CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY: THE CONTENTIOUS NATURE – LITERATURE REVIEW
Abstract
This paper attempts to provide an overview to the contentious concepts of corporate sustainability (CS). The conclusions, drawing literary support from anecdotal evidences, theories and changing business dynamics reflect that CS is custom made process and thus one size fits all definition of the concept is imprudent. The notion of business entities’ social receptivity and responsible citizenship aren’t novel and its genesis can be traced to history. As evident from the forthcoming literary discussion that conventional multiple notions of sustainability basically convey the same meaning and consequently corporate and academe often use them synonymously.
References
I. Marshall, J. and Toffel, M. (2005), “Framing the Elusive Concept of Sustainability: A Sustainability Hierarchy,” Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 39, issue 3, pp. 673-682.
II. van Marrewijk, M. (2003). Concepts and definitions of corporate social responsibility: Between agency and communion. Journal of Business Ethics. 44, 95-105.
III. Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society, 38, 268-295.
IV. Garriga, E., & Mele, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping theTerritory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53, 51-71.
V. Carroll, A. B., & Shabana, K. M. (2010). The business case for corporate social responsibil- ity: A review of concepts, research and practice. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 85–105.
VI. Brown, M.E. (2004), “Managing to be ethical: debunking five business ethics myths”, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 69-81.
VII. Dyllick, T. & Hockerts, K. (2002). “Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 11, pp. 130-141.
VIII. Andriof, J., and McIntosh, M. (2001) (eds.), Perspectives on Corporate Citizenship, Greenleaf, Sheffield: UK, pp. 53-65.
IX. Scherer, A. and Palazzo, G. (2007), “Toward a political conception of corporate responsibility: business and society seen from a Habermasian perspective,” Academy of Management Review, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 1096-1120.
X. Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Re- view, 16(4), 691–718.
XI. Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. C. (2003). Nature of corporate responsibilities: Perspectives from American, French, and German consumers. Journal of Business Research, 56(1), 55– 67.
XII. Hediger, W. (1999), “Reconciling ‘weak’ and ‘strong’ sustainability,” International Journal of Social Economics, vol. 26, No. 7/8/9, pp. 1120-1143.
XIII. Bowen, H. R. (1953). Social responsibilities of the businessman. New York: Harper & Row.
XIV. Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505.
XV. Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). Implicit and explicit CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33, 404-424.
XVI. Carroll, B., A. (1991). The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders. Business Horizons,, 34(August), 39–48.
XVII. Frederick, W. C. (1960). The growing concern over business responsibility. California Man- agement Review, 2(4), 54–61.
XVIII. Schwartz, M. S., & Carroll, A. B. (2003). Corporate social responsibility: A three-domain approach. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13, 503-530.
XIX. Matten, D., & Crane, A. 2005. Corporate citizenship: Towards an extended theoretical conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 30(1): 166-179.
XX. Visser, W., 2008. CSR 2.0: The New Era of Corporate Sustainability and Responsibility. CSR Inspiration Series No. 1. Published online by CSR International: www.csrinternational.org.
XXI. Visser, W. (2005). Corporate citizenship in South Africa: A review of progress since democracy. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 18, 29–38.
XXII. Aras, G., & Crowther, D. (2009). Corporate Sustainability Reporting: A Study in Disingenuity? Journal of Business Ethics, 87(S1), 279–288. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9806-0
XXIII. Dahlsrud, A. (2008). How corporate social responsibility is defined: An analysis of 37 defini- tions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 15(1), 1–13.
XXIV. Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). ‘Implicit’ and ‘explicit’ CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32. 33(2), 404–424.
XXV. Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine, 32-33, 122, 124, 126.
XXVI. Wilson, M. (2003), “Corporate sustainability: what is it and where does it come from?” Ivey Business Journal, vol. March/April 2003, pp. 1-5.
XXVII. Montiel, I. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and corporate sustainability: Separate pasts, common futures. Organization & Environment, 21(3), 245–269.
XXVIII. Keijzers, G. (2002). The transition to the sustainable enterprise. Journal of Cleaner Produc- tion, 10(4), 349–359.
XXIX. Wempe, J. and M. Kaptein: 2002, The Balanced Company. A Theory of Corporate Integrity (Oxford University Press).
XXX. Holme, R. and P. Watts: 2000, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility: Making Good Business Sense’ (WBCS), http://www.wbcsd.org/newscenter/reports /2000/csr2000.pdf.
XXXI. Hockerts, K. (2003), Sustainability Innovations, Ecological and Social Entrepreneurship and the Management of Antagonistic Assets, Doctoral Dissertation at the University St. Gallen, St.Gallen.
XXXII. Atkinson, G. (2000). Measuring corporate sustainability. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 43(2), 235–252.
XXXIII. Dyllick, T., & Hockerts, K. (2002). Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment, 11(2), 130–141.
XXXIV. Schaltegger, Stefan; Wagner, Marcus; 2002: “The Sustainability Balanced Scorecard – Linking Sustainability Management to Business Strategy.” Business Strategy and the Environment, issue 11, pp. 269-284.
XXXV. Redclift, M. (1987), Sustainable Development: Exploring the Contradictions, Routledge, London: UK.
XXXVI. Starik, M., & Rands, G. P. (1995). Weaving an integrated web: Multilevel and multisystem perspectives of ecologically sustainable organizations. Academy of Management Re- view, 20(4), 908–935.
XXXVII. McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. and Wright, P. (2006), “Corporate social responsibility: strategic implications,” Journal of Management Studies, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 1-18.
XXXVIII. Kakabadse, N., Rozuel, C. and Lee-Davies, L. (2005), “Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder approach: a conceptual review,” International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 277-302.
XXXIX. Schneider, J.L., Wilson, A. and Rosenbeck, J.M. ( 2010 ), " Pharmaceutical companies and sustainability: an analysis of corporate reporting ",Benchmarking: An International Journal , Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 421 –434.
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 International Education and Research Journal (IERJ)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
