No abstract

Addressing the critique that communication activities with regard to CSR are often merely instrumental marketing or public relation tools, this paper develops a toolbox of CSR communication that takes into account a deliberative notion. We derive this toolbox classification from the political approach of CSR that is based on Habermasian discourse ethics and show that it has a communicative core. Therefore, we embed CSR communication within political CSR theory and extend it by Habermasian communication theory, particularly the four validity claims of communication. Given this communicative basis, we localize CSR communication as a main means to receive moral legitimacy within political CSR theory. A typology of CSR communication tools is advanced and substantiated by a review of case studies supporting the categories. Thus, we differentiate between instrumental and deliberative, as well as published and unpublished tools. Practical examples for the literature-derived tool categories are provided and their limitations are discussed.

This paper aims to deepen the understanding of corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting practices toward stakeholder group investors. Quantitative content analysis was applied to 437 articles of CSR reports from the chemicals, and banking and insurance industries in Germany and Switzerland. The results were benchmarked to the Sarasin sustainability rating's weighting of social and environmental industry risks. It was found that the chemicals industry's CSR reports meet the benchmark, whereas those from the banking and insurance industry do not (RQ1). Swiss chemicals producers perform well in reporting on their specific industry risks, while German companies mirror the sector‐specific risks in the banking and insurance industry (RQ2). The results thus indicate the appropriateness of investor‐specific reporting and suggest – in line with GRI and the European Union – further standardization in order to level the playing field of CSR in Europe. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Recently, researchers have claimed that food and beverage corporations should be excluded from the development of public health policy because their lobbying activities strategically undermine the promotion of public health. At the same time, recent political corporate social responsibility (CSR) theory holds that corporations have a responsibility to help solve global public issues. We address this described misalignment and show that corporations may fulfill this “new political role” if they turn to novel forms of corporate political activity (CPA) establishing a minimal standard for not contradicting their CSR. Therefore, we put forward a normative concept called deliberative lobbying based on discourse, transparency, and accountability, which aims to resolve public issues and advance CPA. In three lobbying cases, we show misalignments and contradictions that harm both society and the corporation. We position deliberative lobbing as an argument to maintain self-regulation against critics claiming that corporations should be excluded from all political processes.

No abstract