The systemic role of corruption and its link to low human development is explored. The extractive resource industry is presented as an arena where conditions for corruption—monopoly and discretion without accountability—are especially intense. Corruption is maintained by a self-reinforcing cycle. Multiple stakeholders are involved in the maintenance of and/or opposition to the cycle: investing corporations, host country regimes and officials, inter-governmental bodies like the OECD, industry associations, non-governmental organization (NGO) watchdogs like Transparency International, and international agencies facilitating global investment like the World Bank. Complementarity of interests between the demand and supply sides provides strong incentives for entrenched players to maintain corruptive relationships, to protect past gains and sustain current ones. Compulsory international regulation, maximum transparency, effective detection, and enforcement are recommended to enhance accountability, thereby reversing the cycle. It is also necessary to create a corporate culture built on integrity, if regulation itself is to succeed.

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to examine the ways that sin industry companies attempt to utilise CSR reporting for legitimation.Design/methodology/approachConventional and summative content analyses were carried out on annual CSR reports in UK tobacco and gambling companies, juxtaposed against analysis of the actual behaviour of the companies, collectively and individually.FindingsThe paper concludes that there is an ongoing tension between the business of sin industry companies and their attempts to establish and maintain any legitimacy, using CSR reporting in particular ways to try to prove their credentials to society and to engage salient stakeholder support. Ultimately, they aim to give themselves the scope for strategic choice to enable survival and financial flourishing.Research limitations/implicationsFurther research on CSR on other sin industries and in other jurisdictions with different regulatory situations could shed further light on the achievement or denial of different types of legitimacy. Studying different time periods as industries change would be of value.Practical implicationsOn a practical basis, the study offers guidelines to stakeholders on the use of CSR reports from sin companies, and suggests the establishment of objective external CSR reports, overseen by accounting regulators.Social implicationsThe paper provides an overview of the role of sin industries in society, and mitigating their harms.Originality/valueThis study allowed for a comprehensive, dynamic and inclusive understanding of the interplay of CSR reporting and legitimacy by addressing conflicting interests between sin companies' social effects and inherent activities at the industry level. The methodology of multiple case study design in two sin industries combined content analysis of CSR reports, juxtaposed against analysis of behaviour in context. Previous research included the juxtaposition of actuality in analysis of only single case studies or particular issues. Thus, this research allows for a broader industry understanding. On a practical basis, the study offers guidelines to stakeholders on the use of CSR reports from sin companies, and suggests the establishment of objective external CSR reports, overseen by accounting regulators. At the social level, the paper provides an overview of sin industries in society, and mitigating their harms.

No abstract

PurposeThe objective of this paper is to investigate the benefits arising from various corporate social responsibility (CSR) approaches, to determine which approach generated the most sustainable mutual benefit accruing both to the focal firm, as well as to society and the firm's stakeholders.Design/methodology/approachThe ethnographic case studies are based on interviews with senior managers from six companies which are members of Business in the Community Ireland, a not‐for‐profit organization comprised of companies which are active about CSR initiatives.FindingsResults show that for the companies interviewed, CSR initiatives that are voluntary and strategic, as opposed to coerced and/or non‐strategic, generate the most sustainable mutual benefit to the firm itself and its social beneficiaries.Originality/valueThe paper presents a framework to analyze approaches to CSR, using the dimensions of strategic/non‐strategic, voluntary/coerced. The study discovers ways to reconcile the conventionally competing shareholder and stakeholder mindsets. The paper concludes that if firms pursue CSR activities in a voluntary and strategic manner they can satisfy both shareholders' and stakeholders' demands.

stakeholders, corporate social responsibility, organizational configurations,