Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Corporate Social Responsibility Implementation in the EU and USA: The Trend and the Way Forward

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Corporate Social Responsibility

Part of the book series: CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance ((CSEG))

Abstract

The core principles of CSR are being integrated into the core policy objectives of different economies and global companies and are also moving beyond their individual business initiatives. This integration can be seen from individual states’ perspectives; states are also accepting these issues in their socio-economic strategies and thus are establishing these issues within national economies. Given this background, this chapter explicates the trends in implementing CSR principles in the EU and USA. It demonstrates that companies in the developed countries use a mix of different strategies to incorporate CSR principles in their self-regulatory mechanisms. Strategies based on legal regulation are not foremost in this mix; rather, in these countries regulation-based strategy is meant to assist the non-legal drivers of CSR.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For details see, Section 4(3)(a) of the Trustee Act 2000.

  2. 2.

    For example, the regulations and legislations are the Community Reinvestment Act in Banking Sectors, for waste control Federal Water Pollution Control Act and the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977, for the workplace the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972, for consumer protection the Consumer Product Safety, for control over Corruption the Foreign Corrupt practices Act, and the Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act.

  3. 3.

    For details, see United States Department of Commerce, US Model Business principles (1995) http://www.state.gov/www/global/human_rigths/business_principles. html 29 December 2012.

  4. 4.

    Preamble of Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act 2010. This Act is available at http://www.cftc.gov/ucm/groups/public/@swaps/documents/file/hr4173_enrolledbill.pdf 28 December 2012.

  5. 5.

    The amount of investment increased largely in 1980s to African Black people as millions of people, churches, universities, cities and states underscored this investment strategy to press the white government of South Africa to abstain from racist system of apartheid. SRI investment was involved in the wake of Bhopal, Chernobyl and Exxon Valdez incidents and presently in combating global warming and ozone depletion. By and large, environmental issues have come to the forefront of the companies’ agendas involved in socially responsible investing.

  6. 6.

    See also, Indiana Code, No. 23-1-35-1 (2010). These statutes were adopted in response to the hostile takeover wave of the 1980s and early 1990s. In practice, courts have relied on them only rarely since the business judgment rule and other anti-takeover statutes already protect directors who reject takeover bids out of concern for other stakeholders.

References

  • Albareda, L., Lozano, J. M., & Ysa, T. (2007). Public policies on corporate social responsibility: The role of governments in Europe. Journal of Business Ethics, 74(4), 391–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, W. (1992). Our schizophrenic conception of the business corporation. Cardozo Law Review, 14, 261–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, D. S. (2001). The first amendment and the doctrine of corporate personhood. Journalism, 2(3), 255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antal, A. B. & Sobczak, A. (2007). Corporate social responsibility in France: A mix of national traditions and international influences. Business and Society, 46(1) 9–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair, M., & Stout, L. (1999). A team production theory of corporate law. Vanderbilt Law Review, 85(2), 247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blowfield, M., & Frynas, J. G. (2005). Setting new agendas: Critical perspectives on corporate social responsibility in the developing world. International Affairs, 81(3), 499–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buhmann, K. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: What role for law? Some aspects of law and CSR. Corporate Governance, 6(2), 180–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkett, B., Criage, J., & Link, M. (2004). Corporate Social responsibility and codes of conduct: The Privatisation of International Law. A paper presented at Canadian Council on International Law Conference, 15 October 2004. October 6, 2008, from http://www.lexpert.ca/labour/files/CSR%20Final%20Paper-CCILPdf

  • Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe. (2005). Corporate social responsibility and the role of the legal profession: A guide for European lawyers advising on corporate social responsibility issues (Update No. 1, April 2005) December 26, 2012. http://www.ccbe.org

  • Di Pascale, A. (2007). The EU voluntary approach to corporate social responsibility in comparison with regulatory initiatives across the world. Fondazinione Eni Enririco Mattei. December 27, 2012, from http://www.feem.it/Feem/Pub?Publications/CSRPapers/default.htm

  • Eisenberg, M. A. (1998). The conception that the corporation is a Nexus of contracts, and the dual nature of the firm. Journal of Corporation Law, 24(819), 825–826.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2001). Green paper: Promoting a European framework for corporate social responsibility. December 26, 2012, from http://www.europa.eu.int

  • European Council. (2012). Conclusions. Article 39. December 26, 2012, from http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/off/index_en.htm

  • European Parliament. (2002). Resolution on the commission green paper on promoting a European framework for corporate social responsibility. September 15, 2012, from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/

  • European Parliament resolution of 13 March 2007 on corporate social responsibility: A new partnership (2006/2133(INI)). December 27, 2012, from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDocdo?Type=TA&Reference=p6-TA-2007-0062&language=EN

  • Googins, B. (2002). The journey towards corporate citizenship in the United States: Leader or laggard? Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 5(4), 85–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R., Adams, C., & Owen, D. (1996). Accounting and accountability: Changes and challenges in corporate social and environmental reporting. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenfield, K. (1997). The place of workers in corporate law. Boston College Law Review, 39, 283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutierrez, R. & Jones, A. (2005). Effects of corporate social responsibility in Latin American communities: A comparison of experiences. Social Science Research Network. December 28, 2012, from http://papers.ssrn.com/

  • Hoffmann, E. (2003). Environmental reporting and sustainable reporting in Europe: An overview of mandatory reporting schemes in the Netherlands and France. Intern at IGES Kansai Research Centre. December 27, 2012, from http://www.iges.or.jp/en/phase2/be/pdf/report7pdf

  • Hopkins, M. (2004). Corporate social responsibility: An issue paper (Working Paper No. 27). World Commission on Social Dimension of Globalisation: Policy Integration Department

    Google Scholar 

  • Horrigan, B. (2007). 21st Century corporate social responsibility trends—An emerging corporate body of law and regulation on corporate responsibility, governance and sustainability. Macquarie University Journal of Business Law, 4(1), 85–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorgensen, T. H. & Holgaard, J. E. (2004). Environmental reporting: Experience from Denmark (Working Paper No. 6). Aalborg University: Department of Development and Planning. December 27, 2012, from http://www.plan.aau.dk/tms/publikationer/workingpaper62004.pdf

  • Klausner, M. (2005). The contractarian theory of corporate law: A generation later. Journal of Corporation Law, 31, 779,782–784.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lux, J., Thorsen, S. S., & Meisling, A. (2005). European initiatives. In R. Mullerat (Ed.), Corporate social responsibility: The corporate governance of the 21st century (p. 283). The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2005). ‘Implicit’ and ‘explicit’ CSR: A conceptual framework for understanding CSR in Europe. In A. Habish, J. Jonker, M. Wegner, & R. Schmidpeter (Eds.), Corporate social responsibility across Europe (pp. 335–357). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). “Implicit” and “Explicit” CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 404–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonnell, B. H. (2004). Corporate constituency statutes and employee governance. William Mitchell Law Review, 30, 1227–1232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services. (2006). Corporate responsibility: Managing risk and creating value, 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrini, F., Pogutz, S., & Tencati, A. (2006). Developing corporate social responsibility: A European perspective (1st ed., pp. 34–35). Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinkston, T., & Carroll, A. B. (1996). A retrospective examination of CSR orientations: Have they changed? Journal of Business Ethics, 15(2), 199–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rahim, M. M. (2013). New governance and CSR. In S. O. Idowu (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of corporate social responsibility. Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schueth, S. (2003). Socially responsible investing in the united states. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(3), 189–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, G. (1998). The shareholder primacy norm. Journal of Corporate Law, 23, 277–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snider, J., et al. (2003). Corporate social responsibility in the 21st century: A view from the world’s most successful firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 48(2), 175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tung, C. (2006). The legal implications of CSR: Changing landscape of liability. November 20, 2010, from http://www.csr-asia.com/CGconference2006/ChrisTung.pdf

  • United States Department of Commerce. (1995). US model business principles. December 29, 2012, from http://www.state.gov/www/global/human_rigths/business_principles.html

  • United States Government Accountability Office. (2005). Report to Congressional requesters, numerous federal activities complement U.S. Business’s global corporate social responsibility efforts. December 28, 2012, from http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

  • Van Marrewijk, M. (2003). Concept and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: Between agency and communion. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2–3), 95–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Virginia, E., & Harper, H. (2010). Enlightened shareholder value: Corporate governance beyond the shareholder-stakeholder divide. The Journal of Corporation Law, 36, 59–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren, R. C. (2003). The evolution of business legitimacy. European Business Review, 15(3), 153–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuval, F., & Lobel, O. (2008). Decentralized enforcement in organizations: An experimental approach. Regulation & Governance, 2(2), 165–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Accountancy, QUT Business School, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Mia Mahmudur Rahim

  2. Department of Law, University of Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh

    Nakib Mohammad Nasrullah

Authors
  1. Mia Mahmudur Rahim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nakib Mohammad Nasrullah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mia Mahmudur Rahim .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management and Marketing, Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania, Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania, USA

    John O. Okpara

  2. Faculty of Business & Law, London Metropolitan University, London, United Kingdom

    Samuel O. Idowu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rahim, M.M., Nasrullah, N.M. (2013). Corporate Social Responsibility Implementation in the EU and USA: The Trend and the Way Forward. In: Okpara, J., Idowu, S. (eds) Corporate Social Responsibility. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40975-2_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation