On the Economic Dimensions of Corporate Social Responsibility

Abstract

The macro-level debate on the economic impact of multinational enterprises (MNEs) is still unsettled. This article explores micro-level evidence by examining what Fortune Global 250 firms themselves report about their economic impact. Such reporting embodies corporate attempts to account for their economic implications, in addition to the environmental and social aspects of their activities that have traditionally received more attention in the context of corporate responsibility. Firms' reports turn out to provide a rich illustration of the mechanisms through which MNEs (can) affect economic development (including sheer size, technology transfer, and backward linkages) and of how such impacts are being operationalized and measured. The authors test which MNEs are most likely to disclose information on the various mechanisms and find that it is influenced by region, sector, and size but not by profitability. Implications of this exploratory study for research and practice are discussed.

MNC Reporting on CSR and Conflict in Central Africa

“…Interestingly, the relative lack of interest for human rights issues in CSR reporting (compared to other CSR topics) was also found in recent research on South Africa, where the environment (81%) and community (83%) were mentioned most, while only 29% of the companies reported on human rights (Dawkins and Ngunjiri, 2008). In a study on MNC CSR reporting generally, the provision of some specific information on human righst was even less prevalent (11%), although more companies vaguely referred to or only mentioned the term (Fortanier and Kolk, 2007b). It thus seems that human rights have not been 'mainstreamed' yet in CSR, but that there appears to be somewhat more attention for it by companies that operate in conflict settings -the difference between South Africa and Central African conflict countries is smaller though.…”

“…Systematic evidence has been lacking here, however (UNCTAD, 2007). In some cases, and presumably in response, companies outline, in their CSR reports, the large contribution made to a national/local economy using such figures (Fortanier and Kolk, 2007b). …”

“…Thus, seen from this perspective, the role of MNCs in conflict zones also includes the more generic economic and social aspects that are considered to be part of CSR, particularly when it comes to MNCs operating in developing countries (Fortanier and Kolk, 2007b;Meyer, 2004). These include economic impacts originating from the size of MNCs' investments (jobs, taxes) and spillovers (to local firms and through transfer of skills and technologies), and social consequences, for employees (working conditions and rights), local communities and society more broadly by demonstrating good practices (consideration for human and ethnic rights, poverty alleviation and ethical behaviour regarding corruption and transparency) (Andriof and McIntosh, 2001;Kolk et al, 2006;Meyer, 2004;Sullivan, 2003;UNCTAD, 2007).…”

An investigation of the cross-border supplier development process: Problems and implications in an emerging economy

“…Additionally, matters of asymmetry may also affect the knowledge transfer dynamic. There may be occasions where supplier firms are unwilling to reveal strategic information through fear of weakening their hand in negotiations with a buyer, or there may be circumstances where a buyer holds back key knowledge to protect firm specific assets or to avoid anti-trust issues (Fortanier & Kolk, 2007).…”

“…Actions by the assemblers in stage 1 seem instead to have a pragmatic, strategic underpinning. However, it is possible that Japanese assemblers see CSR mainly in terms of maintaining fair competition and therefore avoiding anti-trust issues when dealing with suppliers in stage 1 (a point alluded to by Fortanier & Kolk, 2007).…”