Advertisement

Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 81, Issue 2, pp 371–385 | Cite as

Conceptualizing the Dynamics of Social Responsibility: Evidence from a Case Study of Estonia

  • Ruth AlasEmail author
  • Külliki Tafel
Article

Abstract

During the last decade and a half, Estonia has concentrated predominantly on economic development in its narrowest sense. Currently, the emphasis is gradually moving towards a broader approach, including an increasingly social agenda. The research question here concerns the awareness of corporate social responsibility among Estonian owners and managers. Empirical research in Estonia indicates that there has been a shift towards recognizing the importance of social responsibility, but this primarily concerns the “lower layers” of social responsibility, recognizing the importance of economic responsibility and in some respects also public responsibility. Responses in interviews show a certain amount of personal initiative, but these are single examples rather than a general trend and are not enough to change the overall picture. Still, in any assessment of the current situation regarding social responsibility in Estonia, emphasis should be laid on the fact that changes are taking effect and will continue to do so. In transition economies, including Estonia, we should not overlook the fact that, at least in the early years of transition, the focus is on a rapid economic development where the social side will inevitably be left in the background and economic development will take place at the expense of social and environmental development.

Keywords

Estonia corporate social responsibility owner transition economy 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alas R.: 2004 The Reasons for the Low Popularity of Trade Unions in Estonia. Journal of Human Resource Management, 1–2: 14–28Google Scholar
  2. Balogun, J. and V. H. Hailey: 2004, Exploring Strategic Change (Prentice Hall).Google Scholar
  3. Carroll A. B.: 1991 The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34: 39–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Garriga E., D. Melé: 2004 Corporate Social Responsibility Theories: Mapping the Territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1–2): 51–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gatewood E., A. B. Carroll: 1981 The Anatomy of Corporate Social Response. Business Horizons, 24: 9–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gray, J. and S. Graff: 2003, Responsibility strategies (Green@work, January/ February).Google Scholar
  7. Friedman, M.: 1970, ‹The Responsibility of Business is to Increase Its Profits’, New York Times Magazine, 13 SeptemberGoogle Scholar
  8. Hoffman, A. J.: 1997, From heresy to dogma: An institutional history of corporate environmentalism (San Francisco: New Lexington Press).Google Scholar
  9. Laar, M.: 2002, New Beginning of Estonia (Konrad Adenauer Stiftung).Google Scholar
  10. van Marrewijk, M.: 2003 Concepts and Definitions of CSR and Corporate Sustainability: Between Agency and Communication. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2/3): 95–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Reidenbach R. E., D. P. Robin: 1991 A Conceptual Model of Corporate Moral Development. Journal of Business Ethics, 10: 273–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Singer A. E.: 1994 Strategy as Moral Philosophy. Strategic Management Journal, 15(3): 191–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Szwajkowski, E. W.: 1986, ‹The Myths and Realities of Research of Organizational Misconduct’, in Post, J. E. (ed.), Research in corporate social performance and policy, Vol. 9 (JAI Press, Greenwich, Conn), pp. 103–122.Google Scholar
  14. Schwartz M. S., A. B. Carroll: 2003 Corporate Social Responsibility: A Three Domain Approach. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(4): 503–530Google Scholar
  15. Terk, E.: 2005, Eesti majanduspoliitika: muutuv või muutumatu – Eesti poliitika eile, täna, homme. Tartu Johannes Mihkelsoni Keskus.Google Scholar
  16. Wartick S. L., P. L. Cochran: 1985 The Evolution on the Corporate Social Performance Model. Academy of Management Review, 10: 758–769CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Wilenius, M.: 2005, Towards the age of corporate responsibility? Emerging challenges for the business world, www.elsevier.com/locate/futures, visited June 2005. Google Scholar
  18. Wood D. J.: 1991 Corporate Social Performance Revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16(4): 691–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of ManagementEstonian Business SchoolTallinnEstonia
  2. 2.Estonian Institute for Futures StudiesTallinnEstonia

Personalised recommendations