European Commission companies Integrates: Environmental Dimensions

• deals with the fragility of ecological and biophysical systems, and their
• Social Concerns. problem that affects many people within a society. It different functions, under a hazardous condition, to suffer damage and
is a group of common problems in present-day society and ones that deterioration.
many people strive to solve.
• Environmental Concerns. are the harmful effects of human activities on Corporate Social Responsibility models
the environment. These include pollution, overpopulation, waste • Corporate social performance
disposal, climate change, global warming, the greenhouse effect, e Sethi (1975: 58) argued that the phrase Corporate Social Responsibility
• Business Operations. everything that happens within a company to keep has lost its meaning and ‘it has come to mean all things to all people’.
it running and earning money.
Pyramid of social responsibility
• Stockholders. shareholder of a company or an individual that owns at Carroll (1991) characterized the firm’s Corporate Social Responsibility in ways
least one share of an organization's capital stock. Stockholders are that might be useful to executives who wish to reconcile their obligations to their
mostly the owner of the company and generally acquire the company's shareholders with those to other competing groups claiming legitimacy.
accomplishment in the form of increased stock valuation.
• He devised a pyramid with four categories, namely economic, legal,
ethical and philanthropic responsibilities (Carroll, 1991).
According to Carroll
The MEASUREMENTS OF Corporate Social Responsibility
• the first and foremost responsibility of business is to produce and sell
CSR its measurement… goods and services that society wants, and to generate profits out of
connect the value of your activities toyour company’s bottom line. them. This is the economic responsibility of business.
• Benchmarking. is a process of measuring the performance of a • The second responsibility of business is to obey the law; according to
company's products, services, or processes against those of another this rule society expects that business should achieve its economic
business considered to be the best in the industry, goals within the legal framework laid down by the society’s legal
system.
• Key Performance Indicators. Measure a company's success versus a set
of targets, objectives, or industry peers. • The third responsibility represented by Carroll is ‘ethical
responsibility’, which expects business to go beyond its legal
responsibilities and adopt those norms and behaviors that are expected
by society but are not required by law.
KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
Performance variables and indicators • The fourth responsibility discussed by Carroll is the philanthropic
• Employee Perspectives responsibility, such as making charitable contributions, making
• Health and Security contributions to society and community welfare
• Diversity Supportive Ratio
• Respect Ratio The business ethics theory
• Satisfaction Ratio • Changing and emerging social responsiveness
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Social Dimensions
• Quantity of Waste
• Efficiency in Energy Use
• Eternal or intrinsic ethical values
• Social Policies Followed • Corporate citizenship i.e. corporation as better citizen
• Social Contribution
• Strategic Partners The Shareholder Value Theory
• Responsibility Percentage • Hayek (neoclassical economist )
• Time Spent in Volunteering • - function of business is doing business that contributes to society and
• Management Perspective economy
• Management Initiatives
• - function must not be confused with other social functions
RECOGNIZED INDUSTRY STANDARDS
• Recognition Initiatives
• Recognition Achieved Corporate Social Responsibility theories
• Effectiveness in Communication
• Number of Social Activities Stakeholder theory is wrapped up in a general theory of the company as having a
• Number of Community Members Reached wider range of responsibilities to a broad range of stakeholders rather than simply
• Total Impact exercising its duty to its shareholders.
• Stakeholder theory plays an important role in understanding the
Sustainable development goals. Also known as the Global Goals, were adopted by relationship that exists between business and society.
the United Nations in 2015 as a universal call to action to end poverty, protect the
planet, and ensure that by 2030 all people enjoy peace and prosperity.
• Gray, Owen and Adams define a stakeholder as: Any human agency
that can be influenced by, or can itself influence, the activities of the
organization in question.
1. No Poverty
2. Zero Hunger
Two types of stakeholders
3. Good Health and well-being
4. Quality Education • Primary stakeholders can have a direct impact on the business and its
5. Gender Equality activities. They are driven by the market (employees, competitors,
6. Clean water and sanitation customers, suppliers, stockholders, creditors).
7. Affordable and clean energy • Secondary stakeholders are those groups of stakeholders who are
8. Decent work and economic Growth directly or indirectly influenced by the secondary impact and
9. Industry innovation and infrastructure involvement of a company’s activities (local communities, media,
10. reduced inequalities public) (Post et al, 1996).
11. Sustainable cities and communities This theory highlights that an organization can have many different stakeholders,
12. Responsible consumption andProduction such as employees, customers, the government, communities, suppliers,
13. Climate Action competitors, shareholders etc.
14. Life below water
15. Life on Land Stakeholder theory provides a system-based view of an organization and its
16. peace, justice and strong institution environment that makes a distinction between two variants.
17. Partnership for the Goals • The first variant looks at the complex relationship that exists between
business and society and how business and society interact with each
other by considering the responsibility and accountability of the
EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT REVENUE & EFFICIENCY business towards its stakeholders.
• The second variant is linked with ‘empirical accountability’ where
Economic Dimensions. stakeholders are identified by the organisation itself rather than society
1. may endear business scholars and practitioners. Handles all economic as suggested by the accountability framework
outputs/externalities of the event firm and the individual event.
Triple bottom line. Legitimacy theory
• by Carroll, 1991, the triple bottom line (abbreviated as TBL or 3BL, and Legitimacy theory is a development on the second variant of the stakeholder
also known as ‘people, planet, profit’) captures an expanded spectrum of theory.
values and criteria for measuring organizational (and societal) success: • Many companies use this theory as a motivation to report on their social
economic, ecological and social. and environmental activities.
• triple bottom line accounting means expanding the traditional reporting • According to this theory an organization can only continue to exist if
framework to take into account ecological and social performance in the society in which it operates scrutinizes that it is behaving adequately
addition to financial performance. according to the values that society holds (Gray, Owen and Adams,
• The phrase ‘triple bottom line’ was coined by John Elkington in 1996).
1994. It was later expanded and articulated in his 1998 book Cannibals • Legitimacy is a generalized perception or assumption that the actions
with Forks: the Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. of an entity are desirable, proper, or appropriate within some socially
Social Dimensions constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and definitions.
• the characteristics of the context that affect how language is used
• includes the problem of public health, human rights and equal Political economy theory
opportunities, job training and education, community issues, public Political economy theory is another important theory that is used by companies as
debate, social justice, workplace condition, workplace safety a motivational tool to report on their Corporate Social Responsibility activities.
 • According to Gray, Owen and Adams: The political economy is the
social, political and economic framework within which human life takes
place.(Gray, Owen and Adams, 1996: 47)
• This theory also consists of two variants – the ‘classical’ variant and the
‘bourgeois’. The classical variant provides a direct insight into the
mandatory disclosure rules that are imposed by the government and
enables stakeholders to understand general trends in CSR.
• According to Gray, Owen and Adams (1996) the bourgeois variant is
more helpful in understanding why companies would not disclose
information about their CSR activities.
• The main difference between the two variants as highlighted by Gray,
Owen and Adams (1996) is that classical political economy includes
structural conflict, inequality and the role of the government in the
analysis, whereas bourgeois political economy takes such things as given
and excludes them from the issue.
MODEL OF CSR
Ethical Responsibilities Carroll Pyramid for CSR
Philanthropic responsibilities. .Be good corporate citizen
Legal Responsibilities. Obey the law/ law is society’s codification of right and
wrong
Economic Responsibilities. Be profitable or the foundation upon which all others
rest
Ethical Responsibilities. Obligation to do, what is right and fair, avoid harm
CSR was divided into 6 Models
• Vision and Mission
• Stakeholder
• Work
• Market
• Environment
• Accountability
Chapter 1: Strategic Policy vision for corporate Social Responsibility
CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY REFERENCE FRAMEWORK
The Green Papers "Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social
Responsibility" (2001) and the subsequent "Communication Concerning Social
Responsibility: A Business Contribution to Sustainable Development" (2002)
published by the European Commission have undoubtedly become the yardsticks for
approaching this topic.
The Final Declaration of the Lisbon European Council (March 2000) states: by
2010, "to become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in
the world, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and
greater social cohesions."
The European Commission (2001) defines CSR as a "concept whereby companies
integrate social and environmental concerns in their business operations and in their
interaction with stockholders on a voluntary basis."
• The Commission tackles this topic with two aspects: the "what" and the
"how." The "what," emphasizes the fact that companies should make
social and environmental commitments in their actions; and for the
"how," it stresses the voluntary nature of those commitments.
• In other words, we believe that the two dominant debates about CSR (the
"what" and the "how") are unresolved, and that we will waste a great deal
of energy unless we explore the "why", which can only be expressed
through the business model and the social model that provide the
framework for the CSR debate.
1.2 CSR WHERE DO WE STAND?
The CSR debate highlights the fact that, in a globalized world, it is not just products
and services that compete but also business models, management models and
governance national models.
• In the USA, the main issues regarding CSR revolve for the most part
around management in relation to the stakeholders, the establishment of
relations with the community, and business action at society, which are
frequently described as CSR because they are carried out by companies,
rather than because they affect the company's business core.
• On the other hand, in Europe, CSR tends to be linked increasingly to an
overall vision of the company, with more attention to all the processes in
which it is involved and greater sensitivity towards the political and
social context in which it operates.
• CSR is a new vision of the corporate world to society, a new relationship
between the political and business players, and the ability to develop a
shared vision about the nature of the main challenges facing our societies
in order to enable us to conceptualize that vision and that relationship.
Roome (2005) stated that, in the approach taken to CSR in every Country, several
elements were included:
1. The political and institutional structure
2. The political style and processes
3. The social structure
4. The intensity of the nature to voluntariness, as opposed to the acceptance of
regulation and government control
5. How the role of businesses is described locally and nationally
6. The role and the position of NGOs and civil society
7. The characteristics of the educational system and the values converged by it
8. What is expected of leaders
9. Historical traditions
• Infact, the most encouraging ideas on this topic came from those
companies, public institutions and research or academic institutions that
place CSR within the debate generated by the intersection between the
action (positive and negative alike) of transnational corporations, the
emergence of a global civil society and public opinion and the
reconstruction of the role of governments and their interrelationships.
• Thus, CSR no longer refers simply to the relations between business
and society, but crystallizes as a way of rethinking the role of business
in society, incorporating, as a salient feature, a perspective on
governance and sustainability. To tackle this issue we need leadership,
commitment and conviction, not only in the field of business, but also
in the political and social spheres.
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) brings us, then, to ask ourselves whether
our country is capable in its economic and social aspects, because CSR is also about
how companies and countries differentiate themselves in an interdependent world.
• Incorporating CSR into the public: economic, political, and social
agenda reminds us that neither companies nor countries are possible
without a shared vision: a shared corporate vision and a shared vision
for the country, each in its own differentiated way, because the CSR
debate is Corporate Social Responsibility and Good Governance always
a debate about the society we wish to build and how companies
contribute to the building process.
The following issues/topics that can be publicly formed and aired:
1. CSR players involved: How to develop companies" relationship with their
social environments. This means identifying and becoming better acquainted with
the various players that affect business activities or that may be affected by them.
2. CSR and partnership relations. We can infer from this the need to explore in
depth a possibility that is quite highly developed in some nations: the creation of
new forms of cooperation between businesses, public administrations and social
organizations.
• The creation of these areas of comfortable partnership proposes two
aspects:
first, that there is dialogue enabling the construction of a common vision and goals;
and
second, that each player strictly plays it own part, because fostering CSR does not
mean that businesses stop being businesses and start performing duties that do not
belong to them, nor that they should be subordinated to the demands of public
administrations or social organizations.
3. CSR and creation of social capital. As a result of the above, the possibility of
increasing the consolidation and development of social capital arises, inasmuch as
the spread of CSR- and also of partnership culture - has a strong influence on the
consolidation of the network of economic and social relations.
• However, this also imposes the need to promote an institutional network
making the importance of CSR possible and visible.
4. CSR and business discourse. CSR only makes sense if all organizations (public,
social, etc.) put their weight and assume their own social responsibilities, and if
they do them as a result of a reflection on what role they should play in the emerging
society.
• In this respect, coherently facing the challenge of CSR also constitutes
an opportunity for leadership in the business world that should not be
wasted or overlooked.
5. CSR: Innovation and coherence. CSR can become one of the courses of
business innovation and cohesion. It is impossible to develop it if it is not linked to
the corporate identity, the way of doing things that is particular to each
organization, and its culture.
6. CSR from rhetoric to good practices:
• (a) rhetoric on CSR should not (only) serve to state that there is still a
long way to go and to criticize irresponsible behavior; rather, it should
provide on opportunity to differentiate and highlight socially
responsible action (given that CSR is one of the great opportunities for
differentiation).
• (b) We must avoid the impression that companies develop CSR out of
nothing; they do it working from the basis of their own track record:
CSR is a vision that allows us to innovate, but also to strengthen, consolidate,
reinforce and indeed expound ways of operating that have come to form part of
business practice
1.4. MANAGING CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
Basically, CSR should be managed and manageable. If we had to sum up the matter
of how to manage CSR, we ought to single out three points: what topics, what
processes and how it is integrated into management.
Below is a model that divides CSR into six main areas (Figure 1.3):
1. Vision and mission: aspects related to the development of the concept of CSR,
its articulation with corporate values, the explication and formulation of those
values and how they are integrated into the strategy and governance of the
organization.
2. Stakeholders: aspects related to the interaction between the company and
society, especially through all the stakeholders who are affected by its activities.
3. Work: aspects of CSR related to the sphere of work and the quality of its
organization and development.
 3. An aspect of CSR that is concerned with what business model is proposed and
what role business firm is considered to play in society:
4. Market: aspects of CSR related to the activities of the company with regard to
products, services, and market strategies. a. Agenda
5. Environment: perhaps the area that is recognized with most consensus; it deals b. Understanding
with the impact the company's activities have on the environment. C. Vision
6. Accountability: aspects related to information, transparency, and how the d. None of the above
company accounts for itself towards society with regard to its CSR policies and e. All of the above
practices, and the channels it uses to do so."
4. According to Roome, in the approach taken to CSR in every Country, the
• To complete the model we have to take into account that, from a CSR following elements were included except:
perspective, it is necessary to develop strategies, turn them into concrete
policies and on this basis generate new practices. a. The political and institutional structure
B. The political style and processes
Corporate Social Responsibility is a process in which the most important thing is C. The social structure
the trajectory and the direction that sustain it and the ongoing commitment that gives d. None of the above
it structure. e. All of the above
• In contrast, this understanding of CSR as a learning process is what has 5. CSR refers to:
become, for many companies, a factor for innovation that has given rise a. only to the relations between business and society sustainability
to new forms of organization, new products or improvements in the
b. a way of rethinking the role of business in society C. incorporating a perspective
quality of their management. on governance and
• Corporate Social Responsibility constitutes a vision of now d. None of the above
relationships are carried on with the various players involved in business e. All of the above
activity, which include the structures and processes of the company itself.
• If CSR is important, it should be carried through to the selection, training, 6. An aspect related to the development of the concept CSR, its articulation with
communication, motivation, and reward criteria, and also to the working corporate values, of the explication and formulation of those values and how they
conditions, furthermore, it is necessary to encourage the skills and are integrated into the strategy and governance of the organization:
attitudes that are linked in each company to the development of its CSR.
a. Vision and mission
When CSR is conceived as a process, it is important to be aware that several b. Stakeholders c. Work
dimensions have to be taken into consideration: d. None of the above
e. All of the above
1. The explicit those elements that formalize and objective CSR (codes; reports,
organizational structures etc). statements, 7. An aspect related to interaction between the company and society, especially
2. The tacit: those intangible elements that make up the concrete manifestations of through all the stakeholders who are affected by its activities:
CSR in each company (organizational culture, history, leadership, etc.).
3. The negative aspects: those approaches, in any of the management areas involved a. Vision and mission b. Stakeholders
in CSR, that are characterized by emphasizing what should not happen in business c. Work d. None of the above
dealings, or should be excluded from them; and also those minimum levels that must e. All of the above
be respected by law (sanctions, prohibitions, rules of procedure, etc.).
4. The propositional aspects: those approaches, in any of the management areas 8. An aspect related to the activities of the company with regard to products,
involved in CSR, that have a component of enquiry, facilitating innovation or services, and market strategies:
improving management, and shaping new relational dimensions.
a. Vision and mission
b. Stakeholders
c. Work
TRUE OR FALSE
d. None of the above
e. All of the above
If the statement is true, write the word "TRUE"; if otherwise, write the word,
"FALSE", opposite the corresponding number.
9. An aspect related to information, transparency, and how the company accounts
for itself towards society with regard to its CSR policies and practices, and the
1. Diversity of terminologies is not only the visible aspect of many initiatives,
proposals, programs and experiences that share the same quality or respond to the channels it uses to do so:
same types of actions but also the issue of quality and actions.
a. Vision and mission b. Stakeholders
2. Corporate Social Responsibility provides an opportunity for differentiation and
c. Work d. None of the above
awareness.
e. All of the above
3. Corporate Social Responsibility is a concept whereby companies integrate
social and environmental concerns in their business operations and in their
interaction with stockholders on a voluntary basis.
4. Public space is needed to be created to share, spread and recognize significant Chapter 2: GCSR: Context Aim and Perspective
experiences of others.
5. Without a shared vision, public and indeed corporate - reflection on CSR boils THE LITERATURE ON GOVERNMENTS AND CSR: EUROPEAN
down to no more down the pragmatic results of the correlation of forces and the play FRAMEWORK
of interests.
6. CSR do not mean that businesses stopped being businesses and start performing In the European framework, the starting point is provided by the documents
duties that do not belong to them, nor that they should be subordinated to the published by the European Commission (EC):
demands of public administrations or social organizations. The Green Paper "Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social
7. The Green Papers "Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility" (European Commission, 2001) and
Responsibility" and "Communication Concerning Social Responsibility: A Business the "Commission Communication Concerning Corporate Social
Contribution to Sustainable Development" published by the European Commission Responsibility: A Business Contribution to Sustainable Development"
are the yardsticks for approaching CSR. (European Commission, 2002a).
8. This vision of CSR, at the same time synchronic and diachronic, enables us to • These two documents give us the key to understanding the role
expound on the limitations of reducing deliberation on policy and CSR to the debate governments can play in the promotion and development of CSR.
on its regulation.
9. Commitment to CSR has to be linked to economic and social development; to In June 2004, the EC also presented the Final Report of the European multi-
the generation of trust and social capital and to a certain vision of national identity. stakeholder Forum on CSR. This document establishes the recommendations
10. The explicit elements are those that formalize the objectives of CSR such as derived from the European Multi- stakeholder Forum on CSR, and serves as a
codes, reports, statements, organizational structures, etc support for the action of governments and the European Commission itself.
11. In the last decade, CSR is social action, socially responsible investment,
management by values, corporate citizenship, business ethics, the triple bottom line In March 2006, the European Commission published a new communication
and reputation. explaining a vision of CSR that is linked to sustainable economic growth, the
12. Fostering the development of CSR in a nation constitutes the articulation of competitiveness of the European economy, innovation and job.
its competitive advantage and its ethical wealth, because it explicitly gives structure
to a corporate vision and a vision for the country in the context of a globalized world. The commissions' vision is set in a new complex framework of European Union
enlargement with new patterns of business practices and initiatives.

MULTIPLE CHOICE However, other approaches predominate in the analyses of public policies and CSR
1. An aspect of CSR that is concerned with the variety of practices, measures and such as:
proposals that comes under the term CSR: (1) the analysis of public policies that governments have adopted in the framework
a. Agenda b. Understanding of CSR promotion and development; and,
c. Vision d. None of the above e. All of the above (2) the analysis of the public sector roles adopted by the governments in the
development of CSR public initiatives.
2. An aspect of CSR that is concerned with what project for society CSR conforms
to 2.2 COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN EUROPEAN FRAMEWORK
a. Agenda b. Understanding c. Vision d. None of the above AND AMERICAN FRAMEWORK
e. All of the above
From an American Point of View
The pioneering works of Aaronson and Reeves (2002 and 2002b) should be
studied.
• These authors analyzed the differences between the development and the
acceptance among European based companies on the role adopted by
European governments promoting CSR and the less favorable acceptance
to be found in the US based companies in relation to US government
initiatives.
• Both authors defend the idea that the key element in the attitude of some
of the pioneering European governments in the development of CSR is
their cooperation with certain corporations, especially in comparison
with the low level of acceptance of CSR public policies by US
companies. Aaronson and Reeves (2002a) consider that the difference
lies in the respective business cultures:
• European policymakers have taken a wide range of steps to promote
CSR. These actions contrast with the lack of policies in the USA. The
failure of American policymakers to promote CSR is surprising, because
CSR pressures sare so strong in the United States.
• European firms are comfortable working with government to improve
social conditions, and they are more more comfortable in a regulated
environment.
• European business leaders seem to believe that CSR policies can help
them find their way in the chaotic ever changing global economy.
Another comparative study between CSR development in Europe and America is the
report published by Canadian Business for Social Responsibility in 2001.
• In this document, CSR (2001) compiles the CSR public policies of
various governments and gives a series of recommendations to the
Canadian government to develop CSR policies and provide support for
companies in their social and environmental practices: it should generate
business leadership and show commitment, transparency, and a will to
communicate and act.
• Another report that makes recommendations is "Promoting Global
Corporate Social Responsibility" by Frank Hawkins Kenan
Institutes of Private Enterprise, (2003), which encourages the US
government to develop strong partnerships capable of responding to the
new challenges for governance generated by globalization.
From a European point of view
According to Habisch et. al. (2005), Corporate Social Responsibility across
Europe, presents collective research on CSR in 23 European countries, all either EU
Member States or in the process of joining.
• shows how CSR is rooted in different national frameworks and is
modulated according to different social, cultural and economic traditions:
ethical issues are predominant in the Anglo-Saxon countries;
environmental concerns are the main issue on the CSR agenda of the
countries of northern Europe; and in southern European countries CSR is
approached as a social development issue.
Contribution that present a more Pan-European Vision:
1. Roome (2005) presents the implications of the CSR agenda of European
governments by showing how cultural factors and the political, social and business
structure influence the shades of meaning the CSR adopts in each country.
• A comparative analysis is performed of the UK, Germany, the
Netherlands, and Sweden regarding the way the topics on the CSR
agenda are dealt with.
2. Matten and Moon (2005), developed a conceptual framework for understanding
CSR in Europe on the basis of the idea of social governance, comparing the European
context with the American one. Their main conclusion is that in the US, more explicit
CSR strategies have been adapted by companies, thus resulting in a weaker
institutional framework.
3. Lenssen and Vorobey (2005) provide insight into the development of theoretical
and empirical models on the role of business in society in Europe, based on social
contract theory and stakeholder theory. The authors analyze how cultural differences
and socio political systems affect corporate responsibility in each country. The
analysis also incorporates the concept of corporate governance and corporate
reputation.
• The purpose of the work is to find elements of convergence in the
framework of the European Union.
2.3 ROLES IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR IN RELATION TO CSR
According to Fox et. al. (2002), work from the idea of the public sector adopting
four roles:
(1) Mandating. . (2) facilitating,
(3) partnering, and, . (4) endorsing.
The report builds and develops a matrix with the possible initiatives taken by
governments depending on the roles they adopt, in relation to the ten key themes on
the CSR agenda
(1) minimum standards,
(2) the public policy role of business,
(3) good corporate governance,
(4) socially responsible investment;
(5) philanthropy and community development,
(6) stakeholder engagement,
(7) production and consumption,
(8) certification and management systems,
(9) transparency and reporting, and,
(10) international CSR guidelines.
Lepoutre et. al. (2004) also presents a review of the roles adopted by governments
in the CSR debate.
• Their analysis discusses the strategic roles played by governments (activate,
orchestrate and modulate) and presents common tools adopted in public action
(public information campaigns, organizational reporting, labelling, contracts,
agreements and incentives).
The work done by Nidasio (2004) is also interesting, although it focuses
exclusively on a comparative study of the reporting frameworks and models
developed by four European governments: Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, and
France.
2.4 GOVERNANCE AND CSR
The development of theories on CSR is increasingly incorporated into an overview
of its contribution in terms of governance.
Analysis by Moon (2004) on the CSR policy adopted by the UK government.
• Moon considers that this government adopted its CSR policy as a response
to the social governance crisis and the lack of legitimacy of the state that appeared
in the last decades of the twentieth century.
• Moon concludes that the British government saw CSR as a contribution by
the business world towards meeting these challenges and incorporated it into the
political agenda. This explains why the British government became one of the first
to foster and institutionalize CSR within the framework of a particular public policy
and a particular department.
Midttun (2005) locates the development of CSR in the context of the changes
taking place in the welfare state, on the basis of a comparative study of three
models: the Keynesian Welfare State Model, the Neo-liberal Model, and the
Embedded Relational CSR Model.
• Midttun analyzed each of the models adopted by the governments in
political, commercial and regulatory exchange taking into. account three players:
(1) government,
(2) industry,
(3) civil society.
The CSR model, in contrast to the welfare state model, is based on decentralized
sector, and less state intervention.
• The CSR model has developed new ways of paying attention to sustainable
development, by adding new dimensions and roles to areas of exchange.
• The CSR model proposed by Midttun is thus based more on the initiative of
civil society and the self-regulation of the private sector.
Gribben et. al. (2001) presents the role of governments in the creation of new
models of social partnerships with a view to solving social problems, in
coordination with companies, social organizations and local government.
Guarani and Nidasio (2003), analyzed the role of CSR in public-private
partnerships incorporates an area of long- term consistency into the concept of
political networks.
• The authors analyzed public-private CSR partnerships in the Italian context
in issues such as management and accountability. The study concludes that public-
sector players commit themselves above all in the evaluation of social and
environmental needs, thus laying the foundations on which to plan CSR strategy.
Bendell and Kearins (2004) address the political dimension of CSR and its
application to business administration and management in relation to the demands
of civil society.
• First, they state that the concept of voluntary compliance linked to CSR is
accepted by few stakeholder groups especially NGOs as they believe Voluntary
CSR initiatives to be incapable of leading to the goal of Sustainable development.
• Second, they point out that the voluntary nature of CSR has brought growing
social awareness of the political activities of companies, especially those activities
that generate a certain amount of controversy around certain companies and their
international activities.
• Third, they claim that some general and financial managers are of the option
that, without major changes in government public policies, individual efforts by
companies in CSR may not yield commercial success, and thus may cause the
business world to be wary against taking such action.
The interrelationship between business, gov. and civil society as basic elements
for the development of CSR.
2.5 STUDY OF GOVERNMENTS AND CSR
Governments all over the world have developed an ever wider range of public
policies for the fostering of socially responsible business practices. This public
action is being implemented through various public policies and programs.
In July 2001, the European commission (EC) presented its Green Paper
"Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social responsibility."
• there has been a public policies adopted by European governments to
encourage CSR.
• But Corporate Social Responsibility has also a global framework: In 1999,
Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the United Nations, proposed the Global compact
with the aim of reconciling the creative forces of private entrepreneurship with the
needs of disadvantaged and future generations.
• A year earlier, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) had revised its guidelines for multinational enterprises.
Generally, these initiatives are justified because the attitude to business is changing,
and it is beginning to be regarded as having an important part to play in improving
society.
2.6 CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AS A RELATIONAL
APPROACH
The European Commission in (2001)
• defines CSR as "a concept whereby companies integrate social environmental
concerns in their interaction with stakeholders on a voluntary basis."
• implies a relational interpretation of business activity, when this activity is
carried out.
• refers to the principles, values and criteria that guide businesses in all their
dealings.
• we understand CSR not as a mere analysis of the consequences of isolated
action, but as a valuation of the specific relationships established between several
players.
The responsibility of enterprise is not reduced, therefore, to the consequences of
what companies do; it is about how companies stand and move in the network of
relationships in which they act.
• CSR has entered the political agenda, of the governments of most European
countries, and those of other countries such as Canada, the United States of America,
Australia, Japan and others.
• Governments thus face a daunting social challenge: they are responding to the
new role of enterprise in the current process of economic development and the
resulting social and environmental challenges that arise.
• Furthermore the European commission requires that these national CSR
policies are in accordance with local policies and international standards and code,
such as ILO Declaration of fundamental principles and rights at work (1999), the
ILO International Labor Standards and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational
Enterprises (2000).
Many European governments have started to develop and design governmental
actions and policies in the framework of CSR. They have adopted several roles and
lines of action, such as:
issues according to its historical trajectory, depending on the relationship that exists
between business, government and civil society stakeholders.
3. In Europe, the concept of CSR is linked to sustainability and governance.
4. CSR is rooted in different national frameworks and is modulated according
to different social, cultural and economic traditions.
5. The treatment of CSR public policies has become progressively consolidated
as an increasingly all-encompassing perspective that locates these policies within a
social governance context and that rests on the growing importance given to the
interrelationship between business, government and civil society as a basic element
for the development of CSR.
6. The role of governments opened had a certain tendency to focus on the issue
of the voluntary or mandatory nature of CSR.
7. The debate between voluntary compliance and legislation depends on how
we understand CSR.
8. The role of governments focus on the issue of the voluntary or mandatory
nature of CSR
9. When we talk of public policies and CSR. we are talking not about
mechanical solutions, but about political options and strategy.
10. Governments face a daunting social challenge responding to the new role of
enterprise in the current process of economic development and the resulting social
challenges that arise. and environmental
11. Every country has focused CSR on the most appropriate social or
environment issues according to its historical trajectory, depending on the
relationship that exists between business government and civil society
stakeholders.
12. Midttun analyzed the models adopted by the governments in political,
commercial and regulatory exchange taking into account three players:
government, industry and civil society.
MULTIPLE CHOICE
1. according to the European Linkages of CSR Commission:
a. sustainable economic growth
b. the competitiveness of the European economy
c. innovation and job creation d. none of the above
e. all of the above

1. They play the role of facilitators in promotion and discussion on the development 2. Approaches in the analyses of public policies and CSR:
of CSR. a. the analysis of public policies that governments have adopted in the framework
2. They play the role of promoters of CSR (increasing knowledge about the positive of CSR promotion and development
impact of CSR, developing the exchange of experience and good practice, promoting b. the analysis of the public sector roles adopted by the governments in the
the development of CSR management skills, fostering CSR among Small and development of CSR public initiatives.
Medium Enterprises, and facilitating convergence and transparency of CSR practices c. the analysis of public policies that promotes innovation and job creation d. none
and tools). of the above
3. They play the role of mediators promoting multi- stakeholder dialogue between c. all of the above
the players involved, by facilitating information flows.
4. They play a role related to partnering in the development of partnership initiatives 3. Role played by European governments to develop and design governmental
and projects with the participation of the public-private sector. actions and policies in the framework of CSR:
5. They play the role of creators of knowledge networks. giving validity to those a. Facilitators in promotion and discussion on the development of CSR.
instruments, standards and tools that are already accepted and legitimized. b. Promoters of CSR
6. They play a participatory role in the international organizations that have adopted c. Mediators promoting multi-stakeholder dialogue between the players involved,
CSR promotion and development measures on an international scale. by transferring by facilitating information flows.
their formal commitments to the national scale. d. none of the above
7. They play the role of regulators often through enabling regulatory measures and e. all of the above
transparency measures, and less often through mandatory regulations.
4 Social players involved in CSR:
a. Private agents b. Governments.
GOVERNMENT ACTION IN THE FIELD OF CSR: COMPARATIVE c. Civil society stakeholders d. None of the above
EVALUATION e. All of the above

Every country has focused CSR on the most appropriate social or environment 5. Public action implemented through various public policies and programs
issues according to its historical trajectory, depending on the relationship that exists requiring some degree of public intervention explicitly requested by the players
between business, government and civil society stakeholders. involved in the development of CSR.
a. Socially responsible business practices b. Government practices.
c. Stakeholders practices d. None of the above
• Today the drafting of CSR public policies by governments involves all social
e. All of the above
players - the public sector, the private sector, civil society, and even the intersections
between them all-in multi-sectoral framework.
6. Generated when CSR policies provide support for companies in their social and
environmental practices:
CSR policies have been defined in some countries on the basis of social issues, thus
a. business leadership b. commitment
allowing CSR to be incorporated into the national sustainability policy.
c. transparency d. none of the above
• This approach, which focuses on sustainability seems to have much in e. all of the above
common. with the environmentalist tradition - "green" debate - and brings social
issues under the concept of sustainable development. 7. Starting point of CSR where law ends:
• In contrast elsewhere, the approach to CSR is more closely linked with the a. efficiency
business-society tradition and the relationship between these social players and b. competitiveness
policies of collective bargaining. c. paying taxes
• Each country defines CSR according to its economic context and its historical d. none of the above
tradition. e. all of the above
• However, if CSR is regarded as an element that provides structure for a new 8. CSR is rooted in different national frameworks and is modulated according to
model of social organization that reorients the social, economic, and environmental social, cultural and economic traditions except:
relationships of companies in globalized societies, then in reality CSR involves not a. ethical issues
only companies, as private agents, but all the social players: governments, b. environmental concerns
businesses, and civil society stakeholders. c. social development issue.
d. none of the above e. all of the above
CSR appears as a new framework in which to establish and organize all kinds of
socioeconomic and environmental relationships. Using this approach, we can see 9. Models advanced by Midttun that locates the development of CSR in the context
that CSR introduces new lines along which the social players relate and interact. of the changes taking place in the welfare state:
a. the Keynesian Welfare State Model
True or False b. the Neo-liberal Model
1. The vision of CSR is linked to sustainable economic growth, the competitiveness c. the Embedded Relational CSR Model.
of the European economy, innovation and job creation. d. none of the above
2. Every country has focused CSR on the most appropriate social or e. all of the above
environment