II. Environmental protection in economic thinking
10. Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainability
10.4. Conclusion
it is unclear to what extent this is due to the EU’s CSR policy and to other global processes.)
The renewed strategy also provides a new definition, which is very general and comprehensive, as it defines CSR as ‘the responsibility of enterprises for their impacts on society’. In relation to the theoretical concepts de-scribed above, we can conclude that the document reflects the approach of strategic CSR and also relies on the concept of creating shared value (CSV), since it says the following: ‘To fully meet their corporate social responsibil-ity, enterprises should have in place a process to integrate social, environ-mental, ethical, human rights and consumer concerns into their business op-erations and core strategy in close collaboration with their stakeholders, with the aim of – maximizing the creation of shared value for their owners/share-holders and for their other stakeowners/share-holders and society at large; – identifying, preventing and mitigating their possible adverse impacts.’269
The EU’s CSR policy, therefore, also seeks to integrate the latest scientific findings, trends and theories. Since the 2000s, it has constituted an important policy area, which covers a number of domains affecting the management of the companies’ internal and external stakeholders. It is seen as an important tool to support the EU’s strategic objectives.
largest companies gain economic benefits from their CSR activities, mainly in the form of additional profits or the acquisition of larger market shares270. It is very positive that companies follow with attention and adopt the latest CSR trends, at least at the level of rhetoric. At the same time, it is important to avoid the phenomenon known as ‘greenwashing’ in the corporate environ-mental policies, which, in this case, could be called ‘responsible appearance’.
Many people are likely to encounter mainly the most visible and communi-cable forms and manifestations of corporate responsibility, such as donation or cause marketing. We hope that this chapter has made it clear that there is much more to it. CSR is more of a way in which companies try to find their place in the management of current complex problems concerning sustaina-bility. We trust that this brief summary of the relevant trends and scientific findings will also help future corporate experts and business leaders succeed in this field.
270 KPMG, The KPMG Survey of Corporate Responsibility Reporting 2013, KPMG International, Amsterdam, 2013.
Bibliography
• Ackermann R.W. (1973): How Companies Respond to Social Demands’, Har-vard University Review, vol. 51, no. 4, 1973
• Bank (2017): Implicit és explicit, valamint belső és külső CSR egy kettős függésben lévő piacgazdaságban, különös tekintettel a munkavállalókról való gondoskodásra [Implicit and Explicit, Internal and External CSR in a Double Dependent Market Economy. Especially Regarding Labor Provisions], PhD thesis, Corvinus University of Budapest, Budapest, 2017.
• Barth R. and F. Wolff (eds.) (2009): Corporate Social Responsibility in Europe:
Rhetoric and Realities, Edward Elgar, 2009
• Bowen, H. (1953) Social Responsibilities of the Businessman, Harper and Row, New York, 1953
• Carroll, A.B. (1979): A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance’, Academy of Management Review, vol. 4, no. 4, 1979
• Carroll, A.B. (1991): The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organisational Stakeholders, Business Horizons, July–August 1991, pp. 39–48.
• Carroll, A.B. (2008): A History of Corporate Social Responsibility. Concepts and Practices’, in A. Crane et al. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2008, pp. 19–46.
• Clarkson, M.B.E. (1995): A Stakeholder Framework for Analysing and Evalu-ating Corporate Social Performance’, Academy of Management Review, vol. 20, no. 1, 1995, pp. 92–117.
• Csigéné Nagypál N. (2008), A vállalatok társadalmi felelősségvállalása és kapcsolódása a fenntarthatósághoz [Corporate Social Responsibility and its Relationship with Sustainability], Doctoral thesis, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, 2008.
• Csigéné Nagypál N. (2014): ‘Corporate social responsibility of Hungarian SMEs with good environmental practices’, Journal For East European Man-agement Studies, vol. 19, no. 3, 2014, pp. 327–347.
• Csigéné Nagypál N. (2018): What is beyond philanthropic responsibility? in The 7th International Conference on Social Responsibility, Ethics, and Sustain-able Business, ASE Publishing, 2018, p. 20.
• Csigéné Nagypál N. and G. Görög (2015): A társadalmilag felelős fogyasztás egyes jellemzőinek vizsgálata egyetemi hallgatók körében [Analysis of Certain Features of Socially Responsible Consumption among University Students]’, Marketing és Menedzsment, vol. 49, no. 2, 2015, pp. 3–18.
• European Commission, A renewed EU strategy 2011–14 for Corporate Social Responsibility, COM(2011) 681 final, 2011, 7.
• European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee – Implementing the Partnership for Growth and Jobs: Making Europe a Pole of Excellence on Corporate Social Responsibility, COM(2006) 136 final, 2006.
• European Commission, Promoting a European framework for corporate social responsibility, Green Paper, COM (2001) 366, 2001, p. 8.
• European Commission, Social Business Initiative. Creating a suitable climate for social enterprises, key stakeholders in the social economy and innovation, SEC(2011) 1278 final, 2011.
• European Parliament, European Parliament resolution of 13 March 2007 on corporate social responsibility: a new partnership, 2006/2133(INI), 2007.
• Freeman R.E. and R. Velamuri (2006): A New Approach to CSR: Company Stakeholder Responsibility’, in A. Kakabadse and M. Morsing (eds.), Corpo-rate Social Responsibility (CSR): Reconciling Aspirations with Application, Basingstoke Palgrave Macmillan, 2006
• Freeman, R.E. (1984): Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach, Pit-man, Boston, 1984
• Friedman M. (1970): The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits”, New York Times Magazine, 13 September 1970.
• Goodpaster K.E. and J.B. Matthews (1982): Can a Corporation Have a Con-science?’, Harvard Business Review, January – February 1982.
• Harangozó G. and Gy. Zilahy (2015): Cooperation between business and non-governmental organisations to promote sustainable development’, Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 89
• Johnson, K., K. Scholes and R. Whittington (2008) Exploring Corporate Strat-egy (8th Edition), 8th Edition, Prentice Hall
• Knox S. and S. Maklan (2004): Corporate Social Responsibility: Moving Be-yond Investment Towards Measuring Outcomes, European Management Jour-nal, vol. 22, no. 5, 2004, pp. 508–516.
• Kósi K. and L. Valkó (eds.) (2008), Környezetmenedzsment [Environmental Management], Typotex Kiadó, Budapest, 2008
• KPMG (2013): The KPMG Survey of Corporate Responsibility Reporting 2013, KPMG International, Amsterdam
• Labuschagne, C. and A.C. Brent (2005): Sustainable Project Life Cycle Man-agement: the Need to Integrate Life Cycles in the Manufacturing Sector, Inter-national Journal of Project Management, vol. 23, no. 2, 2005, pp. 159–168
• Loew, T. K. Ankele, S. Braun and J. Clausen (2004): Significance of the CSR Debate for Sustainability and the Requirements for Companies, Berlin, Mün-ster, 2004.
• Málovics Gy (2011), A vállalati fenntarthatóság értelmezéséről [The Interpre-tation of Corporate Sustainability], JATEPress, Szeged, 2011
• Málovics, Gy. N. Csigéné Nagypál and S. Kraus (2008): The Role of Corporate Social Responsibility in Strong Sustainability, Journal of Socio-Economics, vol. 37, no. 3, 2008
• Matten D. and J. Moon (2008): ‘“Implicit” and “Explicit” CSR: A Conceptual Framework for a Comparative Understanding of Corporate Social Responsibil-ity’, Academy of Management Review, vol. 33, no. 2, 2008.
• Matten, D., A. Crane and W. Chappel (2003): Behind the Mask: Revealing the True Face of Corporate Citizenship’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 45, no. 1-2, 2003, pp. 109–120.
• Porter M.E. and M.R. Kramer (2011): Creating Shared Value’, Harvard Busi-ness Review, vol. 89, no. 1-2, 2011, pp. 62–77.
• Sethi, S.P. (1975): Dimensions of Corporate Social Performance: An Analyti-cal Framework’, California Management Review, vol. 17, no. 3, 1975, pp. 58–
64.
• Szlávik J. (ed.) (2009): A vállalatok társadalmi felelősségvállalása [Corporate Social Responsibility], Complex Kiadó, Budapest
• Tóth, G. (2007): A Valóban Felelős Vállalat (The Really Responsible Com-pany), Környezettudatos Vállalatirányítási Egyesület, Budapest, 2007.
• Valkó L. (2003): Fenntartható/környezetbarát fogyasztás és a magyar lakosság környezeti tudata [Sustainable/Environmentally Friendly Consumption and the Environmental Awareness of the Hungarian Population], Working Paper, Bu-dapest University of Economic Sciences and Public Administration, Institute of Environmental Science, Budapest, 2003, p. 55.
• Visser W. (2008): ‘Corporate Social Responsibility in Developing Countries’, in The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility, Oxford Univer-sity Press (eds: A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon and D.S. Siegel), 2008, pp. 473–499.
• WEF, Global Corporate Citizenship: The Leadership Challenge for CEOs and Boards, World Economic Forum, Geneva, 2002.
• Zilahy, Gy. (2016) ‘Sustainable Business Models – What Do Management Theories Say?’, Vezetéstudomány – Budapest Management Review, vol. 47, no. 10, 2016, pp. 62–72.