Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 86, Issue 4, pp 417–428 | Cite as

Political and Economic Arguments for Corporate Social Responsibility: Analysis and a Proposition Regarding the CSR Agenda

  • Francis WeyzigEmail author


Different perspectives on corporate social responsibility (CSR) exist, each with their own agenda. Some emphasise management responsibilities towards stakeholders, others argue that companies should actively contribute to social goals, and yet others reject a social responsibility of business beyond legal compliance. In addition, CSR initiatives relate to different issues, such as labour standards and corruption. This article analyses what types of CSR initiatives are supported by political and economic arguments. The distinction between different CSR perspectives and CSR issues on the one hand and between political and economic arguments on the other could help to advance the debate on the justification and welfare impact of CSR. It is argued that ordinary boundary conditions for business behaviour in a market economy provide support for some, but not all, CSR initiatives. This has implications for policy priorities. Building on the analysis, it is proposed that more attention should be paid to the behaviour of large multinational enterprises in their normal business operations and to CSR issues with a potentially large impact on market functioning.


broader goals corporate social responsibility market failures market functioning multinational enterprises neo-liberal economics social contract stakeholder theory welfare impact 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bendell, J. (2005). In whose name? The accountability of corporate social responsibility. Development in Practice, 15(3), 362–375. doi: 10.1080/09614520500075813 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blowfield, M. (2005). Corporate Social Responsibility: reinventing the meaning of development? International Affairs, 81(3), 515–524. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2346.2005.00466.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boatright, J.R. 2000, Ethics and the conduct of business (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River)Google Scholar
  4. Carroll, A.B. (1979). A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505. doi: 10.2307/257850 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carroll, A.B. (1991). The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Towards the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48. doi: 10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carroll, A.B. (1999). Corporate Social Responsibility. Evolution of a Definitional Construct. Business & Society, 38(3), 268–295. doi: 10.1177/000765039903800303 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Christensen, J., & Murphy, R. (2004). The Social Irresponsibility of Corporate Tax Avoidance: Taking CSR to the bottom line. Development, 47(3), 37–44. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.development.1100066 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clarkson, M.B.E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–117. doi: 10.2307/258888 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cramer, J., Jonker, J., & van der Heijden, A. (2004). Making Sense of Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 55(2), 215–222. doi: 10.1007/s10551-004-1903-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dhanarajan, S. (2005). Managing ethical standards: When rhetoric meets reality. Development in Practice, 15(3), 529–539. doi: 10.1080/09614520500075946 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T. 1999, Ties that bind: A social contract approach to business ethics (Harvard Business School Press, Boston)Google Scholar
  12. Dunfee, T. (2006). A Critical Perspective of Integrative Social Contracts Theory: Recurring Criticisms and Next Generation Research Topics. Journal of Business Ethics, 68(3), 303–328. doi: 10.1007/s10551-006-9016-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Elkington, J. 1997, Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom line of the 21st century business (Capstone Publishing, London)Google Scholar
  14. Elkington, J. 2001, The chrysalis economy: How citizen CEOs and their corporations can fuse values and value creation (Capstone Publishing, London)Google Scholar
  15. Friedman, M. 1962, Capitalism and Freedom (University of Chicago Press, Chicago)Google Scholar
  16. Friedman, M.: 1970, ‹The Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits’, The New York Times Magazine September 13Google Scholar
  17. Hartman, L. P., B. Shaw and R. Stevenson: 1999, ‹Balancing Sweatshop Ethics and Economics: Labor Standards Working Paper No. 9901’, SSRN, (accessed June 2008)
  18. Hayes, B. and B. Walker: 2005, ‹Corporate Responsibility or Core Competence?’, Development in Practice 15(3), 405–413Google Scholar
  19. Heap, S. 2000, NGOs engaging with business: A World of Difference and a Difference to the World (INTRAC, Oxford)Google Scholar
  20. Heath, J. (2006). Business Ethics Without Stakeholders. Business Ethics Quarterly, 16(4), 533–557Google Scholar
  21. Henderson, D. 2001, Misguided Virtue: False notions of Corporate Social Responsibility (Institute of Economic Affairs, London)Google Scholar
  22. Henderson, D.: 2005, ‹The Role of Business in the World of Today’, Journal of Corporate Citizenship 17, 30–32Google Scholar
  23. Holme, R., & Watts, P. 2000, Corporate social responsibility: Making good business sense (WBCSD, Geneva)Google Scholar
  24. Jenkins, R. (2005). Globalization, Corporate Social Responsibility and poverty. International Affairs, 81(3), 525–540. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2346.2005.00467.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kell, G. and J. G. Ruggie: 1999, Global Markets And Social Legitimacy: The Case For The “Global Compact”. Transnational Corporations, 8(3), 101–119Google Scholar
  26. Kraakman, R., & Hansmann, H. 2004, ‹Agency Problems and Legal Strategies. In R. Kraakman et al. (eds.) The Anatomy of Corporate Law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 21–31Google Scholar
  27. Mackenzie, C.: 2004, ‹Moral Sanctions’, Journal of Corporate Citizenship 15, 49–61Google Scholar
  28. Maitland, I. 2000, ‹The Great Non-Debate over International Sweatshops. In T. Beauchamp and N. Bowie (eds.), Ethical Theory and Business. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, pp. 579–590Google Scholar
  29. Marens, R. (2004). Wobbling on a One-Legged Stool: The Decline of American Pluralism and the Academic Treatment of Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Academic Ethics, 2(1), 63–87. doi: 10.1023/B:JAET.0000039008.46810.32 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Marens, R. (2007). Returning to Rawls: Social Contracting, Social Justice, and Transcending the Limitations of Locke. Journal of Business Ethics, 75(1), 63–76. doi: 10.1007/s10551-006-9238-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Marsden, C. 2001, ‹Making a Positive Impact on Society’, in S. Nourick (eds.), Corporate Social Responsibility: Partners for Progress (OECD, Paris), pp. 45–49Google Scholar
  32. Murphy, D.F., & Bendell, J. 1999, Partners in Time? Business, NGOs and Sustainable Development. UNRISD, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  33. Norberg, J.: 2003, ‹Why Corporations Shouldn’t be Socially Responsible: A Critical Examination of the Theories of CSR’, in Conference Managing on the Edge: Keynotes, Session Proposals and Proceedings (University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen), p. 19Google Scholar
  34. OECD. 2001a, Corporate responsibility: Private Initiatives and Public Goals. OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  35. OECD.2001b, OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises: Annual Report 2001. Global Instruments for Corporate Responsibility (OECD, Paris)Google Scholar
  36. Prahalad, C.K. (2002). Strategies for the Bottom of the Economic Pyramid: India as a Source of Innovation. Reflections: The SOL Journal, 3(4), 6–18. doi: 10.1162/152417302760127192 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Reich, R.B. 2007, Supercapitalism: The Transformation of Business, Democracy and Everyday Life (Knopf, New York)Google Scholar
  38. Rodin, D. (2005). The Ownership Model of Business Ethics. Metaphilosophy, 36(1/2), 163–181. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9973.2005.00361.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sacconi, L. (2006). A Social Contract Account for CSR as an Extended Model of Corporate Governance (I): Rational Bargaining and Justification. Journal of Business Ethics, 68(3), 259–281. doi: 10.1007/s10551-006-9014-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sargent, J., & Matthews, L. (1999). Exploitation or Choice? Exploring the Relative Attractiveness of Employment in the Maquiladoras. Journal of Business Ethics, 18(2), 213–227. doi: 10.1023/A:1005742629319 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Singh, A.: 2003, ‹CSR from a Developmental Perspective’, in Summaries of Conference on CSR and Development: Towards a New Agenda (UNRISD, Geneva), pp.␣47–54Google Scholar
  42. Sustain Ability and WWF-UK. 2005, Influencing Power: Reviewing the conduct and content of corporate lobbying. SustainAbility, LondonGoogle Scholar
  43. UNCTAD. 1999, The Social Responsibility of Transnational Corporations. UNCTAD, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  44. Utting, P. (2005). Corporate responsibility and the movement of business. Development in Practice, 15(3), 375–389. doi: 10.1080/09614520500075797 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Utting, P. (2007). CSR and Equality. Third World Quarterly, 28(4), 697–713. doi: 10.1080/01436590701336572 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wettstein, F.: 2005, ‹From Causality to Capability’, Journal of Corporate Citizenship 19, 105–117Google Scholar
  47. Zeldenrust, I.: 2003, ‹Multistakeholder Initiatives’, in Summaries of Conference on CSR and Development: Towards a New Agenda (UNRISD, Geneva), pp. 32–36Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations (SOMO)AmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations