Abstract
Globalisation has accelerated economic development in emerging economies through the outsourcing of their supply chains and at the same time has accelerated the degradation of environmental and social conditions. Society expects corporations to play an essential role in creating economic, environmental and social prosperity beyond their country of origin. In order to regulate outsourcing activities in the supply chain, many multinationals are constantly searching for ways to manage their indirect environmental and social impacts accordingly, as well as to meet their stakeholder expectations. Because expectations of stakeholders vary widely across different regions, this study intends, by engaging with major stakeholders, to identify what are the local and regional supply chain stakeholders’ perceptions and expectations. The findings would help in building consensus, strengthening the implementation and establishing the future corporate social responsibility (CSR) framework. This study collects and analyses data from 21 major stakeholders in Hong Kong and Mainland China. The results indicate that local and regional stakeholders perceive that CSR is fairly significant to largely export-oriented businesses, but it is lagging behind the West due to the fact that most local/regional companies only become involved in CSR when this is a client requirement. They see responsible corporations as meeting the local legislative requirement; going beyond this requirement is unnecessary. A voluntary approach favours multi-party partnership initiatives with pilot trust programmes aimed at managers’ and workers’ capacity building. Most stakeholders favour the proposed regional partnership initiative, supply chain task forces aimed at bringing together relevant organisations and people with different sets of skills. Distinct roles of different organisations are identified to assist suppliers to understand CSR, and only this will bring about long-term sustainable change.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Balabanis, G., Philips, H.C., & Lyall, J. (1998). Corporate social responsibility and economic performance in the top British companies: Are they linked? European Business Review, 98(1), 25–44. doi:10.1108/09555349810195529.
Barrientos, S., Dolan, C., & Tallontire, A. (2003). A gendered value chain approach to codes of conduct in African horticulture. World Development, 31(9), 1511–1526. doi:10.1016/S0305-750X(03)00110-4.
Chambers, E., W. Chapple, J. Moon and M. Sullivan: 2002, CSR in Asia: A Seven Country Study of CSR Website Reporting, July Conference Paper (International Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility, Nottingham University Business School, UK)
Christmann, P. (2004). Multinational companies and the natural environment: determinants of global environmental policy standardization. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 747–760.
Civil Exchange and China Development Institute: 2003, Attitudes on the Environment: A survey of Pearl River Delta Residents, Shenzhen: Hong Kong and China Development Institute.
Clarkson, M.B.E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–117. doi:10.2307/258888.
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L.E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91. doi:10.2307/258887.
European Commission: 2001, Green Paper: Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility, 366 final (European Commission, Brussels)
Gibbon, P. 2003, ‹At the cutting edge: UK Clothing Retailers’ Global Sourcing Patterns and Practices and their Implications for Developing countries’, Centre of Development Research, Copenhagen
Guangdong EPB: 2002, Guangdong Statistical Yearbook 2002 (In Chinese) (Guangdong Environmental Protection Bureau (Guangdong EPB), Guangdong P.R. China)
Henriques, I. and P. Sadorky: 1999, ‹The relationship between environmental commitment and managerial perceptions of stakeholder importance’, Academy of Management Journal 42(1), 89–99.
Hong Kong Trade Development Council (HKTDC): 2003, ‹Hong Kong Clothing Industry: Overview’, http://garment.tdctrade.com/. Accessed 15 Dec 2003
Hong Kong Trade Development Council (HKTDC): 2005, Corporate Social Responsibility and Implications for Hong Kong’s Manufacturers and Exporters (Hong Kong Trade Development Council, Hong Kong)
Jones, T.M.: 1995, ‹Instrumental Stakeholder Theory: a Synthesis of Ethics and Economics’, Academy of Management Review 20(2), 404–437.
Kolk, A. and R. van Tulder: 2002, ‹The effectiveness of self regulation: Corporate codes of conduct and child labor’, European Management Journal 20, 260–271.
Ledgerwood, G.: 1997, Greening the boardroom: Corporate Governance and Business Sustainability, UK: Greenleaf, pp. 11.
Maignan, I. and O.C. Ferrell: 2003, ‹Nature of corporate responsibilities: Perspectives from American, French and German consumers’, Journal of Business Research 56(1), 55–67.
Maignan I, D.T. McAlister: 2003, ‹Socially responsible organizational buying: how can stakeholders dictate purchasing policies?’ Journal of Macromarketing 23(2), 78–89.
Meinders H. and Meuffels, M. 2001, ‹Product Chain Responsibility: An Industry Perspective’, Corporate Environmental Strategy 8(4), 348–354.
Mitchell, R., B. Agle and D. Wood: 1997, ‹Towards a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts’, Academy of Management Review 22, 853–886.
Oxfam Hong Kong: 2004, Turning the garment industry inside out: Purchasing Practices and Workers’ Lives, Oxfam Hong Kong April Briefing Paper, Hong Kong.
The United Nation Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTD): 2002, World Investment Report 2002: Transnational Corporations and Export Competitiveness (United Nations, New York and Geneva), p. 129
Waddock, S. and C. Bodwell: 2004, ‹Managing responsibility: what can be learned from the quality movement?’ California Management Journal, 47(1), 25–37.
Waddock S.A. and M.E. Boyle: 1995, ‹The dynamics of change in corporate community relations,’ California Management Review, 37, 125–140.
Welford, R.: 2003, Corporate Social Responsibility in Europe and Asia: Critical Elements and Best Practice, Corporate Environmental Governance Report, Corporate Environmental Governance Programme, University of Hong Kong (Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong)
Welford R. and S. Frost: 2006, ‹Corporate Social Responsibility in Asian Supply China’, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 13, 166–176.
Wood, D.J. and R.E. Jones: 1995, ‹Stakeholder mismatching: A theoretical problem in empirical research on Corporate Social Performance,’ The International Journal of Organizational Analysis 3(3), 229–267.
World Bank: 2003, Strengthening Implementation of Corporate Social Responsibility in Global Supply Chains. World Bank Report
World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD): 2006, ‹Corporate Responsibility Overview’, http://www.wbcsd.ch/. Accessed 15 Mar 2006
World Trade Organisation (WTO): 2003, ‹Export Value of Clothing and % of National Merchandise Export in 1995 and 2002’, http://www.wto.orgEnglish/rese/statise/its2003_e/iv70.xls. Accessed 15 May 2004
Yam R.C.M. and C.P.Y. Tang: 1996, ‹Transportation Systems in Hong Kong and Southern China: a Manufacturing Industries Perspective’, International Journal of Physical Distribution Logistics Management 26(10), 46–59.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tsoi, J. Stakeholders’ Perceptions and Future Scenarios to Improve Corporate Social Responsibility in Hong Kong and Mainland China. J Bus Ethics 91, 391–404 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0091-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0091-3