Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Reporting—Administrative Burden or Competitive Advantage?

  • Matthias FifkaEmail author
  • Cristian R. Loza Adaui
Part of the FOM-Edition book series (FOMEDITION)


CSR Reporting has recently received widespread attention in the business community due to the introduction of mandatory CSR reporting at European Union (EU) level. Against this background, intense debate transpires regarding whether companies should be forced to report on their social and environmental performance, considering the underlying financial and technical effort necessary to measure and disclose the respective information. On the one hand, especially with regard to small and medium-sized enterprises (SME), such a burden is widely regarded as unbearable. Taking this argument into account, the EU has reacted by limiting the reporting requirement to large companies. This reaction clearly reflects the widespread notion that CSR reporting is an administrative and financial burden and supports the necessity of mandatory laws to motivate its realisation. Unfortunately, on the other hand, potential business benefits resulting from reporting—such as improved stakeholder communication, a better understanding of one’s own value chain, and enhanced risk management—tend to be disregarded.

The purpose of this chapter is to address this discussion. It briefly presents the nature, development, and status quo of CSR reporting as an introduction, before the connected challenges and chances are discussed. Based on this evaluation, recommendations are developed on how CSR reporting should be implemented by companies in order to generate a benefit for them so that a seemingly administrative burden is turned into a competitive advantage.


Corporate Social Responsibility European Union Global Reporting Initiative Voluntary Disclosure Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Aras, G., & Cowther, D. (2009). Corporate sustainability reporting: A study in disingenuity? Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 279–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Azzone, G., Brophy, M., Noci, G., Welford, R., & Young, W. (1997). A stakeholder’s view of environmental reporting. Long Range Planning, 30(5), 699–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Becker, W., Krämer, J., Staffel, M., & Ulrich, P. (2009). Bamberger Absolventenbaromenter 2009. Bamberger Betriebswirtschaftliche Beiträge 170. Universitaet Bamberg.Google Scholar
  4. Bizzarri, K. (2013). Refusing to be accountable. Accessed 17 April 2013.
  5. Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship. (2009). Weathering the storm: The state of corporate citizenship in the U.S. 2009. Chestnut Hill: Boston College.Google Scholar
  6. Center for Corporate Citizenship Deutschland. (2007). Corporate Citizenship—Gesellschaftliches Engagement von Unternehmen in Deutschland und im transatlantischen Vergleich mit den USA (Corporate citizenship—Corporate citizenship in Germany and in the transatlantic comparison with the U.S.). Berlin: Center for Corporate Citizenship.Google Scholar
  7. Collier, J., & Esteban, R. (2007) Corporate social responsibility and employee commitment. Business Ethics: A European Review, 16(1), 19–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dando, N., & Swift, T. (2003). Transparency and assurance: Minding the credibility gap. Journal of Business Ethics, 44, 195–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Deegan, C. (2007). Organisational legitimacy as a motive for sustainability reporting. In J. Unerman, J. Bebbington, & B. O’Dwyer (Eds.), Sustainability accounting and accountability (pp. 127–149). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Delbard, O. (2008). CSR legislation in France and the European regulatory paradox: An analysis of EU CSR policy and sustainability reporting practice. Corporate Governance, 8(4), 397–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. DIHK. (18 July 2013). Falsches Signal: Berichtspflicht für unternehmerische Verantwortung (Wrong sign: mandatory reporting on corporate responsibility). DIHK Pressemitteilung.Google Scholar
  12. Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Oxford: Capstone Publishing.Google Scholar
  13. European Commission. (2013). Commission to propose mandatory company reporting of environmental and social performance. Accessed 22 Jan 2014.
  14. Fifka, M. S. (2011). Corporate Citizenship in Deutschland und den USA—Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede im gesellschaftlichen Engagement von Unternehmen und das Potential für einen transatlantischen Transfer [Corporate citizenship in Germany and the U.S.—Similarities and differences in corporate citizenship and the potential for a transatlantic transfer]. Wiesbaden: Gabler.Google Scholar
  15. Fifka, M. S. (2012a). Brent Spar revisited—The impact of conflict and cooperation among stakeholders. In P. Kotler, A. Lindgreen, F. Maon, & J. Vanhamme (Eds.), A stakeholder approach to corporate social responsibility: Pressures, conflicts, reconciliation (pp. 57–72). Farnham: Gower.Google Scholar
  16. Fifka, M. S. (2012b). The development and state of research on social and environmental reporting in global comparison. Journal für Betriebswirtschaft, 62(1), 45–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fifka, M. S. (2013a). Corporate responsibility reporting and its determinants in comparative perspective—A review of the empirical literature and a meta-analysis. Business Strategy and the Environment, 22(1), 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fifka, M. S. (2013b). Sustainability reporting—A challenge worthwhile. In C. Weidinger, F. Fischler, & R. Schmidpeter (Eds.), Sustainable entrepreneurship—A new business concept of sustainability (pp. 235–247). Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  19. Fifka, M. S., & Drabble, M. (2012). Focus and standardization of sustainability reporting—A comparative study of the United Kingdom and Finland. Business Strategy and the Environment, 21(7), 455–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gray, R. (2001). Thirty years of social accounting, reporting and auditing: What (if anything) have we learnt? Business Ethics: A European Review, 10(1), 9–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gray, R. (2002). The social accounting project and accounting, organizations and society: Privileging engagement, imaginings, new accountings and pragmatism over critique? Accounting, Organizations, and Society, 27(7), 687–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gray, S. J., Radebaugh, L. H., & Roberts, C. B. (1990). International perceptions of cost constraints on voluntary information disclosures: A comparative study of U.K. and U.S. multinationals. Journal of International Business Studies, 21(4), 597–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. GRI. (2014). G4 sustainability reporting guidelines. Accessed 19 Jan 2014.
  24. Hooghiemstra, R. (2000). Corporate communication and impression management—New perspectives why companies engage in corporate social reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 27, 55–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Holgaard, J. E., & Jørgensen, T. H. (2005). A decade of mandatory environmental reporting in Denmark. European Environment, 15, 362–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. KPMG. (2013). The KPMG survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2013. Amsterdam: KPMG.Google Scholar
  27. Nyquist, S. (2003). The legislation of environmental disclosures in three Nordic countries—A comparison. Business Strategy and the Environment, 12, 12–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. O’Dwyer, B. (2002). Managerial perceptions of corporate social disclosure: An Irish story. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 15(3), 406–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Owen, D. (2008). Chronicles of wasted time? A personal reflection on the current state of, and future prospects for, social and environmental accounting research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 21(2), 240–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Perrini, F., & Tencati, A. (2006). Sustainability and stakeholder management: The need for new corporate performance evaluation and reporting systems. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15, 296–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Reynolds, M. A., & Yuthas, K. (2008). Moral discourse and corporate social responsibility reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 279–288.Google Scholar
  32. Schaltegger, S., & Burritt, R. (2006). Corporate sustainability accounting: A nightmare or a dream coming true? Business Strategy and the Environment, 15, 293–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schaltegger, S., & Burritt, R. (2010). Sustainability accounting for companies: Catchphrase or decision support for business leaders? Journal of World Business, 45(4), 375–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Spence, C. (2009). Social and environmental reporting and the corporate ego. Business Strategy and the Environment, 18, 254–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. UNEP, KPMG Climate Change & Sustainability Services, GRI, Centre for Corporate Governance in Africa. (2013). Carrots and sticks. Sustainability reporting policies worldwide—Today’s best practice, tomorrow’s trends. Accessed 12 Feb 2014.
  36. Von der Leyen, U. (24 November 2011). Letter to the commissioner for industry and entrepreneurship Antonio Tajani. German Ministry for Labour and Social Affairs.Google Scholar
  37. Weaver, G. R., Treviño, L. K., & Cochran, P. L. (1999). Integrated and decoupled corporate social performance: Management commitments, external pressures and corporate ethics practices. Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 539–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Welford, R., & Gouldson, A. (1993). Environmental management and business strategy. London: Pitman.Google Scholar
  39. Yongvanich, K., & Guthrie, J., (2006). An extended performance reporting framework for social and environmental accounting. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15, 309–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universität Erlangen-NürnbergErlangenGermany

Personalised recommendations