Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Strategic and Moral Dilemmas of Corporate Philanthropy in Developing Countries: Heineken in Sub-Saharan Africa

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This case study illustrates the dilemmas facing multinational companies in meeting social challenges in Sub-Saharan Africa (especially health-related ones). It also discusses the purpose, responsibilities and limitations of business involvement in social development. From a business standpoint, social challenges in developing countries differ greatly from those in nations where governments or markets effectively provide for the population’s health needs. The case illustrates what led a multinational to set up a corporate foundation and focuses on three strategic and operational dilemmas it ran up against. The case discussion shows that the ethical issues intertwined with these dilemmas are best understood using a variety of ethical approaches. We also show that Ethics of Care are just as relevant to analysing corporate social responsibility and corporate philanthropy as the Deontological and Utilitarianism theories commonly used in business ethics.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The Erasmus Centre for Strategic Philanthropy (ECSP) aims to contribute to the overall performance and effectiveness of the philanthropy sector. ECSP addresses the challenges and needs of all philanthropic organizations in Europe, which annually contribute over €50,000 m to a large variety of projects. The services are backed by an academic research program focused on practical and impact-oriented issues within philanthropy. (http://www.erim.eur.nl/research/centres/strategic-philanthropy/).

  2. After her visit to Ethiopia in March 2013, Dutch minister of Development Aid, Liliane Ploumen was quoted in De Volkskrant (Dutch newspaper) of the 2nd of March 2013 as saying that ‘trade works better than aid’, pointing out to investments leading to job creation, stable incomes and provision of food.

  3. After collection of data a teaching case was developed primarily for business ethics and corporate responsibility courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels. It has been successfully used in class room settings in MBA courses. After each trial, the case was revised and detailed by the authors taking into account the feedback of both the students that participated as well as the course managers and professors in charge.

  4. www.annualreport.Heineken.com (visited 19 October 2011).

  5. Unpublished research carried out in a Heineken operating company in Congo questioned employees and dependents on the main reasons for working for the company; healthcare was the third most important reason after training and salary.

  6. Support was given through a €500,000 donation.

  7. PharmAccess International is an international organization fostering access to affordable quality basic health care in low-income countries in Africa (www.pharmaccess.org).

  8. HAART is ‘Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy’ for people diagnosed as HIV positive.

  9. Namibia Breweries Limited is a joint venture between Heineken and the Ohlthaver & List Group of Companies.

References

  • Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. (2012). Why nations fail: The origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. New York: Crown Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnove, R. F. (1980). Philanthropy and cultural imperialism: The foundations at home and abroad. Boston, MA: G.K. Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnove, R. F. (2007). Revisiting the “big three” foundations. Critical Sociology, 33, 389–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, A. V., & Duflo, E. (2011). Poverty and risk: A review of poor economics: A radical rethinking of the way to fight global poverty. New York: Public Affairs Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barder, O. (2009). Beyond planning: Markets and planning for better aid. Centre for Global Development, Working Paper 185.

  • Barder, O., & Birdsall, N. (2006). Payments for progress: A hands-off approach to foreign aid. Centre for Global Development, Working Paper 102.

  • Baron, D. (2001). Private politics, corporate social responsibility and integrated strategy. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 10, 7–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, P. (1972). Dissent on development. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp, T. L., Bowie, N. E., & Arnold, D. G. (2012). Ethical theory and business. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, D. E., Bloom, L. R., Steven, D., & Weston, M. (2006). Business & HIV/AIDS: A healthier partnership? A global review of the business response to HIV/AIDS 2005–2006. Geneva: World Economic Forum. http://www.weforum.org. Retrieved Oct 19, 2011.

  • Boatright, J. R. (1999). Does business ethics rest on a mistake? Business Ethics Quarterly, 9(4), 583–591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowie, N. E. (1999). A Kantian approach to business ethics. In R. E. Frederick (Ed.), A companion to business ethics (pp. 3–16). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Burdge, R. J., & Vanclay, F. (1996). Social impact assessment: A contribution to the state of the art series. Impact Assessment, 14, 59–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, L., & Logsdon, J. M. (1996). How corporate social responsibility pays off. Long Range Planning, 29(4), 495–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carman, J., & Fredericks, K. (2010). Evaluation capacity and nonprofit organizations: Is the glass half-empty or half-full? American Journal of Evaluation, 31(3), 84–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Renzio, P., & Woods, N. (2008). The trouble with cash on delivery aid: A note on its potential effects on recipient country institutions, Centre for Global Development, Note prepared for the CGD Initiative on ‘Cash on Delivery Aid’.

  • Dunfee, T. W., & Hess, D. (2000). The legitimacy of direct corporate humanitarian investment. Business Ethics Quarterly, 10(1), 95–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterly, W. (2001). The elusive quest for growth: Economists’ adventures and misadventures in the tropics. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahim, A., & Rangan, V. K. (2010). The limits of non profit impact: A contingency framework for measuring social performance. Harvard Business School Working Paper 10-099.

  • French, W., & Weis, A. (2000). An ethics of care or an ethics of justice. Journal of Business Ethics, 27, 125–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freudenburg, W. R. (1986). Social impact assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 12, 451–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frumkin, P. (2006). Strategic giving. The art and science of philanthropy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, T. P., Knock, C. L., & Neely, D. G. (2009). The role of rating agencies in the market for charitable contributions: An empirical test. Journal of Accountable Public Policy, 28, 469–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (1997). Ethnography: Principles in practice (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heineken. (2007). Heineken Health Symposium, speeches, video overview and photo gallery. http://www.symposium.heineken.com. Retrieved Jan 18, 2012.

  • Hemingway, C. A., & Maclagan, P. W. (2004). Managers’ personal values as drivers of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 50, 33–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolk, A., & Lenfant, F. (2012). Business–NGO collaboration in a conflict setting: Partnership activities in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Business & Society, 51, 1–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolk, A., & van Tulder, R. (2002). The effectiveness of self-regulation: Corporate codes of conduct and child labour. European Management Journal, 20(3), 260–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kostova, T., & Zaheer, S. (1999). Organizational legitimacy under conditions of complexity: The case of the multinational enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 24(1), 64–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lantos, G. P. (2001). The boundaries of strategic corporate social responsibility. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 595–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latané, B. (1981). The psychology of social impact. American Psychologist, 36(4), 343–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M.-D. P. (2008). Theory of corporate social responsibility: Its evolutionary path and the road ahead. International Journal of Management Review, 10(1), 53–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liedtka, J. M. (1996). Feminist morality and competitive reality: A role for an ethics of care? Business Ethics Quarterly, 6(2), 179–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • London, T., & Hart, S. L. (2004). Reinventing strategies for emerging markets: Beyond the transnational model. Journal of International Business Studies, 35, 350–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maak, T. (2009). The cosmopolitical corporation. Journal of Business Ethics, 84, 361–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maas, K., & Liket, K. (2011). Social impact measurement: Classification of methods, environmental accounting and supply chain measurement. Eco-Efficiency in Industry and Science, 27(3), 171–202.

  • McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meijs, L. C. P. M. (2010). Reinventing strategic philanthropy: The sustainable organization of voluntary action for impact. Inaugural Address Series, Research in Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam. ISBN 978-90-5892-230-4.

  • Moyo, D. (2009). Doodlopende hulp: waarom ontwikkelingshulp niet werkt, en wat er wél moet gebeuren, Uitgeverij Contact.

  • Murray, V. (2005). Evaluating the effectiveness of nonprofit organizations. In R. Herman & Associates (Ed.), The Jossey Bass handbook of nonprofit management, 2nd edn. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

  • Porter, M., & Kramer, M. (2011). Creating shared value: How to reinvent capitalism—and unleash a wave of innovation and growth. Harvard Business Review, 89(1/2), 62–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinikka, R., & Svensson, J. (2004). The power of information: Evidence from a newspaper campaign to reduce capture. Working paper, IIES, Stockholm University.

  • Rodrigo, P., & Arenas, D. (2008). Do employees care about CSR programs? A typology of employees according to their attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(2), 265–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roome, N. (2011). Looking back, thinking forward: Distinguishing between weak and strong sustainability. In T. Bansal & A. Hoffman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of business and the natural environment (pp. 620–629). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sachs, J. (2005). Who beats corruption. http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/who-beats-corruption. Retrieved March 7, 2013.

  • Saxton, G. D., & Guo, C. (2011). Accountability online: Understanding the web-based accountability practices of nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(2), 270–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selsky, J., & Parker, B. (2005). Cross-sector partnerships to address social issues: Challenges to theory and practice. Journal of Management, 31(6), 849–873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (2002). One world. The ethics of globalization. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, C. (1994). The new corporate philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, 72(May/June):105–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J. D. (2005). Moral markets and managers revisited. Journal of Business Ethics, 61, 129–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J., & Dubbink, W. (2011). Understanding the role of moral principles in business ethics: A Kantian perspective. Business Ethics Quarterly, 21(2), 205–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stork, D., & Woodlilla, J. (2007). Nonprofit organizations: An introduction to charity rating sources and cautions in their use. The International Journal of Applied Management and Technology, 6(4), 5–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valente, M., & Crane, A. (2010). Public responsibility and private enterprise in developing countries. California Management Review, 12(3), 52–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Cranenburgh, K. C., Arenas, D., & Albareda, L. (2010). Healthcare provision of a multinational company operating in emerging markets. Ethical motivations, benefits of healthcare investment and the impact on socially responsible investors. In C. Louche, S. O. Idowu, & W. L. Filho (Eds.), Innovative CSR: From risk management to value creation. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the weld: On writing ethnography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Tulder, R., van Wijk, J., & Kolk, A. (2008). From chain liabililty to chain responsibility: MNE approaches to implement safety and health codes in international supply chain. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 399–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, B. (1981). Moral luck. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, A., & West, C. (1981). The marketing of “unmentionables”. Harvard Business Review, 51(1), 91–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. J., & Jones, R. E. (1995). Stakeholder mismatching: A theoretical problem in empirical research on corporate social performance. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 3, 229–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Katinka C. Van Cranenburgh

  2. ESADE Business School, Ramon Lull University, Barcelona, Spain

    Daniel Arenas

Authors
  1. Katinka C. Van Cranenburgh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniel Arenas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katinka C. Van Cranenburgh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Van Cranenburgh, K.C., Arenas, D. Strategic and Moral Dilemmas of Corporate Philanthropy in Developing Countries: Heineken in Sub-Saharan Africa. J Bus Ethics 122, 523–536 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1776-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1776-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation