Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Governmentalities of CSR: Danish Government Policy as a Reflection of Political Difference

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

Abstract

This paper investigates the roles that Danish government has played in the development of corporate social responsibility (CSR). Denmark has emerged as a first mover among the Scandinavian countries when it comes to CSR. We argue that government has played a pivotal role in making this happen, and that this reflects strong traditions of regulation, corporatism and active state involvement. However, there is no unitary “Danish model of CSR” being promoted by government. Although Danish society is often associated with a model of consensus, our claim is that Danish government policy on CSR is characterized by a lack of common direction and that we need to approach it on such terms. In order to provide a critical account of ‘the Danish model’ we apply a governmentality perspective that allows us to stress political difference. We argue that Danish government policy consists of three distinct regimes of practice and show how they subject CSR to different modes of rationalization and action. We conclude that the problem with public policy being split into three is not different as such, but the failure of each regime to recognize the value of the others. As a result, government tends to add to the confusion and opaqueness of 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

Notes

  1. See Midttun et al. (2012), for an elaborate presentation of the project and its findings. See also Gjølberg (2010).

  2. The Copenhagen Centre was established by the Danish government in 1998. It was an independent, international knowledge center that operated as an intermediary between governments, businesses, NGOs and other parts of civil society to promote and inspire discussions about new social partnerships (Andersen and Mailand 2002; Gribben et al. 2001; Kjaer 2003; Nelson and Zadek 2000).

  3. The interests of employers and labor unions have not, however, been evenly distributed among the three pillars. Preventing unemployment and, in particular, retaining employees have been of obvious value as they relate to the maintenance of the core workforce, while the integration pillar to some extent has been associated with costly efforts to integrate personnel with insufficient qualifications (Bredgaard 2004).

  4. The Danish Commerce and Companies Agency was renamed the Danish Business Authority as of January 2012.

  5. The Ministry of Economic and Business Affairs was renamed the Ministry of Business and Growth as of January 2012.

  6. Policies on CSR include considerations of human rights, social, environmental and climate conditions as well as efforts to combat corruption. Accounts of actions include any systems or procedures in use, and comments on results include, if applicable, future expectations in this regard (www.csrgov.dk).

  7. The latest survey on the impact of the new requirements (2010 figures) shows that of the compliant companies, 87 % state that they work with CSR, while 13 % state that they do not. After adjusting for subsidiaries that do not report separately, but refer to CSR information in the parent company’s consolidated financial statement, 95 % of companies report on policies, 89 % report on actions, and 65 % describe the results that have been achieved—and these numbers are up from 2009 (DCCA 2011).

References

  • Aguilera, R. V., Rupp, D. E., Williams, C., & Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S Back in corporate social responsibility: A multi-level theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32, 836–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 391–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albareda, L., Tencati, A., Lozano, J. M., & Perrini, F. (2006). The government’s role in promoting corporate responsibility: A comparative analysis of Italy and UK from the relational state perspective. Corporate Governance, 6(4), 386–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, S. K., & Mailand, M. (2002). The role of employers and trade unions in multipartite social partnerships. Copenhagen: The Copenhagen Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, J., & Torfing, J. (2002). Det rummelige arbejdsmarked og de lokale koordinationsudvalg—nye vitaminer til det inkluderende velfærdssamfund? In Arbejde og Politik—Undervejs med CARMA (pp. 87–117). Aalborg: CARMA Årbog.

  • Arbejdstilsynet. (2002). At-Vejledning. Det rummelige arbejdsmarked, F.5.3., April 2002 (København).

  • Banerjee, S. B. (2007). Corporate social responsibility: The good, the bad and the ugly. Cornwall: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, A. (2004). Ethical capitalism. In W. Larner & W. Walters (Eds.), Global governmentality governing international spaces (pp. 195–211). London: Routledge.

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bredgaard, T. (2004). Virksomhedernes sociale ansvar—Fra offentlig politik til virksomhedspolitik. Ph.d.-afhandling. Institut for Økonomi: Institut for Økonomi, Politik og Forvaltning.

  • Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why should corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 946–967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J., & Pedersen, O. K. (2007a). The varieties of capitalism and hybrid success: Denmark in the global economy. Comparative Political Studies, 40, 307–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J., & Pedersen, O. K. (2007b). Institutional competitiveness in the global economy: Denmark, the United States, and the varieties of capitalism. Regulation and Governance, 1, 230–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conley, J. M., & Williams, C. A. C. A. (2007). Engage, embed, and embellish: Theory vs. practice in the corporate social responsibility movement. Corporation Law, 31(1), 1–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danish Commerce and Companies Agency. (2005a). Competitive social responsibility: Uncovering the economic rationale for corporate social responsibility among danish small- and medium-sized enterprises. A report prepared by Mark Kramer, Marc Pfitzer and Paul Lee, Foundation Strategy Group & Center for Business and Government, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University (DCCA, Copenhagen).

  • Danish Commerce and Companies Agency. (2005b). Catalogue of CSR activities: A broad overview—an ashridge report prepared for the danish commerce and companies agency. Copenhagen: DCCA.

  • Danish Commerce and Companies Agency. (2005c). People & profit phase 2. Mapping of CSR activities among small- and medium-sized enterprises. A report prepared by tns Gallup. Copenhagen: DCCA.

  • Danish Commerce and Companies Agency. (2011). Corporate social responsibility and reporting in Denmark. Impact of the second year subject to the legal requirements for reporting on CSR in the Danish Financial Statements Act. Copenhagen: DCCA.

  • Danish Government. (2008). Action plan for corporate social responsibility. Copenhagen: Danish Government.

  • Danish Government. (2012). Responsible growth—danish government action plan for corporate social responsibility 2012–2015. Copenhagen: Danish Government.

  • de Schutter, O. (2008). Corporate social responsibility European style. European Law Journal, 14(2), 203–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dean, M. (1999). Governmentality. Power and rule in modern society. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dean, M. (2010). Governmentality. Power and rule in modern society (2nd ed.). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Detomasi, D. (2008). The political roots of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(4), 807–819.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doh, J. P., & Guay, T. R. (2006). Corporate social responsibility, public policy, and NGO activism in Europe and the United States: An institutional-stakeholder perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 47–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2011). A renewed strategy 2011–2014 for corporate social responsibility. COM(2011) 681 final, Brussels.

  • Faubion, J. D. (Ed.). (1994). Power. Essential Works of Foucault 1954–1984. New York: The New Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish discipline and punish. London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1980a). Power/knowledge: Selected interview and other writings 1972–1977. New York: Pantheon Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1980b). Truth and Power. In J. D. Faubion (Ed.), Power. Essential works of Foucault 1954–1984 (pp. 111–133). New York: The New Press.

  • Foucault, M. (1982). The subject and power. In J. D. Faubion (Ed.), Power. Essential works of Foucault 1954–1984 (pp. 326–348). New York: The New Press.

  • Foucault, M. (1991). Questions of method. In J. D. Faubion (Ed.), Power. Essential works of Foucault 1954–1984 (pp. 223–238). New York: The New Press.

  • Foucault, M. (2009). Security, territory, population—lectures at College de France 1977–1978. MacMillan: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, T., Ward, H., & Howard, B. (2002). Public sector roles in strengthening corporate social responsibility: A baseline study. Washington: The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Gjølberg, M. (2010). Varieties of corporate social responsibility (CSR): CSR meets the ‘Nordic Model’. Regulation and Governance, 4(2), 203–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gond, J., & Crane, A. (2010). Corporate social performance disoriented: Saving the lost paradigm? Business & Society, 49(4), 677–703.

    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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gribben, C., Pinnington, K., & Wilson, A. (2001). Governments as partners: The role of the central government in developing new social partnerships. Copenhagen: The Copenhagen Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habisch, A., Jonker, J., Wegner, M., & Schmidpeter, R. (Eds.). (2005). Corporate social responsibility across Europe. Berlin: Springer.

  • Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. (Eds.). (2001). Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, G., & Apostolakou, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in western Europe: An institutional mirror or substitute? Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 371–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kjær, L. (2003). Local partnerships in Europe an action research project. Copenhagen: The Copenhagen Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepoutre, J., Dentchev, N., & Heene, A. (2007). Dealing with uncertainties when governing CSR policies. Journal of Business Ethics, 73(4), 391–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lozano, J. M., Albareda, L., Ysa, T., Roscher, H., & Marcuccio, M. (2007). Governments and corporate social responsibility public policies beyond regulation and voluntary compliance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • 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(4), 404–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCallin, J., & Webb, T. (2004). Corporate social responsibility progress in scandinavia. In Ethical corporation. January.

  • Metaxas, T., & Tsavdaridou, M. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in Europe: Denmark, Hungary and Greece. Journal of Contemporary European Studies, 18(1), 25–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Midttun, A. (2005). CSR: Realigning roles and boundaries between government, business and civil society. Journal of Corporate Governance, 5(3), 159–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Midttun, A., Gautesen, K., & Gjølberg, M. (2006). The political economy of CSR in western Europe. Corporate Governance, 6(4), 369–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Midttun, A., Gjølberg, M., Kourula, A., Sweet, S., & Vallentin, S. (2012). Public policies for corporate social responsibility in four Nordic countries: Harmony of goals and conflict of means. Business & Society. doi:10.1177/0007650312450848.

  • Miller, P., & Rose, N. (1990). Governing economic life. Economy and Society, 19, 1–31.

    Article  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.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility (pp. 452–472). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morsing, M. (2005). Inclusive labour market strategies. In A. J. Habisch, et al. (Eds.), Corporate social responsibility across Europe (pp. 23–35). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Morsing, M., Midttun, A., & Palmås, K. (2007). Corporate social responsibility in Scandinavia: A turn toward the business case. In S. May, G. Cheney, & J. Roper (Eds.), The debate over corporate social responsibility (pp. 87–104). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, J., & Zadek, S. (2000). Partnership alchemy new social partnerships in Europe. Copenhagen: The Copenhagen Centre.

    Google Scholar 

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

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, January–February Issue, 62–78.

  • Powell, J. E., & DiMaggio, P. J. (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rayner, J., & Howlett, M. (2009). Introduction: Understand integrated policy strategies and their evolution. Policy and Society, 28, 99–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhenman, E. (1968). Industrial democracy and industrial management. London: Tavistock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roepstorff, A. (2010). CSR: Virksomheders sociale ansvar som begreb og praksis. København: Hans Reitzels Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, N. (1999). Powers of freedom. Reframing political thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, N., & Miller, P. (1992). Political power beyond the state: Problematics of government. British Journal of Sociology, 43, 173–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A. G., & Pallazzo, 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L., & Rinaldi, L. (2012). Governmentality in accounting and accountability: A case study of embedding sustainability in a supply chain. Accounting, Organizations and Society. doi:10.1016/j.aos.2012.03.003.

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steurer, R., Martinuzzi, A., & Margula, S. (2011). Public policies on CSR in Europe: Themes, instruments, and regional differences. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 19(4), 206–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strand, R. (2009). Corporate responsibility in Scandinavian supply chains. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 179–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomsen, L. B., Holt, H., Jensen, S., & Thuesen, F. (2011). Virksomheders sociale engagement—Årbog 2011. København: SFI—Det Nationale Center for Velfærd.

  • Thuesen, F., Holt, H., Jensen, S., & Thomsen, L. B. (2010). Virksomheders sociale engagement—Årbog 2010. København: SFI—Det Nationale Center for Velfærd.

  • Ungericht, B., & Hirt, C. (2010). CSR as a political Arena: The struggle for a European framework. Business and Politics, 12(4), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vallentin, S., & Murillo, D. (2010). Government, governance and collaborative social responsibility. In A. Tencati & L. Zsolnai (Eds.), The collaborative enterprise (pp. 209–227). Germany: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vallentin, S., & Murillo, D. (2012). Governmentality and the politics of CSR. Organization, 19(6), 825–843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, D. (2010). The private regulation of global corporate conduct: Achievements and limitations. Business & Society, 49(1), 68–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, C. A., & Aguilera, R. V. (2008). Corporate social responsibility in a comparative perspective. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. S. Siegel (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility (pp. 452–472). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zadek, S. (2007). The Civil Corporation (revised ed.). UK: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy, CBS Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility, Copenhagen Business School, Porcelænshaven 18A, 2000, Frederiksberg, Denmark

    Steen Vallentin

Authors
  1. Steen Vallentin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steen Vallentin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vallentin, S. Governmentalities of CSR: Danish Government Policy as a Reflection of Political Difference. J Bus Ethics 127, 33–47 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1703-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1703-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation