The quest for economic development in Africa's emerging economies like Zimbabwe is an uphill undertaking that necessitates multi-stakeholder contribution. Since 2000, China and Chinese firms have played a considerable role in contributing to the Zimbabwean economy and community well-being through CSR programmes. However, in the absence of a CSR regulatory framework, it is not clear whether Zimbabwe harnesses the full social-economic potential of CSR arrangements. Existing research on CSR in the country provides sketchy evidence and mainly from a foreign perspective. This paper analyses Chinese corporations’ engagement in promoting the socio-economic progress of communities in a non-mandatory CSR environment and presents a case for a regulatory framework in Zimbabwe. It applies interpretivism to desk review evidence from sources published between 2017 and 2022 and reveals that, despite voluntary CSR arrangements, Chinese firms have contributed to the socio-economic well-being of communities by investing in some development projects. This notwithstanding, a voluntary CSR engagement has provided a leeway for Chinese firms to neglect environmental concerns, violate employee labour rights, and threaten community displacement, especially in mineral-rich areas. The paper concludes that Zimbabwe’s economic hardships push the country to prioritise economic over social and environmental concerns of communities in fear of losing the scarcely available Foreign Direct Investment. However, mandatory CSR arrangements provide mutual benefits to both Zimbabwe and China, thus an opportunity to legislate CSR without jeopardising Sino-Zimbabwe's economic and political relations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.