Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Construction of Corporate Social Responsibility in Network Societies: A Communication View

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper introduces the communication view on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), which regards CSR as communicatively constructed in dynamic interaction processes in today’s networked societies. Building on the idea that communication constitutes organizations we discuss the potentially indeterminate, disintegrative, and conflictual character of CSR. We hereby challenge established mainstream views on CSR such as the instrumental view, which regards CSR as an organizational instrument to reach organizational aims such as improved reputation and financial performance, and the political-normative view on CSR, which highlights the societal conditions and role of corporations in creating norms. We argue that both the established views, by not sufficiently acknowledging communication dynamics in networked societies, remain biased in three ways: control-biased, consistency-biased, and consensus-biased. We discuss implications of these biases and propose a future research agenda for the communication view on CSR.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aras, G., & Crowther, D. (2009). Corporate sustainability reporting: A study in disingenuity? Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 279–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Århus (2013). The 1st International CSR Communication Conference, Århus University, 18–20 September, 2013.

  • Amsterdam (2011). CSR Communication Conference, VU University Amsterdam, 26–28 October, 2011.

  • Ashcraft, K. L., Kuhn, T. R., & Cooren, F. (2009). Constitutional amendments: "materializing" organizational communication. The Academy of Management Annals, 3(1), 1–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashforth, B., & Gibbs, B. (1990). The double-edge of organizational legitimation. Organization Science, 1, 177–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baden, C. (2010). Communication, contextualization, and cognition: Patterns & processes of frames’ influence on people’s interpretations of the EU constitution. The Netherlands: Eburon, Delft.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). Epic and novel. In M. Holquist (Ed.), The dialogic imagination: Four essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.

  • Barley, S. R., & Kunda, G. (1992). Design and devotion: Surges of rational and normative ideologies of control in managerial discourse. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 363–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basu, K., & Palazzo, G. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: A process model of sensemaking. Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 122–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benkler, Y. (2006). The wealth of networks. How social production transforms markets and freedom. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

  • Bennett, W. L. (2003). New media power: The internet and global activism. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2004). Doing better at doing good: When, why and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. California Management Review, 47(1), 9–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blaschke, S., Schoeneborn, D., & Seild, D. (2012). Organizations as networks of communication episodes: Turning the network perspective inside out. Organization Studies, 33(7), 879–906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S. J., & Pavelin, S. (2006). Corporate reputation and social performance: The importance of fit. Journal of Management Studies, 43(3), 436–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bronn, P. S., & Vrioni, A. B. (2001). Corporate social responsibility and cause-related marketing: An overview. International Journal of Advertising, 20, 207–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capriotti, P. (2011). Communicating corporate social responsibility through the internet and social media. In Ø. Ihlen, J. L. Bartlett, & S. May (Eds.), The handbook of communication and corporate social responsibility. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, C. E., & McCombs, M. E. (2003). Agenda-setting effects of business news on the public’s images and opinions about major corporations. Corporate Reputation Review, 6(1), 36–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caruana, R., & Crane, A. (2008). Constructing consumer responsibility: Exploring the role of corporate communications. Organization Studies, 29(12), 1495–1519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casselman, B. (2010). Chevron ad campaign answers critics hard-on. Wall Street Journal, October 18.

  • Castelló, I., & Galang, R. (2012). Looking for new forms of legitimacy in Asia. Business and Society. doi:10.1177/0007650312469864.

  • Castelló, I., & Lozano, J. M. (2011). Searching for new forms of legitimacy through corporate responsibility rhetoric. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(1), 11–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M. (2000). The rise of the network society. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M. (2007). Communication, power and counter-power in the network society. International Journal of Communication, 1, 238–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. C., & Meindl, J. R. (1991). The construction of leadership images in the popular press: The case of Donald Burr and people express. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(4), 521–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chouliaraki, L., & Morsing, M. (2010). Media, organizations, and identity. London: Palgrave MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, L. T., & Cheney, G. (2000). Self-absorption and self-seduction in the Corporate Identity Game. In M. Schultz, M. J. Hatch, & M. H. Larsen (Eds.), The expressive organization. Linking identity, reputation and the corporate brand (pp. 246–270). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Christensen, L. T., & Cheney, G. (2011). Interrogating the Communicative dimensions of corporate social responsibility. In Ø. Ihlen, J. Bartlett, & S. May (Eds.), Handbook of communication and corporate social responsibility (pp. 491–504). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, L. T., & Cornelissen, J. (2011). Bridging corporate and organizational communication: Review, development and a look to the future. Management Communication Quarterly, 25(3), 383–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, L. T., Morsing, M., & Cheney, G. (2008). Corporate communications: Convention, complexity and critique. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, L. T., Morsing, M., & Thyssen, O. (2013). CSR as aspirational talk. Organization, 20(3), 372–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooren, F. (1999). The organizing property of communication. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copenhagen. (2011). Social media for social purposes conference. Copenhagen Business School.

  • Cramer, J., Jonker, J., & van der Heijden, A. (2004). Making sense of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 55, 215–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cramer, J., van der Heijden, A., & Jonker, J. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: Making sense through thinking and acting. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15(4), 380–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2010). Business ethics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A., Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). Corporations and citizenship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • De Cock, C. (1998). Organisational change and discourse: Hegemony, resistance and reconstitution. M@n@gement, 1(1), 1–22.

  • Deetz, S. (1992). Democracy in an age of corporate colonization: Developments in communication and the politics of everyday life. State University of New York.

  • Deetz, S. (1995). Transforming communication, transforming business: Building responsive and responsible workplaces. Creskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

  • Djelic, M., & Quack, S. (2012). The power of ‘limited liability’—Transnational communities and cross-border governance. In C. Marquis, M. Lounsbury, & R. Greenwood (Eds.), Communities and organizations. research in the sociology of organization (pp. 73–109).

  • Eisenegger, M., & Schranz, M. (2011). CSR—Moralisierung des reputations managements. In J. von Raupp, S. Jarolimek, F. Schultz, & F. Wiesbaden (Eds.), Handbuch Corporate Social Responsibility, Kommunikationswissenschaftliche Grundlagen und empirische Fallstudien (pp. 71–96).

  • Elving, W., Golob, U., Nielsen, A. E., Podnar, K., Schultz, F., & Thomson, C. (forthcoming). CSR and communication: The communication of the ethical position of an organization. Corporate Communications: An International Journal.

  • Esrock, S., & Leichty, G. (1998). Social responsibility and corporate web pages: Self-presentation or agenda-setting? Public Relations Review, 24(3), 305–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzioni, A. (1988). The moral dimension. Towards a new economics. New York: The Free Press.

  • Fernando, M. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in the wake of the Asian Tsunami: Effect of time on the genuineness of CSR initiatives. European Management Journal, 8(1), 68–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fieseler, C., Fleck, M., & Meckel, M. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in the blogosphere. Journal of Business Ethics, 91, 599–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flohr, A., Rieth, L., Schwindenhammer, S., & Wolf, K. D. (2010). The role of business in global governance: Corporations as norm entrepreneurs. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun, C. (2005). Building corporate reputation through CSR initiatives: Evolving standards. Corporate Reputation Review, 8(1), 7–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks. A. C., Parmar, B. L., & de Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Cambridge University Press.

  • Friedland, L. A., Hove, T., & Rojas, H. (2006). The networked public sphere. Javnost—The Public, 13(4), 5–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardberg, N., & Fombrun, C. (2006). Corporate citizenship: Creating intangible assets across institutional environments. Academy of Management Review, 31, 329–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garriga, E., & Melé, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53, 51–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(1), 75–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giroux, H. (2006). It was such a handy term: Management fashions and pragmatic ambiguity. Journal of Management Studies, 43(6), 1227–1260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Göbbels, M. (2002). Reframing corporate social responsibility: The contemporary conception of a fuzzy notion. Rotterdam: Erasmus University Rotterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gond, J. P., & Matten, D. (2007). Rethinking the business-society interface: Beyond the functionalist gap, ICCSR Research Paper Series. Nottingham: Nottingham University Business School.

  • Gond, J. P., Kang, J., & Moon, J. (2011). The government of self-regulation: On the comparative dynamics of corporate social responsibility. Economy and Society, 40(4), 640–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthey, E., & Morsing, M. (forthcoming). CSR and the mediated emergence of strategic ambiguity CSR. Journal of Business Ethics.

  • Haack, P., Schoeneborn, D., & Wickert, C. (2012). Talking the talk, moral entrapment, creeping commitment? Exploring narrative dynamics in corporate responsibility standardization. Organization Studies, 33(5–6), 815–845.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action: Vol. 1. Reasons and the Rationalization of Society. Boston, MA: Bacon Press.

  • Habermas, J. (2001). The postnational constellation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayward, M., & Rindova, V. (2004). Believing one’s own press: The causes and consequences of CEO celebrity. Strategic Management Journal, 25(7), 637–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holder-Webb, L., Cohen, J. R., Nath, L., & Wood, D. (2009). The supply of corporate social responsibility disclosures among U.S. firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(4), 497–527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hooghiemstra, R. (2000). Corporation communication and impression management—New perspectives why companies engage in corporate social reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 27, 55–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ihlen, Ø., Bartlett, J., & May, S. (2011). The handbook of communication and corporate social responsibility. London: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jahdi, K. S., & Acikdilli, G. (2009). Marketing communications and corporate social responsibility (CSR): Marriage of convenience or shotgun wedding? Journal of Business Ethics, 88, 103–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behaviour, agency cost and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economic, 3(2), 305–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. M. (1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 404–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koschmann, M. A., Kuhn, T. R., & Pfarrer, M. D. (2012). A communicative framework of value in cross-sector partnerships. Academy of Management Review, 37(3), 332–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (2005). Corporate social responsibility. Doing the most good for your company and your cause. New Jersey

  • Krotz, F. (2007). Mediatisierung: Fallstudien zum Wandel von Kommunikation. Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laufer, W. (2003). Social accountability and corporate greenwashing. Journal of Business Ethics, 43, 250–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leitch, S., & Davenport, S. (2007). Strategic ambiguity as a discourse practice: The role of keywords in the discourse on “Sustainable” biotechnology. Discourse Studies, 9(1), 43–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lozano, J. M. (2005). Towards the relational corporation: From managing stakeholder relationship to building stakeholder relationships (Waiting for Copernicus). Corporate Governance, 5(2), 60–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, J., & Walsh, J. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 268–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May, S. (2011). Organizational communication and corporate social responsibility. In Ø. Ihlen, J. L. Bartlett, & S. May (Eds.), The handbook of communication and corporate social responsibility (pp. 87–109). Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • May S., Cheney, G., & Roper, J. (Eds.) (2007). The debate over corporate social responsibility. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. K., Angle, B. R., & 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), 853–865.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monge, P. R., & Contractor, N. S. (2001). Emergence of communication networks. In F. M. Jatblin & L. L. Utnam (Eds.), The new handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods. New York: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moon, J., & Vogel, D. (2008). Corporate social responsibility, government, and civil society. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. Siegel (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morsing, M., & Beckmann, S. (Eds). (2006). Strategic CSR Communication. Copenhagen: DJØF Publishers.

  • Morsing, M., & Schultz, M. (2006). Corporate social responsibility communication: Stakeholder information, response and involvement strategies. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15(4), 323–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mutch, N., & Aitken, R. (2009). Being fair and being seen to be fair: Corporate reputation and CSR partnerships. Australasian Marketing Journal, 17(2), 92–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nijhof, A., & Jeurissen, R. (2006). Editorial: A sensemaking perspective on corporate social responsibility: Introduction to the special issue. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15(4), 316–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F., & Reynes, S. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organizational Studies, 24, 195–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palazzo, G., & Scherer, A. (2006). Corporative legitimacy as deliberation: A communicative framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 66, 71–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papacharissi, Z. (2010). A private sphere, democracy in a digital age. Malden, MA: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, N., & Hardy, C. (1997). Managing multiple identities: Discourse legitimacy and resources in the UK refugee system. Organization, 4(2), 159–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pomering, A. (2011). Communicating corporate social responsibility through corporate image advertising. In Ø. Ihlen, J. L. Bartlett, & S. May (Eds.), The handbook of communication and corporate social responsibility (pp. 379–398). Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12).

  • Porter, M., & Kramer, M. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review.

  • Putnam, L. L., & Nicotera, A. M. (2008). Building theories of organization: The constitutive role of communication. Oxford: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raupp, J., Jarolimek, S., & Schultz, F. (2011). Handbuch CSR. Kommunikationswissenschaftliche Grundlagen, disziplinäre Zugänge und methodische Herausforderungen. Mit Glossar. Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag.

  • Scherer, A., & 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A. G., & 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), 889–931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoeneborn, D., & Trittin, H. (2013). Transcending transmission: Towards a constitutive perspective on CSR communication. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 18(2), 193–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, F. (2011). Moral—Kommunikation—Organisation. Funktionen und Implikationen normativer Konzepte und Theorien des 20. und 21. Jahrhunderts. Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag.

  • Schultz, F. (2013). Corporate social responsibility, reputation, and moral communication: A constructivist view. In C. Carroll (Ed.), Handbook of communication and corporate reputation (pp. 362–375). Wiley Blackwell.

  • Schultz, F., Utz, S., & Göritz, A. (2011). Is the medium the message? Perceptions of and reactions to crisis communication via twitter, blogs and traditional media. Public Relations Review, 37(1), 20–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, F., & Wehmeier, S. (2010). Institutionalization of corporate social responsibility within corporate communications. Combining institutional, sensemaking and communication perspectives. Corporate Communications: An international Journal, 15(1), 9–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, XXXVIII, 225–243.

  • Shamir, R. (2008). The age of responsibilization: On market-embedded morality. Economy and Society, 37(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20, 21–571.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundaram, A. K., & Inkpen, A. C. (2004). The corporate objective revisited. Organization Science, 15, 350–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, J. R., & Van Every, E. J. (2000). The emergent organization: Communication as its site and surface. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turban, D. B., & Greening, D. W. (1997). Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 658–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vallaster, C., Lindgreen, A., & Maon, F. (2012). Strategically leveraging corporate social responsibility: A corporate branding perspective. California Management Review, 54(3), 34–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, D. (2005). Is there a market for virtue? The business case for corporate social responsibility. California Management Review, 47(Summer), 19–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S., & Googins, B. (2011). The paradoxes of communicating corporate social responsibility. In Ø. Ihlen, J. L. Bartlett, & S. May (Eds.), The handbook of communication and corporate social responsibility (pp. 23–44). Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S., & Graves, B. (1997). The corporate social performance—Financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, S., & Groth, P. (2010). Measuring the dynamic bi-directional influence between content and social networks. Paper presented at 9th International Semantic Web Conference.

  • Wehmeier, S., & Schultz, F. (2011). Corporate communication and corporate social responsibility: A storytelling perspective. In O. Ihlen, J. Bartlett, & S. May (Eds.), Handbook of communication and corporate social responsibility (pp. 467–488). Boston, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. (1979). The social psychology of organizing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, J. (2008). Arla says melamine scandal has cut China sales by half. Financial Times, November 10.

  • Young, I. M. (2006). Responsibility and global justice: A social connection model. Social Philosophy & Policy Foundation.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the Danish Ministry of Science and Technology and the Strategic Research Council to this research. The authors would also like to express their gratitude to the team and council of the Responsible Business in the Blogosphere project, Joep Cornelissen, Andrew Delios, Dennis Schoeneborn, the Editors of this Special Issue Frank de Bakker, Jeremy Moon, Andreas Rasche, and two anonymous reviewers for inspiring and guiding us in the improvement of the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Copenhagen Business School, Denmark and VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Friederike Schultz

  2. Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, C/ Madrid 126, 28903, Getafe, Spain

    Itziar Castelló

  3. Copenhagen Business School, Porcelaenshaven 18A, 2000, Frederiksberg, Denmark

    Mette Morsing

Authors
  1. Friederike Schultz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Itziar Castelló
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mette Morsing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mette Morsing.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schultz, F., Castelló, I. & Morsing, M. The Construction of Corporate Social Responsibility in Network Societies: A Communication View. J Bus Ethics 115, 681–692 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1826-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1826-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation