Abstract
Academic literature recognizes that firms in different countries deal with corporate social responsibility (CSR) in different ways. Because of this, analysts presume that variations in national-institutional arrangements affect CSR practices. Literature, however, lacks specificity in determining, first, what parts of national political-economic configurations actually affect CSR practices; second, the precise aspects of CSR affected by national-institutional variables; third, how causal mechanisms between national-institutional framework variables and aspects of CSR practices work. Because of this the literature is not able to address to what extent CSR practices are affected by either global or national policies, discourses and economic pressures; and to what extent CSR evolves as either an alternative to or an extension of national-institutional arrangements. This article proposes an alternative approach that focuses on an exploration of links between disaggregated variables, which can then be the basis for imagining new national-institutional configurations affecting aspects of CSR. It illustrates this approach with an exploration of the importance of development aid policy for CSR practices in global supply chains.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
This description paraphrases the European Commission’s definition of CSR, which is: ‘a concept whereby companies integrate social and environmental concerns in their business operations and in their interaction with their stakeholders on a voluntary basis.’ See http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sustainable-business/corporate-social-responsibility/index_en.htm, accessed 15 April 2011.
Gjolberg (2009b) remedies this by also looking at general proxies for amongst others political culture.
Witt and Redding (2011) perform interviews with business representatives to gauge CSR across countries, but their questions focus on respondent’s values and preferences, not on strategic processes.
We share this point with Kang and Moon (2011) who offer an interesting analysis of developments with regard to variation across countries of corporate governance models and CSR. However, their analysis is based on discussion of developments in both, using secondary analysis, rather than empirically revealing the connections between both.
Own research, April 2012, based on measurement of business participation in private regulatory organizations using policy documentation of the websites of the Better Sugar Cane Initiative, Business Social Compliance Initiative, Common Code for the Coffee Community, Electronics Industry Citizenship Coalition, the Ethical Trading Initiative(s) in the UK and Scandinavia, Fair Labor Association, Fair Wear Foundation, Initiative Clause Sociale, Made-By, Responsible Jewellery Council, Social Accountability International’s Corporate Involvement Program.
Abbreviations
- CME:
-
Coordinated market economy
- CSR:
-
Corporate social responsibility
- GIZ:
-
Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit
- GTZ:
-
Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit
- IDH:
-
Initiatief Duurzame Handel
- LME:
-
Liberal market economy
- SLME:
-
State-led market economy
- QCA:
-
Qualitative comparative analysis
- VoC:
-
Varieties of capitalism
References
Aguilera, R. V., Williams, C. A., Conley, J. M., & Rupp, E. D. (2006). Corporate governance and social responsibility: A comparative analysis of the UK and the US. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 14(3), 147–158.
Albareda, L., Lozano, J. M., & Ysa, T. (2007). Public policies on corporate social responsibility: The role of governments in Europe. Journal of Business Ethics, 74(4), 391–407.
Amable, B. (2003). The diversity of modern capitalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Auld, G., Gulbrandsen, L., & McDermott, C. (2008). Certification schemes and the impact on forests and forestry. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 33, 187–211.
Becker, U. (2008). Open varieties of capitalism: Continuity, change and performances. London: Palgrave.
Berthelemy, J. C. (2006). Bilateral donors’ interest vs recepients’ development motives in aid allocation: Do all donors behave the same? Review of Development Economics, 10(2), 179–194.
Campbell, J. L. (2006). Institutional analysis and the paradox of corporate social responsibility. American Behavorial Scientist, 49, 925–938.
Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 946–967.
Christopherson, S., & Lillie, N. (2005). Neither global nor standard: Corporate strategies in the new era of labor standards. Environment and Planning, 37(11), 1919–1938.
Clarke, N. (2008). From ethical consumerism to political consumption. Geography Compass, 2(6), 1870–1884.
Crane, A. (2000). Corporate greening as amoralization. Organization Studies, 21, 673–686.
Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2005). Business ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Crouch, C. (2005). Models of capitalism. New Political Economy, 10(4), 439–456.
Crouch, C. (2006). Modelling the firm in its market and organizational environment: Methodologies for studying corporate social responsibility. Organization Studies, 27(10), 1533–1551.
Fransen, L. (2011). Corporate social responsibility and global labor standards: Firms and activists in the making of private regulation. New York: Routledge.
George, A. L., & Bennett, A. (2004). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gerring, J. (2001). Social science methodology: A criterial framework. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gjolberg, M. (2009a). Measuring the immeasurable? Constructing an index of CSR practices and CSR performance in 20 countries. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 25(1), 10–22.
Gjolberg, M. (2009b). The origin of corporate social responsibility: Global forces or national legacies? Socio-Economic Review, 7, 605–637.
Gjolberg, M. (2010). Varieties of corporate social responsibility (CSR): CSR meets the Nordic model. Regulation and Governance, 4, 203–229.
Hall, P. D., & Soskice, D. W. (Eds.). (2001). Varieties of capitalism: The institutional dimensions to comparative advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hughes, A., Buttle, M., & Wrigley, N. (2007). Organisational geographies of corporate responsibility: A UK–US comparison of retailers ethical trading initiatives. Journal of Economic Geography, 7, 491–513.
Jackson, G., & Apostolakou, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in Western Europe: CSR as an institutional mirror or a substitute? Journal of Business Ethics, 94(3), 371–394.
Jackson, G., & Deeg, R. (2008). From comparing capitalisms to the politics of institutional change. Review of International Political Economy, 15(4), 680–709.
Kang, N. & Moon, J. (2011). Institutional complementarity between corporate governance and corporate social responsibility: A comparative institutional analysis of three capitalisms. Socio-Economic Review. doi:10.1093/ser/mwr025.
Kinderman, D. (2009). Why Do Some Countries Get CSR Sooner, and in Greater Quantity, than Others? The Political Economy of Corporate Responsibility and the Rise of Market Liberalism Across The OECD: 1977-2007. WZB Discussion Paper.
Kinderman, D. (2011). Free us up so we can be responsible! The co-evolution of corporate social responsibility and neo-liberalism in the UK, 1977–2010. Socio-Economic Review. doi:10.1093/ser/mwr028.
King, G., Keohane, R. O., & Verba, S. (1994). Designing social inquiry: Scientific inference in qualitative research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Knopf, J., Kahlenborn, W., Hajduk, T., et al. (2011). Corporate social responsibility: National public policies in the European Union. Brussels: European Commission, Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion.
Koch, D. J., Westeneng, J., & Ruben, R. (2007). Does marketisation of aid reduce the country-level poverty targeting of private aid agencies? The European Journal of Development Research, 19(4), 636–657.
Kollman, K., & Prakash, A. (2002). EMS-based environmental regimes as club goods: Examining variations in firm-level adoption of ISO 14001 and EMAS in UK, US, and Germany. Policy Sciences, 35, 43–67.
Kriesi, H., Koopmans, R., Duyvendak, J. W., & Giugni, M. G. (1992). New social movements and political opportunities in Western Europe. European Journal of Political Research, 22(2), 219–244.
Lee, E. M., Park, S.-Y., Rapert, M. I., & Newman, C. L. (2011). Does perceived consumer fit matter in corporate social responsibility issues? Journal of Business Research, 1–7. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.02.040.
Lee, M.-D. P. (2011). Configuration of external influences: The combined effects of institutions and stakeholders on corporate social responsibility strategies. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(2), 281–298.
MacDonald, K., & Marshall, S. (2010). Fair trade, corporate accountability and beyond: Experiments in globalizing justice. Farnham: Ashgate.
Maignan, I., & Ralston, D. (2002). Corporate social responsibility in Europe and the US: Insights from businesses “Self-presentation”. Journal of International Business Studies, 33, 498–514.
Mamic, I. (2004). Implementing codes of conduct. Sheffield: ILO & Greenleaf.
Marini, M., & Singer, B. (1988). Causality in the social sciences. Sociological Methodology, 18, 347–409.
Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). Implicit and explicit CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 404–424.
Micheletti, M. (2003). Political virtue and shopping: Individuals, consumerism and collective action. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Middtun, A., Gautesen, K., & Gjolberg, M. (2006). The political economy of CSR in Western Europe. Corporate Governance, 6(4), 369–385.
Nölke, A. (2008). Private governance in international affairs and the erosion of coordinated market economies in the European Union, Mario Einaudi Center for International Studies Working Paper.
Palan, R., & Abbott, J. (1996). State strategies in the global political economy. New York: Pinter.
Parsons, W. (1995). Public policy: An introduction to the theory and practice of policy analysis. Brookfield and Aldershot: Edward Elgar.
Prakash, A., & Potoski, M. (2007). Collective action through voluntary environmental programs: A club theory perspective. Policy Studies Journal, 35(4), 773–792.
Sasser, E., Prakash, A., Cashore, B., & Auld, G. (2006). Direct targeting as an NGO political strategy: Examining private authority regimes in the forestry sector. Business and Politics, 8, 1–32.
Slater, D., & Bell, M. (2002). Aid and the geopolitics of the post-colonial: Critical reflections on new labour’s overseas development strategy. Development and Change, 33(2), 335–360.
Steen Knudsen, J., & Brown, D. (2011). CSR Initiatives and National Institutions: Do corporate activities reflect the welfare goals of the state? Presented at the Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics (SASE) Annual Conference, June 23–25, Madrid.
Steuer, R. (2010). The role of governments in corporate social responsibility: Characterising public policies on CSR in Europe. Policy Sciences, 43, 49–72.
Van Tulder, R., & Van der Zwart, A. (2006). International business-society management: Linking corporate responsibility and globalization. London: Routledge.
Whitley, R. (1999). Divergent capitalisms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Witt, M. A., & Redding, G. (2011). The spirits of corporate social responsibility: Senior executive perceptions of the role of the firm in society in Germany, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea and the USA. Socio-Economic Review. doi:10.1093/ser/mwr026.
Acknowledgments
Funding for this paper was provided by the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies at the European University Institute and the EU 7th Framework Politics, Economics and Global Governance: the European Dimensions (PEGGED) program, Grant Agreement no. 217559. An early draft of the paper was presented at the Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics (SASE) conference in Madrid, 23-25 June 2011. I thank Brian Burgoon, Gregory Jackson, Daniel Kinderman and Jette Steen Knudsen for comments on and discussion of my ideas. Final thanks go out to the editors and reviewers of Journal of Business Ethics for their insightful comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fransen, L. The Embeddedness of Responsible Business Practice: Exploring the Interaction Between National-Institutional Environments and Corporate Social Responsibility. J Bus Ethics 115, 213–227 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1395-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1395-2