and Prakash M S, 1998, Beyond development, what?. Development in Practice, vol.8(3): 280–296. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09614529853585.

23. European Commission, 2006, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), viewed October 11, 2004,

24. European Commission, 2006, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), viewed October 11, 2004,

25.

26. Friedman M, 1962, Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

27. Friedman M, 1970, The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. Corporate Ethics and Corporate Governance, 173–178.

28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70818-6_14.

29. Hamann R and Acutt N, 2003, How should civil society (and the government) respond to ‘corporate social responsibility’? A critique of business motivations and the potential for partnerships. Development Southern Africa, vol.20(2): 255–270. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03768350302956.

30. Hardin G, 1973, Exploring New Ethics for Survival: The Voyage of the Spaceship Beagle. New York: Pelican Books.

31. Harvey D, 2011, The Enigma of Capital and the Crises of Capitalism. London: Profile Books.

32. Hillman A J and Keim G D, 2001, Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: what’s the bottom line?. Strategic Management Journal, vol.22(2): 125–139.

33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1097-0266(200101)22:2<125::AID-SMJ150>3.0.CO;2-H.

34. Korten D C, 2006, From empire to earth community, in The Great Turning. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.

35. Kowalski R, (eds) 2010, Stakeholder conflict: a case study of the African cherry: Prunus Africana, in Construction Stakeholder Management. London: Blackwell-Wiley, 354–355.

36. Kowalski R, 2013, Sense and sustainability — the paradoxes that sustain. World Futures: The Journal of New Paradigm Research, vol.69(2): 75–88.

37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02604027.2012.762199.

38. Kowalski R, 2014, Paradox in the Contrivance of Human Development. New York: iUniverse.

39. Latouche S, 2003, Sustainable development as a paradox. Paper given at a Symposium of the Religion, Science and the Environment Movement on the Baltic Sea, viewed August 4, 2004.

40. Lee M P, 2008, A review of the theories of corporate social responsibility: its evolutionary path and the road ahead. International Journal of Management Reviews, vol.10(1): 53–73.

41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00226.x.

42. Mayers J and Vermeulen S, 2002, An international review with proposals for improving forests, enterprise and livelihoods, in Company-Community Forestry Partnerships: From Raw Deals to Mutual Gains?. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.

43. McWilliams A, Siegel D S and Wright P M, 2006, Corporate social responsibility: strategic implications. Journal of Management Studies, vol.43(1): 1–18.

44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00580.x.

45. Meppem A and Bourke S, 1999, Different ways of knowing: a communicative turn toward sustainability. Ecological Economics, vol.30(3), 389–404.

46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00053-1.

47. Meppem A and Gill R, 1998, Planning for sustainability as a learning concept. Ecological Economics, vol.26(2): 121–137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(97)00117-1.

48. Miller D and Sklair L, 2010, Capitalist globalization, corporate social responsibility and social policy. Critical Social Policy, vol.30(4): 472–495. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0261018310376804.

49. Murphy D F and Coleman G, (eds) 2000, Thinking partners: business, NGOs and the partnership concept, in Terms for Endearment. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing Limited, 207–215.

50. Nalband N A and Al Kelabi S, 2014, Redesigning Carroll’s CSR pyramid model. Journal of Advanced Management Science, vol.2(3): 236–239.

51. http://dx.doi.org/10.12720/joams.2.3.236-239.

52. Newell P, (ed) 2000, Globalisation and the new politics of sustainable development, in Terms for Endearment. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing Limited, 31–39.

53. O’Connor J, 1998, Essays in ecological Marxism, in Natural Causes. New York: The Guildford Press.

54. Orr D W, 2004, Earth in Mind: On Education, Environment, and the Human Prospect. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

55. Parguel B, Benoît-Moreau F and Larceneux F, 2011, How sustainability ratings might deter “greenwashing”: a closer look at ethical corporate communication. Journal of Business Ethics, vol.102(1): 15–28.

56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0901-2.

57. Pieterse J N, (ed) 1999, Critical Holism and the Tao of development, in Critical Development Theory. Dhaka: The University Press, 63–88.

58. Ramus C A and Montiel I, 2005, When are corporate environmental policies a form of greenwashing?. Business and Society, vol.44(4): 377–414.

59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0007650305278120.

60. Rodrik D, 2011, The Globalization Paradox: Why Global Markets, States and Democracy Can’t Coexist, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

61. Shultz H and Smith O C, 2001, Starbucks Coffee Company: Corporate Social Responsibility Annual Report. USA: Starbucks.

62. Sklair L and Miller D, 2010, Capitalist globalization, corporate social responsibility and social policy, viewed January 1, 2016,

63. Sullivan R and Warner M, (eds) 2004, Introduction, in Putting Partnerships to Work. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing Ltd, 12–23.

64. UNRISD (United Nations Research Institute for Social Development), 1995, States of Disarray: The Social Effects of Globalization. Geneva: UNRISD.

65. Visvanathan S, 1991, Mrs. Brundtland’s disenchanted cosmos. Alternatives, vol.16(3): 377–384. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/030437549101600306.

66. Vogel D, 2005, The Market for Virtue: The Potential and Limits of Corporate Social Responsibility. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.

67. Warhurst A, 2005, Future roles of business in society: the expanding boundaries of corporate responsibility and a compelling case for partnership. Futures, vol.37(2–3): 151–168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2004.03.033.

68. Williams H, 1996, The Essence of Managing Groups and Teams. London: Prentice Hall.

69. Žižek S, 2002, Looking Awry: An Introduction to Jacques Lacan Through Popular Culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.


DOI: https://doi.org/10.18063/ESP.2016.02.001
(1011 Abstract Views, 739 PDF Downloads)

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2016 Robert Kowalski

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.