Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Defining CSR: Problems and Solutions

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

Abstract

The ubiquity of the term CSR threatens its carrying any distinctive meaning. Despite its long history no consensus has been developed among the industry participants, academics or other interested parties. After a careful review of the complications and complexities of the CSR debate and distinct disciplinary definitions, the article turns to approach the problem of definition using the philosophy of science. It applies a scientific definitional approach of genus, differentia and species to arrive at a definition of CSR as international private business self-regulation. The article provides an overview of the implications of this definition on CSR as a field of study, a management practice and an approach to improving the dialogue concerning the social contribution of business.

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

Notes

  1. This is not to say there is no new knowledge. New knowledge in CSR would primarily involve innovation resulting from the implementation process. That, however, is a different thing from taking the position that CSR itself is a knowledge creation enterprise like other sciences or research endeavours.

References

  • Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2012). What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility. Journal of Management, 38(4), 932–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amstutz, M. (2011). The double movement in global law: The case of European corporate social responsibility. In C. Joerges & J. Falke (Eds.), Karl Polanyi, globalisation and the potential of law in transnational markets. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle. (1989). Topica (E. S. Forster, Trans.) (Loeb Classical Library. Ed.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

  • Auld, G., Bernstein, S., & Cashore, B. (2008). The new corporate social responsibility. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 33, 413–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avetisyan, E., & Ferrary, M. (2013). Dynamics of stakeholders’ implications in the institutionalization of CSR field in France and in the United States. Journal of Business Ethics, 115, 115–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, R., & Cave, M. (1999). Understanding regulation: Theory, strategy, and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ballinger, J. (2011). How civil society can help: Sweatship workers as globalization’s consequence. Harvard International Review, Summer, 33(2), 54–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basiago, A. D. (1995). Methods of defining ‘sustainability’. Sustainable Development, 3(3), 109–119. doi:10.1002/sd.3460030302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bessire, D., & Mazuyer, E. (2012). Norms of corporate social responsibility: Densification or degeneration? In A. Guler & D. Crowther (Eds.), Business strategy and sustainability (developments in corporate governance and responsibility (Vol. 3, pp. 67–95). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bismuth, R. (2010). Mapping a responsibility of corporations for violations of international humanitarian law sailing between international and domestic legal orders. Denver Journal of International Law and Policy, 38(2), 203–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, J. (2005). Regulatory innovation: A comparative analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Blowfield, M. (2009). Business, corporate responsibility and poverty reduction. In J. C. Marques & P. Utting (Eds.), Corporate social responsibility and regulatory governance: Towards inclusive development?. Palgrave: Basingstoke.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S., Jackson, G., & Matten, D. (2012). Corporate social responsibility and institutional theory: New perspectives on private governance. Socio-Economic Review, 10(1), 3–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, H., & McChesney, F. (2010). Why they give at the office: Shareholder welfare and corporate philanthropy in the contractual theory of the corporation. In T. W. Joo & U.-I. Chu (Eds.), Corporate governance: Law, theory and policy (pp. 4–9). Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr, A. (1968). Is business bluffing ethical? Harvard Business Review, 46, 145–153.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, AB. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society, 38 doi:10.1177/000765039903800303.

  • Carroll, A. B. (2008). A history of corporate social responsibility: Concepts and practices. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. Siegel (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility (pp. 19–46). Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson, T. (1993). Second thoughts about bluffing. Business Ethics Quarterly, 3(4), 317–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chua, W. (2006a). Extended performance reporting: A review of empirical studies. Sydney: Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chua, W. (2006b). Extended performance reporting: An overview of techniques. Sydney: Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coase, R. (1960). The problem of social cost. Journal of Law and Economics, 3(1), 1–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Copi, I. (1982). Introduction to logic. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A., McWilliams, A., Matten, D., Moon, J., & Siegel, D. S. (2008a). The corporate social responsibility agenda. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. S. Siegel (Eds.), Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility (pp. 3–18). Oxford and NY: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A., McWilliams, A., Matten, D., Moon, J., & Siegel, D. S. (Eds.). (2008b). Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility. Oxford and NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A., Palazzo, G., Spence, L. J., & Matten, D. (2014). Contesting the value of the shared value concept. California Management Review, 56(2), 130–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crifo, P., & Forge, V. D. (2012). The economics of corporate social responsibility: A survey. Ecole Polytechnique: Centre national de la Recherched Scientifique, Paris. Retrieved from http://hal.inria.fr/docs/00/72/06/40/PDF/cahier_de_recherche_2012-21.pdf. Accessed 5 May 2013.

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, H., & Cobb, J., Jr. (1989). For the common good: Redirecting the economy toward community, the environment, and a sustainable future. Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K. (1960). Can business afford to ignore social responsibilities? California Management Review, 2, 70–76. Spring.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K. (1973). The case for and against business assumption of social responsibilities. Academy of Management Journal, 16, 312–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delmas, M. A., & Montiel, I. (2007). The diffusion of voluntary international management standards:responsible care, ISO 9000 and ISO 14001 in the chemical industry. Santa Barbara, CA: ISBER Publications, Institute for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Research, UC Santa Barbara.

  • Dentchev, N. A. (2009). To what extent is business and society literature idealistic? Business and Society, 48, 10–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Detomasi, D. A. (2008). The political roots of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(4), 807–819. doi:10.1007/s10551-007-9594-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devinney, T. M., Auger, P., & Eckhardt, G. (2010). The myth of the ethical consumer. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Djelic, M., & Sahlin-Andersson, K. (Eds.). (2006). Transnational governance: Institutional dynamics of regulation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doane, D. (2005). The myth of CSR: The problem with assuming that companies can do well while also doing good is that markets don’t really work that way. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Fall, 23–29.

  • Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implication. Academy of Management Review, 20, 65–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eabrasu, M. (2012). A moral pluralist perspective on corporate social responsibility: From good to controversial practices. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(4), 429–439. doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1491-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eilbirt, H., & Parket, R. I. (1973). The practice of business: The current status of corporate social responsibility. Business Horizons, 16, 5–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Oxford: Capstone.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esty, D. C. (2005). On Portney’s complaint: Reconceptualizing corporate social responsibility. In B. L. Hay, R. N. Stavins, & R. Veitor (Eds.), Environmental protection and the social responsibility of firms (pp. 137–144). Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feaver, D., & Sheehy, B. (2011). Designing effective regulation: A normative theory. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1954256.

  • Fleming, P., & Jones, M. T. (2013). The end of corporate social responsibility: Crisis and critique. London, UK: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine, 32–33, 122–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallie, W. B. (1956). Essentially contested concepts. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 56, 167–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garriga, E., & Melé, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1/2), 51–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gjolberg, M. (2010). Varieties of corporate social responsibility (CSR): CSR meets the “Nordic Model”. Regulation & Governance, 4(2), 203–229. doi:10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01080.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Göbbels, M. (2002). Reframing corporate social responsibility: The contemporary conception of a fuzzy notion. Journal of Business Ethics, 44, 95–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gond, J.-P., Kang, N., & Moon, J. (2011). The government of self-regulation: On the comparative dynamics of corporate social responsibility. Economy and Society, 40(4), 640–671. doi:10.1080/03085147.2011.607364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gond, J.-P., & Moon, J. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in retrospect and prospect: Exploring the life-cycle of an essentially contested concept. Nottingham, UK: University of Nottingham, International Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greer, J., & Bruno, K. (1996). Greenwash: Reality behind corporate environmentalism. New York: Apex Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunningham, N. (1995). Environment, self-regulation, and the chemical industry: Assessing reponsible care. Law & Policy, 17(1), 57–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haufler, V. (2009). The Kimberley process certification scheme: An innovation in global governance and conflict prevention. Journal of Business Ethics, 89, 403–416. doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0401-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hausmann, D. (1992). The inexact and separate science of economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hay, B. L., Stavins, R. N., & Vietor, R. H. K. (Eds.). (2005). Environmental protection and the social responsibility of firms. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heal, G. (2005). Corporate social responsibility: An economic and financial framework. Geneva Papers Risk Insurance, 30, 387–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horrigan, B. (2002). Fault lines in the intersection between corporate governance and social responsibility. University of New South Wales Law Journal, 25, 515–555.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horrigan, B. (2007). 21st century corporate social responsibility trends: An emerging comparative body of law and regulation on corporate responsibility, governance, and sustainability. Macquarie Journal of Business Law, 4, 85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horrigan, B. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in the 21st century: Debates, models and practices across government, law and business. Cheltenham. UK; North Hampton, USA: Edward Elgar.

  • Howard-Grenville, J., Nash, J., & Coglianese, C. (2008). Constructing the license to operate: Internal factors and their influence on corporate environmental decisions. Law & Policy, 30(1), 73–107. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9930.2008.00270.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huimin, G., & Ryan, C. (2011). Ethics and corporate social responsibility: An analysis of the views of Chinese hotel managers. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30(4), 875–885. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.01.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ireland, P., & Pillay, R. (2009). Corporate social responsibility in a Neoliberal age. In P. Utting & J. C. Marques (Eds.), Corporate social responsibility and regulatory governance: Towards inclusive development? (pp. 77–104). New York: Palgrave-Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang, N., & Moon, J. (2012). Institutional complementarity between corporate governance and corporate social responsibility: A comparative institutional analysis of three capitalisms. Socio-Economic Review, 10(1), 85–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, A., & Lennox, M. (2000). Industry self-regulation without sanctions: The chemical industry’s responsible care program. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkton, J. J., & Trebilcock, M. (Eds.). (2004). Hard choices, soft law: Voluntary standards in global trade, environment and social governance. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • KPMG. (2013). Corporate responsibility reporting has become de facto law for business KPMG International Corporate Responsibility Reporting Survey 2011: KPMG International Cooperative.

  • KPMG, & UNEP, (2006). Carrrots and sticks for starters: Current trends and approaches in voluntary and mandatory standards for sustainability reporting. South Africa: UNEP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krugman, P. (2007). Who was Milton Friedman? New York Review of Books, 54(2), 340–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M.-D.P. (2008). A review of the theories of corporate social responsibility: Its evolutionary path and the road ahead. International Journal of Management Reviews, 10(1), 53–73. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00226.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, D., & Kaplan, R. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and theories of global governance: Strategic contestation in global issue arenas. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. S. Siegel (Eds.), Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility (pp. 432–451). Oxford and NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockett, A., Moon, J., & Visser, W. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in management research: Focus, nature, salience and sources of influence. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 115–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, J. D., Elfenbein, H. A., & Walsh, J. P. (2009). Does it pay to be good—and does it matter? A meta-analysis of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1866371.

  • Mark-Ungericht, B., & Weiskopf, R. (2007). Filling the empty shell. The public debate on CSR in Austria as a paradigmatic example of a political discourse. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(3), 285–297. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9111-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D., & Crane, A. (2005). Corporate citizenship: Toward an extended theoretical conceptualization. The Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 166–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D., Crane, A., & Chapple, W. (2003). Behind the mask: Revealing the true face of corporate citizenship. Journal of Business Ethics, 45(1), 109–120. doi:10.1023/a:1024128730308.

    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), 424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. The Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117–127. doi:10.2307/259398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mil-Homens, J. L. (2011). Labeling Schemes or Labeling Scams? Auditors’ Perspectives on ISO 14001 Certification. (Doctor of Philosophy), Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.

  • Moon, J. (2004). Government as a driver of corporate social responsibility. Nottingham, UK: International Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility, University of Nottingham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moon, J., & Vogel, D. (2008). Corporate social responsibility, government and civil society. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. S. Siegel (Eds.), Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility (pp. 303–326). Oxford and NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muhle, U. (2011). The politics of corporate social responsibility: The rise of a global business norm. Frankfurt New York: Campus Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, J. (2008). CSR and public policy: New forms of engagement between business and government. Cambridge, MA: John F Kennedy School of Government, Havard University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls, A., & Opal, C. (2005). Fair trade: Market-driven ethical consumption. SAGE Publications Ltd.

  • O’Dwyer, B. (2003). Conceptions of corporate social responsibility: the nature of managerial capture. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 16, 523–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obe, R. M. (2004). Still vague and imprecise notion of corporate social responsibility. International Business Lawyer, 32, 236–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (1999). Voluntary approaches for environmental policy: An assessment. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2003). Voluntary approaches for environmental policy: Effectiveness, efficicency and usage in policy mixes. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okoye, A. (2010). Theorising corporate social responsibility as an essentially contested concept: Is a definition necessary? Journal of Business Ethics, 89(4), 613–627. doi:10.1007/s10551-008-0021-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osuji, O. (2011). Fluidity of regulation-CSR nexus: The multinational corporate corruption example. Journal of Business Ethics, 103(1), 31–57. doi:10.1007/s10551-011-0840-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palazzo, G., & Richter, U. (2005). CSR business as usual? the case of the tobacco industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 61(4), 387–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T. (1961). An outline of the social system. In T. Parsons, E. Shils, K. Naegle, & J. Pitts (Eds.), Theories of society. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, A., & Ros, D. (2010). the role of governments in promoting corporate responsibility and private sector engagement in development. http://www.unglobalcompact.org/docs/news_events/8.1/UNGC_Bertelsmannn.pdf. Retrieved 10 Oct 2012.

  • Pickett, K. E., & Wilkinson, R. G. (Eds.). (2009). Health and inequality major themes in health and social welfare. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitts, J. (2009a). Corporate social responsibility: Current status and future evolution. Rutgers Journal of Law and Public Policy, 6(2), 334–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitts, J. (Ed.). (2009b). Corporate social responsibility: A legal analysis. Toronto: LexisNexis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M., & Kramer, M. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84, 78–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 89, 62–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Portney, P. R. (2005). Corporate social responsibility: An economic and public policy perspective. In B. L. Hay, R. N. Stavins, & R. Veitor (Eds.), Environmental protection and the social responsibility of firms (pp. 107–132). Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.

    Google Scholar 

  • Portney, P. R. (2008). The (Not So) new corporate social responsibility: An empirical perspective. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2(2), 261–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratap, S. (2011). Corporate social responsibility and the political agenda of the corporate CSR Research Paper Series No 3. Hong Kong: Asia Monitor Resource Centre.

  • PRI Association. Principles for Responsible Investment. Retrieved 20 May 2013, from www. unpri.org.

  • Ratner, S. (2001). Corporations and human rights: A theory of legal responsibility? Yale Law Journal, 111(2), 443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redmond, P. (2012). Directors’ duties and corporate social responsiveness. UNSW Law Journal, 35(1), 170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinhardt, F. L., Stavins, R. N., & Vietor, R. H. K. (2008). Corporate social responsibility through an economic lens. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2(2), 219–239. doi:10.1093/reep/ren008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sahlin-Andersson, K. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: A trend and a movement, but of what and for what? Corporate Governance, 6(5), 595–608.

    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), 899–931. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00950.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Segon, M. J., & Booth, C. (2009). Business ethics and CSR as part of MBA curricula: An analysis of student preference. Journal of Business and Policy Research, 5(3), 72–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selznick, P. (1969). Law, society and industrial justice. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, S. P. (2011). Self-regluation through voluntary codes. In S. P. Sethi (Ed.), Globalization and self-regulation: The crucial role that corporate codes of conduct play in global business (pp. 3–16). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, S. P., & Emelianova, O. (2006). A failed strategy of using voluntary codes of conduct by the global mining industry. Corporate Governance, 6(3), 226–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shamir, R. (2005). Corporate social responsibility: A case of hegemony and counter-hegemony. In B. De Sousa Santos & C. A. Rodríguez-Garavito (Eds.), Law and globalization from below: Towards a cosmopolitan legality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shamir, R. (2011). Socially responsible private regulation: World-culture or World-capitalism? Law & Society Review, 45(2), 313–336. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5893.2011.00439.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheehy, B. (2004). Corporations and social costs: The Wal-Mart case study. Journal of Law & Commerce, 24, 1–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheehy, B. (2005). Scrooge: The reluctant stakeholder: Theoretical problems in the shareholder-stakeholder debate. University of Miami Business Law Review, 14(1), 193–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheehy, B. (2006). The frightening inadequacy of economics as a worldview. Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, 17(4), 445–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheehy, B. (2007). Reconsidering the corporation and the lateral obligations of the social contract. The ICFAI Journal of Corporate and Securities law, 4(2), 7–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheehy, B. (2010). Regulating the University: Examining the Regulatory Framework of Australian University Corporations. (PhD), Australian National University.

  • Sheehy, B. (2012a). CSR and law: Alternative regulatory systems: SSRN Working Papers.

  • Sheehy, B. (2012b). Interfaces between CSR, corporate law and the problem of social costs: SSRN Working Paper.

  • Sheehy, B. (2012c). Understanding CSR: An empirical study of private self-regulation. Monash University Law Review, 38(2), 103–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheehy, B. (2013). The role of government in making CSR effective: a model regulatory governance agency. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2315929. Accessed 25 Jan 2013.

  • Sheehy, B., & Feaver, D. (2011). Designing effective regulation: A normative theory. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1954254.

  • Sheehy, B., & Feaver, D. P. (2014). Directors’ legal duties and CSR: Prohibited, permitted or prescribed? Dalhousie Law Journal, 37(1), 148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommer, A. A., Jr. (1991). Whom should the corporation serve?: The Berle-Dodd debate revisited sixty years later. Delaware Journal of Corporate Law, 16, 33–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soule, S. (2009). Contention and corporate social responsibility. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Steurer, R. (2010). The role of governments in corporate social responsibility: Characterising public policies on CSR in Europe. Policy Sciences, 43(1), 49–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tallontire, A. (2007). CSR and regulation: Towards a framework for understanding private standards initiatives in the agri-food chain. Third World Quarterly, 28(4), 775–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNEP. (2000). Voluntary initiatives: Current status, lessons learnt and next steps. Paris: UNEP.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights. (2003). Norms on the responsibilities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises with regard to human rights. 2003/16, UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/2003/L.l 1, at 52 (2003).

  • Utting, P., & Marques, J. C. (2009). Introduction: The intellectual crisis of CSR. In P. Utting & J. C. Marques (Eds.), Corporate social responsibility and regulatory governance: Towards inclusive development?. UK: Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • van Marrewijk, M. (2003). Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: Between agency and communion. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2), 95–105. doi:10.1023/a:1023331212247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varadarajan, P. R., & Menon, A. (1988). Cause-related marketing: A coalignment of marketing strategy and corporate philanthropy. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 58–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, D. (2008). Private global business regulation. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 261–282. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.053106.141706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, D. (2010). The private regulation of global corporate conduct: Achievements and limitations. Business Society, 49(1), 68–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wartick, S. L., & Cochran, P. L. (1985). The evolution of the corporate social performance model. The Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 758–769.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, K. (Ed.). (2004). Voluntary codes: Private governance, the public interest and innovation. Ottawa: Carleton Research Unit for Innovation, Science and Environment, Carleton University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, C.A. H. (2002–2003). The cycles of corporate social responsibility: An historical retrospective for the twenty-first century. University of Kansas Law Review, 51, 77–140.

  • Wells, C. A. H. (2013). ‘Corporations Law is Dead’: Heroic managerialism, the cold war, and the puzzle of corporation law at the height of the American Century. University of Pennsylvania Journal Business Law Review, 15, 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitehouse, L. (2005). Corporate social responsibility as regulation: The argument from democracy. In J. O’Brien (Ed.), Governing the corporation (pp. 141–162). London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, R. G. (1996). Unhealthy societies: The affliction of inequality. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Witt, M. A., & Redding, Gordon. (2012). 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, 10(1), 109–134. doi:10.1093/ser/mwr026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16, 691–718.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, J. S., & Malone, R. E. (2008). “Working to shape what society’s expectations of us should be”: Philip Morris’ societal alignment strategy. Tobacco Control, 17(6), 391–398. doi:10.1136/tc.2008.026476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, S., & Marais, M. (2012). A multi-level perspective of CSR reporting: The implications of national institutions and industry risk characteristics. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 20(5), 432–450. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8683.2012.00926.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zerk, J. (2006). Multinationals and corporate responsibility: Limitations and opportunities in international law. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Business and Law, RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    Benedict Sheehy

Authors
  1. Benedict Sheehy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Benedict Sheehy.

Appendix

Appendix

Partial Listing of International and Transnational Law Norms

United Nations Conventions and Treaties

  1. 1.

    United Nations Human Rights Council, A/HRC/17/31, 21 March 2011, Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations Protect, Respect and Remedy Framework, http://www.ohchr.org/documents/issues/business/A.HRC.17.31.pdf.

  2. 2.

    United Nations, General Assembly resolution 217 A (III), 10 December 1948, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/.

  3. 3.

    United Nations, General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI), 16 December 1966, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; United Nations, General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI), 16 December 1966, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

  4. 4.

    United Nations, General Assembly resolution A/61/L.67 and Add.1, March 2008, United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, Art. 8, 10, 25 and 26, http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf.

  5. 5.

    United Nations Human Rights Council, Resolution 7/14, 27 March 2008, The Right to Food, http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/E/HRC/resolutions/A_HRC_RES_7_14.pdf.

  6. 6.

    United Nations, A/HRC/4/18, December 2007, Basic Principles and Guidelines on Development-based Evictions and Displacement, http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/housing/docs/guidelines_en.pdf.

  7. 7.

    United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 1999, Guidelines for Consumer Protection, http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/publications/consumption_en.pdf.

  8. 8.

    United Nations, A/CONF.151/26 (Vol. I), June 1992, Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, http://www.un.org/documents/ga/conf151/aconf15126-1annex1.htm.

  9. 9.

    United Nations, 1992, Convention on Biological Diversity, 1760 UNTS 79; 31 ILM 818 (1992),  http://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf.

  10. 10.

    United Nations, 11 December 1997, Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, UN Doc FCCC/CP/1997/7/Add.1, Dec. 10, 1997; 37 ILM 22 (1998),  http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/kpeng.pdf.

  11. 11.

    Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna, 27 UST 1087; TIAS 8249; 993 UNTS 243 (1973), http://www.cites.org/eng/disc/text.php.

  12. 12.

    Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, 2226 U.N.T.S. 208; 39 ILM 1027 (2000); UN Doc. UNEP/CBD/ExCOP/1/3, at 42 (2000), http://bch.cbd.int/protocol/text/.

  13. 13.

    Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, 2256 UNTS 119; 40 ILM 532 (2001), http://chm.pops.int/Convention/ConventionText/tabid/2232/Default.aspx>.

  14. 14.

    Rotterdam Convention on Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade, 2244 UNTS 337; 38 ILM 1 (1999) (revised in 2011), http://www.pic.int/The-Convention/Overview/TextoftheConvention/tabid/1048/language/en-US/Default.aspx>.

  15. 15.

    United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, Aarhus, 25 June 1998, Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, 2161 UNTS 447; 38 ILM 517 (1999), http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/documents/cep43e.pdf in Principle 10 from the Rio-clarification.

  16. 16.

    United Nations, General Assembly resolution 58/4, 31 October 2003, United Nations Convention against Corruption, http://www.unodc.org/documents/treaties/UNCAC/Publications/Convention/08-50026_E.pdf.

  17. 17.

    United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment, Principles for Responsible Investment, 2006, http://www.unpri.org/principles/ United Nations, website United Nations Millennium Development Goals, http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/.

Specialist International Organisation

  1. 18.

    International Labour Organization (ILO), November 1977,Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy, http://www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/multi/download/english.pdf.

  2. 19.

    International Organization for Standardization, ISO 26000:2010, Guidance on Social Responsibility.

  3. 20.

    International Labour Organization (ILO), ILOLEX Database of International Labour Standards, http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/.

OECD and EU

  1. 21.

    OECD Principles of Corporate Governance, 2004.

  2. 22.

    OECD Guidelines for Multi-national Enterprises, 1976.

  3. 23.

    Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 25 May 2011, OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises—Recommendations for Responsible Business Conduct in a Global Context. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/43/29/48004323.pdf.

  4. 24.

    Corporate Social Responsibility Green Paper, Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility (July 2001) (COM (2001)366 final of 18.7.2001 http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sustainable-business/documents/corporate-social-responsibility/.

  5. 25.

    European Commission 2013, Enterprise and Industry, Corporate Social Responsibility, European Commission, <http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sustainable-business/corporate-social-responsibility/index_en.htm>.

International Finance and Miscellaneous

  1. 26.

    Equator Principles, The Equator Principles, June 2006, <http://www.equator-principles.com/resources/equator_principles.pdf>.

  2. 27.

    International Finance Corporation, International Finance Corporation’s Policy on Environmental and Social Sustainability, 1 January 2012, http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/policyreview.nsf/AttachmentsBy-Title/Updated_IFC_SFCompounded_August1-2011/$FILE/Updated_IFC_SustainabilityFrameworkCompounded_August1-2011.pdf.

  3. 28.

    World Organisation for Animal Health, Terrestrial Animal Health Code 2010, http://web.oie.int/eng/normes/mcode/a_summry.htm.

  4. 29.

    ISO 26000, http://www.iso.org/iso/home/standards/iso26000.htm.

  5. 30.

    Marine Stewardship Council, http://www.msc.org/.

  6. 31.

    Forestry Stewardship Council, http://www.fsc.org.

  7. 32.

    Kimberley Process, http://www.kimberleyprocess.com.

  8. 33.

    ICCA Responsible Care Initiative, http://www.icca-chem.org/en/Home/Responsible-care/.

  9. 34.

    WORLD BUSINESS COUNCIL OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (WBCSD) (2000): Corporate Social Responsibility. Making good business sense. Switzerland: http://research.dnv.com/csr/PW_Tools/PWD/1/00/L/1-00-L-2001-01-0/lib2001/WBCSD_Making_Good_Business_Sense.pdf.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sheehy, B. Defining CSR: Problems and Solutions. J Bus Ethics 131, 625–648 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2281-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2281-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation