Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T19:56:05.448Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2 - The Values System Paradigm As a Regulatory Alternative to Stakeholder Needs CSR

from Part I - Regulation Concepts, Paradigms and Approaches for Corporate Social Responsibility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 June 2023

Onyeka K. Osuji ,
Franklin N. Ngwu  and
Gary Lynch-Wood
By
Onyeka K. Osuji
Onyeka K. Osuji
Affiliation:
University of Essex
Franklin N. Ngwu
Affiliation:
Pan-Atlantic University Lagos Business School, Nigeria
Gary Lynch-Wood
Affiliation:
University of Manchester School of Law
Get access

Summary

This chapter argues that ‘stakeholder needs’ and the ‘value system paradigm’ are alternative approaches to regulating corporate social responsibility (CSR). Drawing on Pound’s Theory of Social Interests and the institutional and stakeholder theories, it highlights the importance of contextualism in CSR and demonstrates that a values system paradigm may be a more suitable regulatory strategy, particularly in the developing and emerging markets. The chapter suggests that the stakeholder needs approach should be coupled with a values system paradigm for a more effective CSR when stakeholder responsiveness is desired.

Keywords

corporate social responsibilitycontextualisminstitutional theoryinstitutionsregulationself-regulationsocial interestsstakeholdersvalues
Type
Chapter
Information
Corporate Social Responsibility Across the Globe
Innovative Resolution of Regulatory and Governance Challenges
 , pp. 11 - 38
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baden, D. and Harwood, I. A. (2013). Terminology matters: a critical exploration of corporate social responsibility terms. Journal of Business Ethics, 116, 615–27.Google Scholar
Bansal, P. (2002). The corporate challenges of sustainable development. Academy of Management Perspectives, 16(2), 122–31.Google Scholar
Barnett, M. (2007). Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 794–816.Google Scholar
Barrett, R. (2006). Achieving value-added corporate performance management. Credit Control, 27(7/8), 34–8.Google Scholar
Berliner, D. and Prakash, A. (2012). From norms to programs: the United Nations global compact and global governance. Regulation and Governance, 6, 149–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blair, M. (1995). Ownership and Control: Rethinking Corporate Governance for the Twenty First Century. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, C. J. (2013). The environmental business case and unenlightened shareholder value. Legal Studies, 33(1), 141–61.Google Scholar
Braithwaite, V. (2009). Defiance in Taxation and Governance: Resisting and Dismissing Authority in a Democracy. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cadbury, A. (1992). Report of the Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance. London: Gee.Google Scholar
Carroll, A. B. (2016). Carroll’s pyramid of CSR: taking another look. International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, 1(3), 1–8.Google Scholar
Commission of the European Communities (CEC). (2001). Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility. EU Doc. COM(2001) 366 final. www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/committees/deve/20020122/com(2001)366_en.pdf.Google Scholar
Commission of the European Communities (CEC). (2011). A Renewed EU Strategy 2011–14 for Corporate Social Responsibility. EU Doc. COM(2011) 681 final. www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/com/com_com(2011)0681_/com_com(2011)0681_en.pdf.Google Scholar
Dahlsrud, A. (2008). How corporate social responsibility is defined: an analysis of 37 definitions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 15(1), 1–13.Google Scholar
Daily, C., Dalton, D. and CannellaJr, A. (2003). Corporate governance: decades of dialogue and data. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 371–82.Google Scholar
Dam, L. and Scholtens, B. (2012). Does ownership type matter for corporate social responsibility? Corporate Governance: An International Review, 20(3), 233–51.Google Scholar
Davis, G. F., Whitman, M. V. N. and Zald, M. N. (2008). The responsibility paradox. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Winter, 31–7.Google Scholar
Demb, A. and Neubauer, F. F. (1992). The corporate board: confronting the paradoxes. Long-Range Planning, 25(3), 9–20.Google Scholar
Dentchev, N. A., van Balen, M. and Haezendonck, E. (2015). On voluntarism and the role of governments in CSR: towards a contingency approach. Business Ethics: A European Review, 24(4), 378–97.Google Scholar
Doorey, D. J. (2011). The transparent supply chain: from resistance to implementation at Nike and Levi-Strauss. Journal of Business Ethics, 103(4), 587–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edelman, L., Petterson, S., Chambliss, E. and Erlanger, H. (1991). Legal ambiguity and the politics of compliance: affirmative action officers’ dilemma. Law & Policy, 13(1), 73–97.Google Scholar
Falck, O. and Heblich, S. (2007). Corporate social responsibility: doing well by doing good. Business Horizons, 50, 247–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fransen, L. (2013). The embeddedness of responsible business practice: exploring the interaction between national-institutional environments and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 115, 213–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston, MA: Pitman.Google Scholar
Garriga, E. and Melé, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53, 51–71.Google Scholar
Gouda, S., Khan, A. G. and Hiremath, S. L. (2016). Corporate Social Responsibility in India: Trends, Issues and Strategies. Hamburg: Anchor Academic.Google Scholar
Hamilton, L. and Clarke, T. (1996). The stakeholder approach to the firm: a practical way forward or a rhetorical flourish? Career Development International, 1(2), 39–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Handy, C. (2002). What’s a business for? Harvard Business Review, December. https://hbr.org/2002/12/whats-a-business-for.Google Scholar
Herlin, H. and Solitander, N. (2017). Corporate social responsibility as relief from responsibility: NPO legitimizations for corporate partnerships in contested terrains. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 13(1), 2–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffman, A. J. (1999). Institutional evolution and change: environmentalism and the U.S. chemical industry. Academy of Management Journal, 42(4), 351–71.Google Scholar
Hofsted, G. (1994). Cultures and Organizations. London: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Iskander, M. R. and Chamlou, N. (2000). Corporate Governance: A Framework for Implementation Overview. Washington, DC: International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jain, T., Aguilera, V. and Jamali, D. (2017). Corporate stakeholder orientation in an emerging country context: a longitudinal cross industry analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 143, 701–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jamali, D. and Mirshak, R. (2007). Corporate social responsibility (CSR): theory and practice in a developing country context. Journal of Business Ethics, 72(3), 243–62.Google Scholar
Jamali, D. and Neville, B. (2011). Convergence versus divergence of CSR in developing countries: an embedded multi-layered institutional lens. Journal of Business Ethics, 102, 599–621.Google Scholar
Jamali, D., Karam, C. M., Soundararajan, V. and Yin, J. (2017). CSR logics in developing countries: translation, adaptation and stalled development. Journal of World Business, 52(3), 343–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kang, N. and 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.Google Scholar
Kraakman, R. H. (1986). Gatekeepers: the anatomy of a third-party enforcement strategy. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 2(1), 53–104.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (2015). The strange entanglement of jurimorphs. In McGee, K., ed., Latour and the Passage of Law. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 331–53.Google Scholar
Leigh Day. (2019). Legal Briefing: Lungowe and Others v Vedanta and KCM: Parent Company Liability Clarified. April. www.leighday.co.uk/media/w5rjukxp/legal-briefing-zambia-april2019.pdf.Google Scholar
Lewis, C. S. (1944). The Abolition of Man or Reflections on Education with Special Reference to the Teaching of English in the Upper Forms of Schools. San Francisco, CA: HarperOne.Google Scholar
Li, J., Moy, J., Lam, K. and Chu, W. (2008). Institutional pillars and corruption at the societal level. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(2), 327–39.Google Scholar
Lindblom, L. (2007). Dissolving the moral dilemma of whistleblowing. Journal of Business Ethics, 76, 413–26.Google Scholar
MacCormick, N. and Weinberger, O. (2013). An Institutional Theory of Law: New Approaches to Legal Positivism. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Marique, E. and Marique, Y. (2019). Sanctions on digital platforms: beyond the public–private divide. Cambridge International Law Journal, 8(2), 258–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matten, D. and Moon, J. (2008). Implicit and explicit CSR: a conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 404–24.Google Scholar
Mitra, M. (2009). It’s Only Business! India’s Corporate Social Responsiveness in a Globalized World. New Delhi: Oxford University Press India.Google Scholar
Ogbu, A. (2012). Jonathan: I don’t own any church. ThisDay, 5 April. www.thisdaylive.com/articles/jonathan-i-don-t-own-any-church/113030/.Google Scholar
Ohnesorge, J. K. (2007). Developing development theory: law and development orthodoxies and the Northeast Asian experience. University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law, 28, 219–308.Google Scholar
Okoye, A. (2009). Theorising corporate social responsibility as an essentially contested concept: is a definition necessary? Journal of Business Ethics, 89(4), 613–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osuji, O. (2011). Fluidity of regulation–CSR nexus: the multinational corporate corruption example. Journal of Business Ethics, 103, 31–57.Google Scholar
Osuji, O. (2012). Corporate social responsibility – fairness and promise as the fundaments for juridification of social disclosures. Contemporary Issues in Law, 12(1), 46–76.Google Scholar
Osuji, O. (2015). Corporate social responsibility, juridification and globalization: ‘inventive interventionism’ for a ‘paradox’. International Journal of Law in Context, 11(3), 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Painter, M., Pouryousefi, S., Hibbert, S. and Russon, J. (2019). Sharing vocabularies: towards horizontal alignment of values-driven business functions. Journal of Business Ethics, 155, 965–79.Google Scholar
Painter-Morland, M. (2008). Business Ethics as Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pillay, S. and Kluvers, R. (2014). An institutional theory perspective on corruption: the case of a developing democracy. Financial Accountability & Management, 30(1), 95–119.Google Scholar
PMNews, Nigeria. (2012). Otuoke church: Jonathan committed no crime. 4 April. http://saharareporters.com/2012/04/04/%E2%80%98otuoke-church-%E2%80%98jonathan-committed-no-crime%E2%80%99.Google Scholar
Pound, R. (1943). A survey of social interests. Harvard Law Review, 57(1), 1–39.Google Scholar
Pound, R. (1968). Social Control through Law. Hamden, CT: Archon Books.Google Scholar
Prentice, D. D. (1993). Some aspects of the corporate governance debate. In Prentice, D. D. and Holland, P. R. J., eds., Contemporary Issues in Corporate Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 25–44.Google Scholar
Robertson, D. (2009). Corporate social responsibility and different stages of economic development: Singapore, Turkey, and Ethiopia. Journal of Business Ethics, 88(4), 617–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rokeach, M. (1973). The Nature of Human Values. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Sadurski, W. (2004).Universalism, localism and paternalism in human rights discourse. In Sajó, A., ed., Human Rights with Modesty: The Problem of Universalism. Leiden: Martinus Njihoff, pp. 141–60.Google Scholar
Schneper, W. D., Wernick, D. A. and Von Glinow, M. A. (2013). Stakeholder voice, corporate dysfunction and change: an organization learning perspective. In Burke, R. J. and Cooper, C. L, eds., Voice and Whistleblowing in Organizations: Overcoming Fear, Fostering Courage and Unleashing Candour. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, pp. 113–36.Google Scholar
Scott, W. (2001). Institutions and Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Scott, W. (2008). Approaching adulthood: the maturing of institutional theory. Theory and Society, 37(5), 427–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solomon, J. (2007). Corporate Governance and Accountability. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Stapenhurst, F. and Langseth, P. (1997). The role of the public administration in fighting corruption. Journal of Public Sector Management, 10(5), 311–30.Google Scholar
Szeftel, M. (2000). Clientalism, corruption and catastrophe. Review of African Political Economy, 27(85), 427–41.Google Scholar
ThisDay. (2012). A most questionable gift: the Italian construction company Gitto’s church gift to Jonathan. Editorial, 1 April. http://saharareporters.com/2012/04/01/most-questionable-gift-italian-construction-company-gittos-church-gift-jonathan-thisday.Google Scholar
Tirole, J. (2001). Corporate governance. Econometrica, 69(1), 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turnbull, S. (1997). Corporate governance: its scope, concerns and theories. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 5(4), 180–205.Google Scholar
United States Government. (1961). Congressional Record. Proceedings and Debates of the 87th Congress First Session. Vol. 107, Pt 9. 26 June to 14 July. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office. www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GPO-CRECB-1961-pt9/context.Google Scholar
Visser, W. (2010). The age of responsibility: CSR 2.0 and the new DNA of business. Journal of Business Systems, Governance and Ethics, 5(3), 7–22.Google Scholar
Waterman Jr, R. (1994). The Frontiers of Excellence: Learning from Companies That Put People First. London: Brealey.Google Scholar
World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). (2001). Corporate Social Responsibility. Geneva: WBCSD.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (1994). International Governance: Protecting the Environment in a Stateless Society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×