Weltorganisationen, transnationale Unternehmen und die Diffusion von CSR

Chapter
First Online:

Zusammenfassung

Die Idee der Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) verbreitet sich seit den 1990er Jahren zunehmend bei transnationalen Unternehmen. CSR ist ein offensichtlicher und globaler Trend geworden (Carroll 2008; Sahlin-Andersson 2005). Dieser äußert sich etwa in der Entwicklung von Verhaltenskodizes durch Unternehmen, die zunehmende Publikation von Nachhaltigkeitsberichten oder auch in der Beteiligung von Unternehmen an kollektiven CSR-Initiativen und Public Private Partnerships auf nationaler und globaler Ebene. Während Unternehmen in den 1990er Jahren zunächst begannen, Umweltberichte zu veröffentlichen, wurden ab Ende der 1990er Jahre zunehmend umfassendere Nachhaltigkeitsberichte publiziert, die auch breitere gesellschaftliche und soziale Aspekte der unternehmerischen Geschäftstätigkeit thematisierten (Kolk 2005).

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

Literatur

  1. Abbott, Kenneth W., und Duncan Snidal. 2009. The governance triangle: Regulatory standard institutions and the shadow of the state. In The Politics of Global Regulation, Hrsg. Walter Mattli, und Ngaire Woods, 44–88. Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  2. Barnett, Michael, und Martha Finnemore. 2004. Rules for the world: International organizations in global politics. Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
  3. Boli, John, und George M. Thomas 1999. Introduction. In Constructing world culture: International nongovernmental organizations since 1875, Hrsg. John Boli, und George M. Thomas, 1–10. Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
  4. Brewer, Thomas L., und Stephen Young. 1998. The multilateral investment system and multinational enterprises. Oxford.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, Halina Szejnwald, de Jong, Martin, und Teodorina Lessidrenska. 2007. The rise of the global reporting initiative (GRI) as a case of institutional entrepreneurship (Working Paper No. 36), Cambridge, MA: Corporate social responsibility initative. http://www.hks.harvard.edu/m-rcbg/CSRI/publications/workingpaper_36_brown.pdf. letzter Zugriff: 10. Sep. 2010.
  6. Brühl, Tanja. 2003. Nichtregierungsorganisationen als Akteure internationaler Umweltverhandlungen: Ein Erklärungsmodell auf der Basis der situationsspezifischen Ressourcennachfrage. Frankfurt a. M.Google Scholar
  7. Brunsson, Nils, Jacobsson, Bengt und Associates Hrsg. 2000. A world of standards. Oxford.Google Scholar
  8. Carroll, Archie B. 2008. A history of corporate social responsibility: Concepts and practices. In The oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility, Hrsg. Andrew Crane, Abagail McWilliams, Dirk Matten, Jeremy Moon, und Donald S. Siegel, 19–45. Oxford.Google Scholar
  9. Coni-Zimmer, Melanie. 2011. Corporate Social Responsibility zwischen globaler Diffusion und Lokalisierung. Eine Studie zur Verbreitung von Corporate Social Responsibility bei transnationalen Unternehmen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Ölindustrie. Inauguraldissertation zur Erlangung des Doktors der Philosophie im Fachbereich Gesellschafts- und Geschichtswissenschaften an der Technischen Universität Darmstadt, April 2011.Google Scholar
  10. Cusimano, Maryann K., Hensman, Mark, und Leslie Riodrigues. 2000. Private-sector transsovereign actors—MNCs and NGOs. In Beyond sovereignty: Issues for a global agenda, Hrsg. Maryann K. Cusimano, 255–282. Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  11. Cutler, A. Claire. 2006. Transnational business civilization, corporations, and the privatization of global governance. In Global corporate power: International political economy yearbook, Hrsg. Christopher May, 199–226. Boulder, CO.Google Scholar
  12. Cutler, A. Claire, Haufler, Virginia, und Tony Porter, Hrsg. 1999. Private authority and international affairs. Albany, NY.Google Scholar
  13. Davis, Gerald F. und Christopher Marquis. 2005. Prospects for organization theory in the early 21st century: institutional fields and mechanisms. Organization Science 16 (4): 332–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Deitelhoff, Nicole. 2006. Überzeugung in der Politik. Grundzüge einer Diskurstheorie internationalen Regierens. Frankfurt a. M.Google Scholar
  15. Deitelhoff, Nicole, Feil, Moira, Fischer, Susanne, Haidvogl, Andreas, Wolf, Klaus Dieter, und Melanie Zimmer. 2010. Business in zones of conflict and global security governance: What has been Learnt and Where to from Here? In Corporate security responsibility? private governance contributions to peace and security in zones of conflict, Hrsg. Nicole Deitelhoff, und Klaus Dieter Wolf, 202–226. Basingstoke.Google Scholar
  16. Deitelhoff, Nicole und Klaus Dieter Wolf. 2010. Corporate security responsibility: Corporate governance contributions to peace and security in zones of conflict. In Corporate security responsibility? corporate governance contributions to peace and security in zones of conflict, Hrsg. Deitelhoff, Nicole, und Klaus Dieter Wolf, 1–25. Basingstoke.Google Scholar
  17. DiMaggio, Paul J., und Walter W. Powell. 1991 [1983]. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. In The new institutionalism in organizational analysis, Hrsg. Walter W., und DiMaggio, Paul J., 63–82. Chicago.Google Scholar
  18. Drori, Gili S., Meyer, W. und Hokyu Hwang. Hrsg. 2006. Globalization and organization: World society and organizational change. Oxford.Google Scholar
  19. Europäische Kommission. 2001. Grünbuch: Europäische Rahmenbedingungen für die soziale Verantwortung der Unternehmen, Brüssel: Europäische Kommission. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/de/com/2001/com2001_0366de01.pdf. Letzter Zugriff: 26. Feb. 2011.
  20. European Commission. 2006. Implementing the partnership for growth and jobs. Making Europe a pole of excellence on corporate social responsibility, brussels: Commission of the European communities. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri = COM:2006:0136:FIN:en:PDF. Letzter Zugriff: 14. Jan. 2011.
  21. Fairbrass, Jenny. 2008. EU, UK and French CSR policy: What is the evidence for policy transfer and convergence?, Unpublished Manuscript. http://www.brad.ac.uk/acad/management/external/pdf/workingpapers/2008/Booklet_08–20.pdf. Letzter Zugriff: 15. Feb. 2010.
  22. Finnemore, Martha. 1996. National interests in international society. Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
  23. Finnemore, Marthaund Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization 52 (4): 887–917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Flohr, Annegret, Rieth, Lothar, Schwindenhammer, Sandra, und Klaus Dieter Wolf. 2010. The role of business in global governance: Corporations as norm-entrepreneurs. Basingstoke.Google Scholar
  25. Friedman, Milton. 1970. The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York times magazine.Google Scholar
  26. Gjolberg, Maria. 2009. The origin of corporate social responsibility: Global forces or national legacies?. Socio-Economic Review 7 (4): 605–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Global Compact. 2010a. Coming of age: UN-private sector collaboration since 2000. New York: United Nations Global Compact Office.Google Scholar
  28. Global Compact. 2010b. Local Network Report 2010. New York: United Nations Global Compact Office.Google Scholar
  29. Hamid, Uzma, und Oliver Johner. 2010. The United Nations global compact communication on progress policy: Origins, trends and challenges. In The United Nations global compact: Achievements, trends and challenges, Hrsg. Rasche, Andreas, und Kell, Georg, 265–280. Cambridge.Google Scholar
  30. Hasse, Raimund, und Georg Krücken. 2005. Neo-Institutionalismus. Bielefeld.Google Scholar
  31. Haufler, Virginia. 2001. A public role for the private sector: Industry self-regulation in a global economy. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  32. Haufler, Virginia. 2006. Global governance and the private sector. In Global corporate power, Hrsg. Christopher May, 85–103. Boulder, CO.Google Scholar
  33. Hoffman, Andrew J. 1999. Institutional evolution and change: Environmentalism and the U.S. chemical industry. Academy of Management Journal 42 (2): 351–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hoffman, Andrew J. 2001. Linking organizational and field-level analyses: The diffusion of corporate environmental practice. Organization & Environment 14 (2): 133–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jakobi, Anja P. 2009. International organizations and lifelong learning: From global agendas to policy diffusion. Houndmills.Google Scholar
  36. Jones, Geoffrey. 2005. Multinationals from the 1930s to the 1980s. In Leviathans: Multinational corporations and the new global history, Hrsg. Chandler, Alfred D., und Mazlish, Bruce, 81–104. Cambridge.Google Scholar
  37. Keck, Margaret E. und Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics. Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
  38. Kell, Georg. 2003. The global compact: Origins, operations, progress, challenges. Journal of Corporate Citizenship 3 (11): 35–49.Google Scholar
  39. Kell, Georg, und David Levin. 2003. The global compact network: An historic experiment in learning and action. Business and Society Review 108 (2): 151–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kell, Georg, und John G. Ruggie. 1999. Global markets and social legitimacy: The case of the global compact. Transnational Corporations 8 (3): 101–120.Google Scholar
  41. Knill, Christoph. 2005. Introduction: Cross-national policy convergence: Concepts, approaches and explanatory factors. Journal of European Public Policy 12 (5): 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kobrin, Stephen J. 2005. Multinational corporations, the protest movement, and the future of global governance. In Leviathans: Multinational corporations and the new global history, Hrsg. Chandler, Alfred D., und Mazlish, Bruce, 219–236. Cambridge.Google Scholar
  43. Koch, Martin. 2009. Autonomization of IGOs. International Political Sociology 3 (4): 431–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kolk, Ans. 2004. A decade of sustainability reporting: Developments and significance. International Journal of Environment and Sustainable Development 3 (1): 51–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kolk, Ans. 2005. Sustainability reporting. VBA Journaal 3 (1): 34–42.Google Scholar
  46. KPMG. 2002. KPMG international survey of corporate sustainability reporting 2002. Amsterdam: KPMG.Google Scholar
  47. KPMG. 2005. KPMG international survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2005. Amsterdam: KPMG.Google Scholar
  48. KPMG. 2008. KPMG international survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2008. Amsterdam: KPMG.Google Scholar
  49. Meyer, John W. 2000. Globalization: Sources and effects on national states and societies. International Sociology 15 (2): 235–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Meyer, John W., Boli, John, Thomas, George M. und Francisco O. Ramirez. 1997a. World society and the Nation-State. American Journal of Sociology 103 (1): 144–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Meyer, John W., Frank, David John, Hironaka, Ann, Schofer, Evan Brandon, und Nancy Tuma. 1997b. The structuring of a world environmental regime, 1870–1990. International Organization 51 (4): 623–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Meyer, John W. und Brian Rowan. 1991 [1977]. Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. In The new institutionalism in organizational analysis, Hrsg. Walter W. Powell, und Paul J DiMaggio, 41–62. Chicago.Google Scholar
  53. Murray, Jill. 2001. A new phase in the regulation of multinational enterprises: The role of the OECD. Industrial Law Journal 30 (3): 255–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Nowrot, Karsten. 2004. Nun sag, wie hast du’s mit den Global Players? Fragen an die Völkerrechtsgemeinschaft zur internationalen Rechtsstellung transnationaler Unternehmen. Die Friedens-Warte 79 (1)–2: 119–150.Google Scholar
  55. OECD. 2000. Die OECD-Leitsätze für multinationale Unternehmen. Neufassung 2000. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  56. OECD. 2001. Corporate responsibility: private initiatives and public goals. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  57. OECD. 2006. OECD risk awareness tool for multinational enterprises in weak zones of governance. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  58. OECD. 2010. OECD due diligence guidance for responsible supply chains of minerals from conflict-affected and high-risk areas. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  59. OECD Watch. 2010. 10 years on. Assessing the contribution of the OECD guidelines for multinational enterprises to responsible business conduct. Amsterdam: OECD Watch. http://oecdwatch.org/publications-en/Publication_3550/view. letzter Zugriff: 18. Oct. 2010.
  60. Price, Richard. 2003. Transnational civil society and advocacy in world politics. World Politics 55 (4): 579–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rasche, Andreas, und Georg Kell, Hrsg. 2010. The United Nations global compact: Achievements, trends and challenges. Cambridge.Google Scholar
  62. Rieth, Lothar. 2004. Der VN global compact: Was als experiment begann…, Die Friedens-Warte 79 (1)–2: 151–170.Google Scholar
  63. Rieth, Lothar. 2009. Global governance and corporate social responsibility. Welchen Einfluss haben der UN Global Compact, die Global Reporting Initiative und die OECD Leitsätze auf das CSR-Engagement deutscher Unternehmen. Opladen.Google Scholar
  64. Rieth, Lothar und Melanie Zimmer. 2004. Unternehmen in der Rohstoffindustrie – Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Konfliktprävention. Die Friedens-Warte 79 (1)–2: 75–101.Google Scholar
  65. Risse, Thomas. 2002. Transnational actors and world politics. In Handbook of international relations, Hrsg. Walter Carlsnaes, Risse, Thomas, und Simmons, Beth A., 255–274.London.Google Scholar
  66. Rittberger, Volker, Carmen Huckel, Lothar Rieth und Bernhard Zangl. 2008. Inclusive global institutions for a global political economy. In Changing patterns of authority in the global political economy, Hrsg. Rittberger, Volker, und Nettesheim, Martin, 13–54. Basingstoke.Google Scholar
  67. Rittberger, Volker, und Zangl, Bernhard. 2003. Internationale Organisationen – Politik und Geschichte. Europäische und weltweite internationale Zusammenschlüsse, 3. überarb. Auflage. Opladen.Google Scholar
  68. Rogers, Everett M. 2003. Diffusion of Innovations, 5. Aufl. New York.Google Scholar
  69. Ruggie, John G. 2001. global_governance.net: The global compact as learning network. Global Governance 7 (4): 371–378.Google Scholar
  70. Ruggie, John G. 2004. Reconstituting the global public domain – issues, actors, and practices. European Journal of International Relations 10 (4): 499–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Sagafi-nejad, Tagi. 2008. The UN and transnational corporations: From code of conduct to global compact. Bloomington.Google Scholar
  72. Sahlin-Andersson, Kerstin. 2005. Corporate social responsibility: A trend and a movement, but of what and for what?. Corporate Governance 6 (5): 595–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Segerlund, Lisbeth. 2010. Making corporate social responsibility a global concern: Norm construction in a globalizing world. Farnham.Google Scholar
  74. Simmons, Beth A., Dobbin, Frank und Geoffrey Garrett. 2008. Introduction: The diffusion of liberalization. In The global diffusion of markets and democracy, Hrsg. Simmons, Beth A., Dobbin, Frank, und Geoffrey Garrett, 1–63. Cambridge.Google Scholar
  75. Utz, Britta. 2006. Die OECD-Leitsätze für multinationale Unternehmen: Eine erste Bilanz der Wirkungsweise des Vermittlungs- und Schlichtungsverfahrens der Leitsätze anhand der abgeschlossenen Beschwerdefälle bei Nationalen Kontaktstellen 2000–2005 (artec-paper Nr. 134), Bremen: Universität Bremen.Google Scholar
  76. Vogel, David. 2008. Private global business regulation. Annual Review of Political Science 11:261–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Volger, Helmut. 2008. Geschichte der Vereinten Nationen, 2. akt. u. erw. Aufl. München.Google Scholar
  78. Walgenbach, Peter. 2006. Neoinstitutionalistische Ansätze in der Organisationstheorie. In Organisationstheorien, 6. Aufl., Hrsg. Kieser, Alfred, und Ebers, Marc, 353–402. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  79. Whelan, Nessa. 2010. Building the United Nations global compact local network model: History and highlights. In The United Nations global compact: Achievements, trends and challenges, Hrsg. Rasche, Andreas, und Kell, Georg, 317–339. Cambridge.Google Scholar
  80. Wobbe, Theresa. 2000. Weltgesellschaft. Bielefeld.Google Scholar
  81. Wolf, Klaus Dieter. 2008. Emerging patterns of global governance: The new interplay between the state, business and civil society. In Handbook of research on global corporate citizenship, Hrsg. Scherer, Andreas Georg, und Palazzo, Guido, 225–48. Cheltenham.Google Scholar
  82. Wolf, Klaus Dieter. 2010. Chartered companies: linking private security governance in early and post modernity. In Corporate security responsibility? private governance contributions to peace and security in zones of conflict, Hrsg. Wolf, Klaus Dieter Wolf, und Deitelhoff, Nicole, 154–176. Basingstoke.Google Scholar
  83. Wolf, Klaus Dieter, Deitelhoff, Nicole und Stefan Engert. 2007. Corporate security responsibility: Towards a conceptual framework for a comparative research agenda. Cooperation and Conflict 42 (3): 295–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wooten, Melissa und Andrew J. Hoffman. 2008. Organizational fields: Past, present and future. In The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism, Hrsg. Greenwood, Royston, Oliver, Christine, Suddaby, Roy, und Sahlin, Kerstin, 130–147. Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
  85. Yaziji Michael und Jonathan Doh. 2009. NGOs and corporations: Conflict and collaboration. Cambridge.Google Scholar
  86. Zimmer, Melanie. 2010a. Oil companies in Nigeria: Emerging good practice or still fuelling conflict?. In Corporate security responsibility? private governance contributions to peace and security in zones of conflict, Hrsg. Deitelhoff, Nicole, und Wolf, Klaus Dieter, 58–84. Basingstoke.Google Scholar
  87. Zimmer, Melanie. 2010b. World business council on sustainable development. In International encyclopedia of civil society, Hrsg. Anheier, Helmut K., und Toepler, Stefan New York.Google Scholar
  88. Zürn, Michael und Jeffrey T. Checkel 2005. Getting socialized to build bridges: Constructivism and rationalism, Europe and the Nation-State. International Organization 59 (4): 1045–1079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften | Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.SchifferstadtDeutschland

Personalised recommendations