Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Lozano and Tamyko Ysa Reviewed work(s): Source: Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 74, No. 4, Ethics in and of Global Organizations: The EBEN 19th Annual Conference in Vienna (Sep., 2007), pp. 391-407 Published by: Springer Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25075478 . Accessed: 24/06/2012 07:16
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Business Ethics.
http://www.jstor.org
? Springer
2007
Public Policies on Corporate Social ? ? . .. ... _,. Responsibility: The Role of Governments
Laura
in Europe TamykoYsa
M Josep Uzam
Albareda
ABSTRACT. Responsibility
whereby better process society by
Over
the last decade, Corporate Social (CSR) has been defined first as a concept
decide cleaner voluntarily environment manage to contribute and, second, to a as a
CSR agendas.
has This on
become has
priority
issue
on
changed and
governments' environmental
companies
their
relation
ship with
2001.
their relationship with companies, but has also affected the framework inwhich CSR public policies are designed:
governments are incorporating multi-stakeholder strate
impact
social
gies. This
European the EU-15 how
public policies in
specifically on keys and imple
aResearch Fellow at theInstitute Laura Albareda is currently for Social Innovation, ESADE, Universidad Ramon Llull URL. and manager of the She is principal researcher on Socially Responsible Investmentin Spain. Observatory
Her areas
governments
understood,
mented
into
public policies. The analysis has entailed the classification of CSR public policies taking
consideration were the actor This to which approach addressed. the governments' to the of analysis
their CSR
of research and
academic
policies
CSR
and So
at
public policies in the EU-15 countries leads us to observe coinciding lines of action among the different
countries 'four ideal' analyzed, typology which model has enabled us to propose action on a for governmental
Senior Researcher
theInstitute Social Innovation, ESADE Business School for (URL). He isCo-founder ofEtica, Econom?a y Direcci?n EBEN) and member of the editorial (Spanish branchof the board ofEthical Perspectivesand Society and Business Re
was member and on Values, has Com Government's of the Catalan is member of the Spanish Ministry of commended in the
CSR
Sustainability, tribution
work
view. He mission
to analyze CSR
and the
analysis focused
policies
highly
runner-up
approach
governance.
KEY WORDS:
policies, state governance,
Introduction Over have (CSR) the last decade we have seen how governments become Social Responsibility Corporate drivers adopting public policies to promote
Research Group for Leadership PrincipalResearcher of the and Innovation in PublicManagement (GLIGP). She is
coauthor of Governments and Corporate Social Responsibility
(Palgrave MacMillan).
392 Laura Albareda and encourage businesses and sustainable manner to behave in a responsible (Aaronson and Reeves,
et al.
and Sochaki, 1996; Zappal, 2003). 2002a, b; Moon In this sense, governments have been involved in a new type of political relationship with businesses and civil society stakeholders to promote responsible and sustainable business practices (Aaronson and Reeves, b; Albareda et al., 2006; Fox et al., 2002;
is defined as a voluntary framework in which CSR reflection of how governments' capacities to regulate the actions of businesses have been transformed in relation to social and environmental voluntary approach ernments' roles in relation business, This to CSR issues. changes gov to the promotion of social and environmental practices (Midt
2004). purpose of this article is to analyze the dif ferent CSR public policies adopted by European governments in order to promote responsible and
and Moon, tun, 2005; Matten 2005; Moon, 2004; to this,most of the research Related Roome, 2005). conducted
sustainable business practices. This research sets out from the initial hypothesis of establishing, how the
on governments and CSR suggests the of new roles adopted by governments in emergence CSR issues (Fox et al., 2002; Lepoutre et al., 2004; 2004). Fox et al. (2002) put forward new sector roles adopted by governments to public enable an environment for CSR: mandatory (legis lative); facilitating (guidelines on content); partner ing (engagement with multi-stakeholder processes);
Nidasio,
ronmental issues in their relationship with businesses. We mention that a unidirectional approach to the public policy analysis neither gives an answer to the
and implementation of public policies pro in governments' CSR reveals changes moting for action and impact in social and envi capacity design
needs of present-day societies (responsiveness), nor does it enable us to understand the new challenges in depth. As a result, it facing social governance seems Hmited The outmoded to analyze public policies approach of'hard power.' of the research has been from the to develop
and, endorsing tools (publicity). In paraUel, Lepoutre et al. (2004) review the strategic roles to be played institutional uncertainty by governments managing
and present (activate, orchestrate, and modulate) common tools for public action managing strategic information campaigns, organi uncertainty (public zational reporting, labeling, contracts, agreements, and incentives). This analysis of the role of govern
as a new approach has also promoting CSR,
mote CSR.
objective an analytical framework that enables us to under stand, through a more adequate methodology, the approaches and perspective of governments in designing and implementing public policies to pro From here on, the article is structured as follows. First, we present a review of specific research focused on governments and CSR. Second, we to build an introduce the methodology developed
ments
been analyzed by other authors under the new forms of public-private partnership linked to CSR (Grib ben et al., 2001; Nelson and Zadek, 2000) in order
to resolve social problems, to promote coordination
with
and local companies, organizations, in and also to analyze the role of CSR governments as models of governance public?private partnerships social (Guarini and Nidasio, Another approach 2003). to the understanding of CSR is the softpolicy approach introduced
analytical framework to map CSR public policies. Third, we propose a Tour ideal' typology model for based on analysis of governmental action on CSR the CSR Fourth,
research.
we
public
policies key
in
15 EU
countries.
present
elements
for
further
by Joseph (2003), inwhich the role of government is viewed as coUaborative and fac?itating through the use of soft tools and means - always in coUaboration with the private sector. Second, there is a common perception that CSR is a process through which companies manage their social and environmental impacts taking into acco
public polices
What
we
learn from
the literature
focused
on governments Over
ment
concept whereby companies voluntarily to a better society and cleaner environ contribute to (European Commission, 2001). This new
their relationship with stakeholders (European business ethics scholars Commission, 2001). Most have made important attempts to link CSR practices with stakeholder management 1998; Donaldson Clarkson, Freeman, 1998) (CarroU, 1989, 1991; and Dunfee, 1999; and the stakeholder approach has
unt
ofGovernments inEurope 393 'Promoting a European Framework for Cor porate Social Responsibility' (2001), the Commu A nication Social 'Corporate Responsibility: to Sustainable Development' Business Contribution Paper 2002) and the Communi (European Commission, cation Implementing the Partnership for Growth on and Jobs: Making Europe a Pole of Excellence Corporate Other Social Responsibility' (2006). studies include research based of on geo
citizenship (Waddock, 2002). to this, some studies point to the devel Related in relation to the development of of CSR opment as an aspect of rela multi-stakeholder dialogues tionship building and organizational change (Kap stein and Von Tulder, 2003; Payne and Calton, is a cornrnon perception that 2002, 2004). There challenges created by corporate practices all over the world have to be solved through a multi stakeholder Commission, approach (European 2001). In recent years, we have seen the appearance of multi-stakeholder
new
government graphical comparative analysis behavior and CSR culture in European and North American and Reeves administrations. The work of Aaronson (2002a, b) and the comparative report of CBSR (2001) shed some light on the relevance of cultural differences and elements in the development of national CSR models. Aaronson and Reeves (2002a) analyze how, in the last decade, European range of public policymakers have taken a wide initiatives to promote CSR, in contrast with a lack of policies companies' compared U.S.-based difference business
pean-based
which
dialogue proposals. Among others, these have included the UN Global Com Initiative, and the pact, the Global Reporting on CSR, Forum Multi-Stakeholder European propose dialogue among the different agents aimed at mak involved as a working methodology
ing headway inmultilateral consensus proposals. is not a Third, other elements suggest that CSR new and isolated topic among the new challenges facing governments in a globalized context (Crane and Matten, 2004; Moon, and 2002). Responsible sustainable business practices form part of the current
in theU.S.
They analyze European-based acceptance of these CSR public policies with the less accepting attitude of companies. The authors argue that the is based on the countries' respective research reveals that Euro
"are more comfortable companies
debate on the role of companies within society in a (Frederick, 2006; Sch?lte, 2001). globalized world This enables us to understand why governments have
cultures. This
Most
to promote CSR in their adopted measures with the new social governance chal relationship lenges. The first documents to introduce the debate role date from the last decade
working with governments to improve social con ditions, and they aremore comfortable in a regulated
environment." "Businesses expect government to
of them and government does ask more of businesses. It seems that European business leaders seem to believe find theirway that CSR policies can help them in the chaotic, ever-changing global (Aaronson and Reeves, 2002a).
ask more
(Moon and Sochaki, 1996). of these texts put forward the need for gov as a response to ernments to actively promote CSR the social and environmental problems caused by economic
out
a globalized action within corporate context (Moon, 2004). Midttun (2005) views the of CSR within the context of changes development in the welfare state, basing his work on a compara tive analysis of three governance models. He points that a new societal emerging model could be governance of CSR-oriented as an analyzed to examine the
economy" These studies lead to the hypothesis that analysis of the different CSR approaches should take into consideration a series of different elements: political and institutional structure; political style and pro
cesses; social structure;
of state guidelines and acceptance approach control; local and national views of the role of and civil companies; the role and posture of NGOs associations in society; the kind of educational sys tem and the values it transmits; what is expected of their leaders; and historical traditions (Rome, 2005). All of this comparative analysis enables us to relate
or
emphasis
on
voluntary
theoretical perspective exchange distinctive characteristic of the relationship between civil society, business, and government. Relevant documents incorporating a new
gov ernment vision, with particular emphasis placed on include the official documents on CSR Europe, published by the European Commission: the Green
the research ofMatten on the comparison between the (2005) CSR model and the U.S. model. For
394 Laura Albareda as a voluntary corporate policy is a fairly them, CSR recent and as yet scattered phenomenon within a context. The reason is derived from his European of trust and authority toricaUy different models contrast with themore liberal model relationships in in theU.S.
et al.
approach focused on the interrelation, collaboration, and partnership between the different actors: gov ernments, businesses, and civil society stakeholders. It has been suggested that, in a globalized world, public policies cannot simply be analyzed in the light value of self-sufficient governments, but that an added lies in exploring the intersections between
view
as opposed to a more European 'implicit CSR.' CSR refers to corporate policies that lead Explicit companies to assume responsib?ity answering con crete needs
As a consequence, the authors defend the that in the U.S. there is an 'explicit CSR'
public and private sectors (including the for-profit and non-profit sectors) and in broadening the areas between these three surrounding the boundaries sectors (Mendoza, 1996). use this relational methodology to analyze We to enabling an the new governmental approach in 15 European Union environment for CSR gov ernments
of society. In the U.S., this normaUy involves voluntary and self-interest-driven corporate In policies, programs, and strategies as part of CSR. contrast in Europe, refers to a coun implicit CSR try's formal and informal institutions through which
business
the social role of business. This normaUy consist of values, norms and rules which, in the course of the last century, have resulted in mostly mandatory requirements for corporations to address issues of social, political, and economic interest.Nevertheless, the authors argue that over the last years explicit the approach
influence of
responsibility for coUective society's needs are agreed and assigned to companies in relation to
in: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, the Greece, Finland, Germany, Italy, Ireland, Sweden Netherlands, Luxembourg, Portugal, Spain, are arguably and the United These Kingdom. the European countries with the most advanced democracies, where the development of social and environmental regulatory frameworks for corporate action and public CSR policies is strongest. We started out
CSR
has been gaining ground in Europe, changing to a more explicit CSR under the
a voluntary approach to CSR.
from the previous study con ducted by Fox et al. (2002), which analyzed the new public sector roles enabling an environment for
CSR, mostly in developing countries, based on non
the foUowing three elements Taking and gov which emerge from the analysis of CSR ernment we propose an analytical framework to analyze CSR The public policies:
into account
explicit CSR public policies. order to be able to conduct empirical unlike Fox et al. explicit CSR (2002), we have
In this research,
in
voluntary nature of the company's ini tiative; The emerging new roles and soft tools; Multi-stakeholder dialogue and new gover
nance chaUenges.
public policies of the 15 European governments. We compiled all the data: CSR public policies, programs, and instruments that governments have volved
each
This in explicitly adopted to promote CSR. each country and building a researching database on the policies and instruments applied by
government. The data was
The
construction CSR
of an analytical governmental
model
to political structures find out how CSR policy was being We assimilated into government structures. compiled the following elements for each government: National vision, mission public policy on CSR: and objectives Government departments assuming responsibili ties for CSR policies
ces published by the governments or from official documents, reports, and governmental web pages. We also focused on an analysis of the contextsand
compiled
via
sour
CSR
public policies we have bu?t an analytical framework serves as a methodology. The design of this which on a relational is based framework analytical
the analysis of coun in 15 European Union public policies In order to be able to analyze and classifyCSR tries. objective
Institutional and relational support from existing Nations international agreements. United
interna
for CSR Organizational structure policies: cen tralized/decentralized; transversal/sectorial; creation of new agencies multi-stakeholder; Actors in the process Socioeconomic, political and cultural context, and administrative tradition This data was
government.
Regulation
the data, we focused on the comp?ing classification of CSR public policies taking strategic and relational aspects into account. Here we intro After duced based account a relational and multi-stakeholder a triangulation approach the relationship among governments, busi nesses, and civil society stakeholders. This framework makes it possible to observe the three social agents of governments, businesses, and civil society stakeholders not as poles or opposites which repel each other, but as agents coUaborating in an interrelated area. Different areas of bilateral were observed: the first between on approach taking into
1. 2. 3. 4.
Figure 1. Relational
model
analysis.
for CSR
public
policy
to gain a complete overview of the directionality of CSR public policies. This infor mation was grouped by country and incorporated allowed into specific reports drafted for each country ana lyzed. Subsequently, in order to obtain a general compar ative analysis of the 15 EU governments, we built a transversal scheme containing all the CSR public policies in Europe By combining (Figure 2). this data, we elaborated scheme tomap (see Table a detailed
us
coUaboration governments
and companies; the second between and civil society and the third a coUaboration: society civil govern stakeholders to map the
comprehensive I) specific initiatives and programs implemented by govern ments through their public policies on CSR. As a result, we
programs
the actors tionality into consideration: are addressed: government policies 1. CSR ingovernments:CSR
government public policies compiled previ classified aU public policies taking direc ously. We to whom
CSR
produced
and the
a map
of CSR
that
public
policies,
action
governments
have taken to promote and develop CSR. This gave us a relational view of the actors who have been addressed by the policies and who attempted to involve. We have governments have
oped
by governments
responsib?ity, leading by example; 2. CSR in government-business relationships: CSR public policies designed to improve business CSR practices; 3. CSR in government-society relationships: CSR policies designed to improve civil society designed This
have
and programs in the four relational frameworks. As a that the European result, it can be deduced gov ernments have adopted public policies taking the into account. We have con
public stakeholders' awareness, and finaUy; 4. Relational CSR: CSR public policies
to improve coUaboration between
governments,
These
firmed that, in general, for all 15 governments the significant number of policies lie in the rela tional framework between government and business. policies are intended to raise awareness of the business sector, promote, and facilitate voluntary
businesses
and
civil
society
stakeholders.
396
Laura Albareda
et al.
and PublicadministrationsCSR
<^Administrations"^> ^-??:
Society
leadership by example (internal policies) CSR Linking spending public to socially responsible companies in Participation of Transferii_ on debate CSR tothe national local and context international Fostering instruments and agreements external trade policy, and development cooperation policy of Development technical how know for CSR in implementing companies Coordination of CSR in policies admini Public campaigns in ii of departments
_ML
and social issues policy employment Environmental policy Taxand funding policies and education training policies business Rural policy ?Agriculture, and development fisheries rural poli Consumer policy defence
Work intersectorial in partnership Facilitating ofsocially Promotion investment responsible ofactions Coordination civil between society the and ofresponsible Promotion consumption ofthe Promotion interests ofallstakeholders employees. (producers, Informand all educate actors social creatior encouragement, and of supervision for evaluatii mechanisms and accountability it Lr of of and change experiences practices good ofconvergence Promotion in andtransparency CSR and practices instruments
(compulsory) Legislation Regulation restriction) (by and Directives guidelines law) (soft framework Fiscal funding and and To promote convergence in CSR transparency instruments and practices To cataly/.eand voluntary facilitate CSR initiatives, of exchange and practices experiencesgood Promotion in of CSR companies: known make positive impact attitudes Toexport in CSR company internationally to needs of Policies attention and SMLsin of characteristics CSR To foster companyrelationships with market stakeholders the and on suppliers. (impactcustomers, employees, providers) capital To foster action the social by company To draw business up restructuring policies
(by Regulationrestriction) Directives guidelines law) and (soft the Todisseminate positive impact of CSR in society ii CSR To support promotion ofci icty actors all To informeducate social and about CSR Topromote facilitate and Responsible Consumption To promote facilitate and Socially Investment Responsible the Topromote facilitate and in interests particular ofallstakeholders CSR terms
Figure
2.
Implemented
public
policies,
programs
and
actions
promoting
CSR.
initiatives, capacity
ment, international transparency,
building,
standards, and
stakeholder manage
convergence accountability, tax and and
models
fostering of
of public CSR
policy
evaluation
to legislation.
an important number of
application
us an
framework on CSR
changing
to
These
initiatives among the policies that governments have to increase their own social responsib?ity. developed CSR
European
gave
governments'
overview
policies
are aimed at leading by public policies example, creating internal departments, coordinating bodies, building, public government capacity in participating campaigns, expenditure, public international events, transferring international debate to the local context, international developing
capacities and strategies to favor the development of social and environmental corporate practices. Taking into account both the CSR public policies and the we have observed actors involved, that there is convergence between the governmental approaches and the action to develop CSR public policies in these countries. As a result ofthat analytical process,
instruments and agreements, and foreign trade policy and international development. We also found a considerable number of gov
we
built up a four-ideal typology model for Euro (see Table II). pean governmental action on CSR
ernment policies aimed at addressing the relationship with civil society. In addition, we found that the governments have also defined CSR public policies with of linking government-businesses to promote CSR. These initiatives and civil society are equaUy as important as other policies and the objective inmuch the same way.
The partnership model the 20th century, the countries in this Throughout and section (Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, an extensive and comprehen Sweden) developed sive welfare policies have state. Since been the directed 1950s, their social towards improving
developed
The Role
ofGovernments inEurope
397
TABLE I
Classification of CSR Policies
1. CSR Internal in government
1. Leadership by example
Work-life
ical
and
control
programs
5. Public expenditure
6. Public campaigns
in business
CSR
and media
influence
International 7. International issues events International European European 8. Transferring international to local contexts debate conferences Commission conferences
between national and local government Agreements on or thematic areas Seminars geographic
Consideration of CSR
Promotion of global of of evaluation
9. and
International agreements
instruments
regulatory and
international
systems bodies
trade
policy
CSR
for
development
rights, etc)
standards,
Link CSR
national External
relations
Other
Laura Albareda
et al.
TABLE I
continued
Policies
2. CSR in government-business Raising awareness relations
Programs
Soft
Identify and promote companies leading in CR Promote CR throughwebsites, publications, specialist journals Offer CR services and support to CR initiatives in companies or
partnerships Undertake surveys and communication campaigns
Promotion of uptake of CR
Encouraging Promotion consumption, volunteering, Promotion Promotion sharing of SRI, work-life employee of business and
policies, publication of CR
of good standards, equal practice fair trade,
reports
sustainable employee
promotion
opportunities, learning or
life-long
partnerships
public-private-civil
Stakeholders
Evaluation programs
Market mechanisms
policies, investment
to favor CR
principles)
(price policies,
competition
Promoting CR
human Convergence and transparency Promote dards, Promote Encourage Promote of conduct Evaluation and accountability Accountability rights,
reports,
auditing systems
fair trade
standardization inclusion
of SRI international
and
auditing
mechanisms
Tax
and
funding
systems
work-personal
Funding streams forCR (volunteering, social projects etc Promotion of SRI through fiscalmechanisms and investment funds)
companies regarding of to regarding socially responsible investment (pension
Legislation
Transparency
Obliging Regulation
public
Hard
Environmental legislation
international agreements
Adaptation
The Role
ofGovernments inEurope
399
TABLE I
continued
Policies
Sector specific issues
Programs
SMEs
practice in SMEs
in the south
Support SMEs in impact assessment Research into the social and environmental impact of SMEs Promote the exchange of good practice and business cases forCR in SMEs Public campaigns directed at SMEs
Favorable Disseminating cooperation tax incentives good between for business and
large
companies networks
and
SMEs
in the community
Corporate
restructuring
practice
creating
in restructuringprograms
their dissemination
3. CSR
relationships
Soft
Analysis and dissemination of good practices in business operations with high impact on the community (work-life balance, social
cohesion Tax incentives for civil society-government partnership programs
Knowledge dissemination of international agreements with civil society implications (human rights, labor standards)
Voluntary initiatives
(facilitatingand promoting)
Campaigns dissemination
for sustainable
consumption,
publications,
seminars
and
initiatives
responsible press mechanisms to foster awards business-community consumption events,
socially and CR
communication
transparency
International
Promote Participation
and participate partnerships initiatives with international in international labeling schemes civil
society
and
transparency
Fair
trade
Triple bottom line reporting initiatives Social and environmental labeling Support for government-civil initiatives
auditing
mechanisms
Tax
incentives
and
funding
streams
Sector
specific
issues of social organizations Improve management and of social enterprise for public contracts to
Management
Enable SRI
Environmental social criteria
Hard
socially
financed
organizations
et al.
Policies
4. Relational CSR: Government?business-society awareness
Programs
Soft
Raising
Sharing Round
and best practices experiences of conduct tables on codes research in promoting information on projects, innovation, supply promoting p?ot chain, dialogue projects, dialogue index
sustainab?ity
of products
Investors: pensions Evaluation and accountability Accountab?ity and information on RC policies mechanisms and expectations regarding
auditing
Convergence
and
transparency
Management
Multi-stakeholder Sector specific issues action Urban Education Cross-sector partnerships Promoting New Local social regeneration
Community
frameworks regeneration
Hard
Consumer rights
this frame and services within provision work. Furthermore, during the final decade of the to twentieth century, these governments began the importance of economic actors acknowledge ? in addressing and resolving companies above all social social problems. governments movement towards CSR
in
attitude
unions,
It is therefore safe to say that, for this model, the identifying with mainly involves a change
all For these governments, employment market. new CSR actors are jointly committed to building policies and actions that will promote the growth of a fairer society.
assuming organizations) in the building of a more inclu co-responsibility a dynamic and sive and integrated society
by and
social social
actors
(companies,
trades
The Role
ofGovernments inEurope
401
TABLE II
Models Model
Partnership Business community in the Partnership for meeting Soft
public policies in 15 EU
Countries
counties
shared
between
sectors
Denmark,
Finland,
the Netherlands,
Sweden
intervention
company
in governance
version
Agora
CSR
public
consensus
on
expectations and demands (Morsing, 2005). National settings define a framework, where public and pri vate actors are directly involved in the process of creating public policies and establishing partnerships for social responsibility. Partnership is seen as an
Apart from this, for many companies already in volved in the social context, being socially respon sible is simply inherent to their way of doing business. Social initiatives are often implemented informally or implicitly, as a response to local
are viewed as part of the regular framework for social and employment practices. A considerable commit ment ismade by local governments who act as the channels
trations,
they should lead by example. Particularly in public made to promote tenders, for instance, every effort is use of goods or services produced in a the sociaUy manner. In short, CSR responsible pubUc policies
notion
innovative and sometimes even key tool for solving difficult social Local governments, problems. for channeling the creation of such responsible partnerships, are also heavily involved, thus fur thering the idea of social co-responsibility
companies, and social
between
characterized by the use of partnership as a tool, and In by the creation of a shared area of welfare.
linked to a long tradition of for cooperative agreements and consensus preference between different types of organizations, is largely The Nordic model,
administrations,
organizations.
Encouraging partnerships has thus become central to CSR public policies in these countries. In fact, in the
Danish context, cross-sector local partnerships
essence, the impetus towards the adoption of public private partnerships may be construed as an heir to Scandinavian political culture, in which research consensus, and par always highlights cooperation, the poHtical tradi (Gr?ve, 2003). Under ticipation tion of most Nordic countries over the last century, social
practically
incorporate
the CSR
concept
(Nidasio,
2004).
One
avoid model
themselves who place on socially responsible production. In emphasis the Netherlands, for example, labels are used to confusion. Another is that public
of the policies common to all these countries insists that companies should provide adequate CSR information adhering to transparency principles on
are part of governments' core problems competences and, as such, are considered among the basic issues that their policies must resolve (Rosdahl, 2001), with these values underpinning cal-social philosophy. The their politi
in environmental management, which experience now also incorporates the CSR component. They
402 Laura Albareda also enjoy a tradition that historically favors social in which negotiation, relationships between gov ernment and companies are viewed as positive, and includes certain aspects of cooperation. We use the term 'partnership' to refer to the format used
et al. strategies for less favored areas' and to the community' to define their
which
to design and implement CSR public policies in Scandinavian countries and Sweden, (Denmark, to which we have also added the Neth
erlands.
to social and community development. idea of corporate responsibility was first seen in the contribution of companies to sustainable development through new public social governance policies
agement,
(Moon,
2004).
Finland),
governments
advocate
ment
The The
of business in society, particularly as regards social challenges and its role in community development. In thismodel, we have included the United King
business in the community concept refers to how these governments and companies interpret the role
the government adopts what is known as Kingdom, 'soft intervention' to promote and endorse corporate action in CSR In both ernment action areas. and Ireland, gov Kingdom as developing, is conceived facili as well as and providing incentives for CSR, tating, encouraging public-private partnerships. In their role as facilitators, the governments seek mechanisms that provide incentives, whether through so-called 'soft regulation' to encourage corporate CSR actions the United
initiatives into Companies bring CSR on and corporate management practices a voluntary basis, quite from any legal apart requirements. However, particularly in the United commercial
in CSR.
first saw the light of day in the United Kingdom and Ireland during the final decades of the 20th century, as a response to a deficit in social CSR undergoing a severe crisis, forcing companies out of severe problems of social business and causing exclusion (Moon, 2004). Both societies had to deal governance when industrialized economies were
to themain framework. It links CSR political CSR in societal governance faced by developed challenges countries (DTI, 2001; 2003a, b).
dom and Ireland. The British government has been one of themost innovative in the development of a
partnership projects for the public and private sec tors, either together or with the third sector. This allows a joint grasp on problems linked to social exclusion, poverty, lack of social services and quality of life in economically depressed areas. Companies collaborate in partnership projects with local gov
ernments in staff
or through taxmeasures. Another important idea in is the building of these countries as regards CSR
with acute problems of social exclusion and growing poverty in urban and rural settings, coupled with environmental degradation. The crisis also affected
training,
company
set-ups
and
the welfare state, as seen in the decline of the social services offered by public administrations. The gov ernments began to look for innovative solutions to ? these problems through engaging all social actors primarily companies. They began to create corporate and public?private Firms were strengthen CSR.
on CSR
opment
regeneration,
networks
port and collaboration of the private sector. These countries deal with social problems such as unem ployment and social exclusion through CSR policies
projects that invested in the community. The concept of 'business in the community'
from the idea that companies play a fundamental role in in the economic development of communities they operate as well as in fighting social and exclusion and poverty. In theUnited Kingdom it is now commonplace for governments Ireland,
involving companies responding to a crisis of gov ernance and creating the conditions for corporate action. Finally, governments base their application of measures on 'soft regulation.'
CSR
which
The sustainability and citizenship model The CSR tackles sustainability and citizenship model from a focused perspective, above all through
and companies to use concepts like 'investment in 'involvement in the community,' the community,'
The Role
ofGovernments inEurope 403 on sustainable development issues,which began long before the publication of the European Commission these govern Green Paper (2001). Nevertheless, ments began moving towards CSR after 2001. This
what companies considered as 'good citizens.' This is Frederick (2006), in his scholarly conclusions, clas sifies as 'public/social policy,' where the corporation these is analyzed as a poHtical actor, and where newer citizenship concepts of business rest on a firm theoretical foundation corporations society. For the governments of thismodel, Austria, the Belgium, France, Germany, and Luxembourg, of political science in which take their place as citizens in civil
experience of environmental public debate, essen initiatives as tially based on the 1990s, views CSR the coun part of long-term sustainability. Among tries included France deserves under this model, attention. In France, CSR iswell-established special in government-supported activities focusing on
concept of 'corporate citizenship' holds that com panies must not only be good citizens through the transparency of their activities and compliance with
tax obligations, but that they should go beyond this. It also refers to businesses' obligation to maintain a link with their local environments and to
sustainable development. So much so that, at times, such activities appear to be directed by the govern ment, revealing a more regulatory approach, in line with the apparently more centralist orientation of the French state. In recent years, these governments have devel strategies, oped national Sustainable Development the role of companies as fundamental considering points in sustainable development, innovation, and In Austria, for example DETE competitiveness. (2002) stresses the need for businesses to redefine
direct
to resolving social problems by forming partnerships with other actors in society. One of the main characteristics of the 'sustainab?ity and citi contribute zenship' model sociaUy contributes notion function is the value it aUocates to companies' undoubtedly responsible behavior, which to social
behind
to help companies assume their social responsibility. also The of 'social market concept economy'
citizenship as the strategy adopted to support their actions in this sphere. In this model, government action mainly promotes CSR and creates incentives
change. EssentiaUy, the key to is for companies this concept as genuine social agents, with corporate
their image as regards environmental social respon sibility and proposes that it is necessary to explore new forms of cooperation with governments and their stakeholders. In these countries, governments have promoted CSR through support for business organizations and through specific political initiatives on promotion
and awareness.
responds to the same principle, combining economic thus fea and personal freedom with social justice In these turing social responsibiUty components. the role of the corporation
societal goals and closer to agendas.
governments,
much
in society is
The Agora model We use the term Agora - a Greek word meaning a to refer to the public gathering place or forum used to implement and enforce CSR public in Mediterranean countries, including some Italy, Portugal, and Spain. Although
countries forming part of this 'sustainab?ity and citizenship' model generaUy enjoy relatively sound welfare states, which, in the 1990s, had to withstand increase the impact of a global economic crisis, an in social costs and the consequences of
The
model
lack of competitiveness and welfare state renovation. Debate on CSR, therefore, often comes fromwithin
over the last few ageing. Consequently, has been added to the political debate surrounding growing concerns over their economy's
policies Greece, are still at an early stage, others, such as Italy, have their CSR govern already begun to consolidate mental project. We have named thismodel 'Agora' because, countries, political CSR arose from a series of discussion pro applications cesses in which governments sought to involve companies and inMediterranean
companies themselves. These companies may join forces and create platforms, where they can share experiences and express themselves with a single
voice.
countries explored in thisCSR model have a long-standing tradition of intense public discussion The
in society stakeholders, debating groups along with political representatives. These CSR relational initiatives work by seeking a con sensus that includes all social voices
government action.
and viewpoints
on
404 Laura Albareda The countries in this model were the latest to
policies and have only recently ex an interest in the issue, largely pressed following the of the European Commission Green publication In 2001, and Communication Paper (2001) (2002). introduce CSR of their governments took part in European Commission debates on the Green Paper. However, from 2002 onwards, most began to include CSR initiatives in none
specific through in Spain, initiatives, especiaUy tangible political seems that Greece and Portugal. In these countries, it the governments adopt a positive attitude towards CSR. The using a creation of commissions 'multi-stakeholder' or working groups to discuss the
focus
are their political agendas. These a less well-developed countries with welfare state, is less mature which if compared with the other countries in Europe. The origins of CSR in gov ernmental initiatives inMediterranean countries can linked
to seek consensual solutions and concept of CSR, to determine the role to be played by government, coun characterizes this process in Mediterranean
be
sustainability indexes). At the same time, CSR actions were beginning to be endorsed by large multinational companies that had invested in these financial were countries or companies from these countries, which In all these countries, starting to globalize. corporate CSR networks and research centers have created
promote due to the impact of various international public and private initiatives (OECD's guidelines for multi national the Global and companies, Compact
tries. In Spain, Greece, and Portugal, sirnflar pro cesses occur through the creation of expert groups, committees and forums. The Italian working government has
to aU thrown open the dialogue actors by creating an ItaUan multi intervening In short, the Agora stakeholder forum on CSR. model aUows space for discussion with a certain dimension. UnUke the EC's pubUc European Forum on CSR, Multi-Stakeholder these working groups or commissions are created by governments action, during the initial stages of government even before The frameworks countries for in action have been defined. have generaUy states than those in less-developed welfare northern Europe, particularly in terms of social services. But, like other European countries, they too have suffered the consequences of eco nomic
exclusion.
this model
to develop and incorporate the CSR within the national framework. It is in these concept CSR networks and organizations that theMediter ranean discourse is being built. Issues linked to CSR, been at least in Spain, Greece,
social in nature.
and Portugal,
are mainly
and
social
These approach
the
implications
governments
in the development of CSR public in Italy, where the government has except specific projects and policies to promote
As we have seen, the analysis of CSR pubUc policies of these leads us to consider the multi-directionaUty
characterizes governmental action most of all here is that before taking decisions, the govern ments need to construct a social consensus and to have engaged This in dialogue with all the social agents. the CSR dialogue produces public policies In these countries, defined by these governments.
to whom in other words, poUcies: they are ad dressed. The new chaUenges of social governance in societies requires new methodological globaUzed instruments to analyze how companies contribute to society and how governments adopt new soft roles
action has been supported by the governmental of reports and studies on CSR, analyzing drafting the development of CSR and in more pean governments undertaken. These
provide consensus
the CSR
elements
on whether
of public
or not
policies dialogue
CSR
society stakeholders. AU thismeans that companies and governments must be increasingly aware of the to CSR. need to formulate their own approach no longer simply affects relationships between a way of businesses and society. It has become the role of companies in society, which rethinking
taking into account the new frameworks of coUab oration between governments, businesses, and civil
governmental
The Role
ofGovernments inEurope 405 this debate on government action on CSR must not to CSR public policies. Governments allow it a much wider approach of governance with and context, a framework
takes governance and sustainability as its core values and changes the focus of CSR public policies. As a this analysis highlights the following points for result,
future research.
be confined must
ment
influence of a country's First, the considerable cultural and political context on the develop social, of national CSR CSR public
governmental public corroborate this. Furthermore, any reader familiar with the literature on the evolution of the welfare state in Europe
fore not just amatter of concept but a political decision. This means that governments and businesses and also
governments, busi and society stakeholders. nesses, From these three points of view, drawing up and is there designing governmental approaches on CSR
1999, 2000) will (Esping-Andersen, have detected the similarities between our models for public policies on CSR and other groupings normally found when analyzing different forms and experi ences of thewelfare state.These parallels should come
society stakeholders must be increasingly aware of the need to formulate their own approach toCSR in order welfare approach thatbest suits their state tradition and the existing relationships between government, business and society. Currendy, the role of CSR to adopt theCSR
and models of development of the welfare state is long overdue. This is essential, and not just for historical or academic reasons. A correct orientation of public policies on CSR will in the long term form a basic element in, and a symptom of, any forthcoming discussions on the redefinition of thewelfare state. in some countries CSR Second, while policies have been defined in relation to social issues, and an independent public policy has been created, others government action has simply incorporated CSR into national policies on sustainability.We feel that the latter approach, focusing on sustainability, ties inwith countries, where there is a long-standing tradition and intense public discussion on Sustainable in
as no surprise, particularly if we then take a closer look at the itinerary of European Commission proposals on the development of CSR policies. An in-depth study of the relationship between models of public policies on CSR
public policies has become away of rethinking the role of businesses in society that takes relational governance and sustainability as its core values.
and the
and
anonymous
comments
Notes possible thanks to the the Department of Economy and support Finance of theRegional Government of Catalonia. 2 This research was begun in 2004 when the EU was st?l composed of 15 Member States: Austria, This of France, Finland, Germany, Luxem Italy, Ireland, the Netherlands, and the United bourg, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, before the EU Enlargement of May Kingdom, Belgium, Greece, 2004 when Denmark, research was made
and 'green' policies. Conversely, the Development CSR in other countries ties inwith busi approach ness and society relationships, and CSR public pol icies are linked to social challenges and are closer to collective bargaining policies. there are other elements Third, considered when that must be
10 States joined the EU. For further information on the results for each
any analyzing and developing CSR government framework for endorsing CSR. must not be seen as being divorced from the great political
sometimes
and
economic
challenges.
response
In fact, it is
sometimes
as the result of, the new challenges created by eco nomic globalization. CSR is at once viewed as a
presented
as a
to, and
response to the crisis of thewelfare state producing a new model for social governance and as a framework linked to national competitiveness. We argue that
et al. (2003) suggest on partnership As Kjaer in thismodel of models, we include theNetherlands CSR due to the tendency of its poUcies to adopt co responsibility and dialogue with other key actors. to construct aUiances
et al. (2007). of the study object ? focused on governments the actions between the and non-profit sectors do not private, for-profit form part of this analytical framework.
et al.
Commission: 2002, Social
to Public Demands for Global Corporate Responsibility (National Policy Association, Washington DC).
Aaronson, S. and
A bility: Business Contribution toSustainableDevelopment. COM (2002) 347-final, Brussels. Commission: 2006, Implementingthe European Partnership Excellence for Growth andJobs:Making European a Pole of on Corporate Social Responsibility. COM (2006) 136
final, Brussels.
European
Corporate
Responsi
bility in theGlobal Village: The Role of Public Policy (National Policy Association, Washington DC).
Albareda, L., T. Ysa
J. Reeves:
2002b,
Corporate
Responsi
inA. Katabadse of Governments in Fostering CSR', Recon andM. Morsing (eds.), CorporateResponsibility. withApplication (PalgraveMacmillan, Aspirations ciling Houndmills, Basingstoke/New York). Ethics and Stake Carroll, A. B.: 1989, Business and Society: holder Western, Cincinnati, OH). Management (South Carroll, A. B.: 1991, 'The Pyramid of Corporate Social Moral Management ofOrga Responsibility: Toward the
and J. M.
Lozano:
2006,
'The Role
W. C: 2006, Corporation,Be Good! The Story of Frederick, Corporate Social Responsibility (Dog Ear Publishing, Indianapolis, IN). Stakeholder Theory of the Freeman, R. E.: 1998, WA
Modern
Classic and Contemporary Corporation and itsStakeholders: of Toronto Press, Toronto), Readings (University pp. 125-138.
T., H. Fox, Ward and B. Howard: 2002, Public Sector
Corporation',
inM.
B.
E. Clarkson
(ed.),
The
Horizons 34(4), 39-48. nizational Stakeholders',Business CBSR: Government and Corporate Social Responsi 2001, An Overview of SelectedCanadian, European and bility.
International Responsibility, Practices (Canadian Business for Social Vancouver).
Roles in Strengthening Corporate Social Responsibility:A World Bank, Washington). Baseline Study (The
Greeve, navia', O: 2003, International 'Public-Private Partnerships Review in Scandi 4(2), 59?68. Public Management The Role
Gribben, C,
ernments
2001, Gov
Government
Clarkson, M. B. E. (ed.): 1998, The Corporation and its Stakeholders:Classic and Contemporary Readings (Uni
versity Crane, pean A. of Toronto and D. Press, Toronto). 2004, Business Ethics. A Euro and Matten: Managing
Copenhagen).
in Public
Paper
Models
Perspective.
Corporate
Citizenship
European presented at the 2n Annual Colloquium of the Joseph, E.: 2003, A New Business Agenda for Government (Institutefor Public Policy Research, London).
Kapstein, M. and R. Von Tulder: Business 2003, and Society 'Effective Review Stakeholder Dialogues', Academy in Society, Copenhagen.
DETE
(Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employ ment): 2002, Sustainable Development Strategy 2003?
2005, December T. 2002 and T. (Irish Government, Dunfee: 1999, Ties Dublin). that Bind: A
versity
Donaldson, Business
108(2), 203-224.
Kjaer, L.,
P. Abrahamson,
DTI:
2001, Business and Society Developing Corporate Social UK (UK Government, Department in the Responsibility
of Trade and 2003a, Industry, London). Business and Society. Corporate London. Social
MA).
P. Raynard
(ed.):
2003,
Local
the Government
DTI:
Responsibility DTI:
Department
Report
and
2002,
UK
Government,
Responsibility Debate. Paper presented at the 3rd Annual Colloquium of the European Academy ofBusiness
in Society, Lozano, J. M., Marcuccio: Ghent. L. Albareda, 2007, T. Ysa, H. and Roscher Corporate and M. Social
of Trade
Industry,
International Department
Governments
1999, Social Foundations of Post Esping-Andersen, G: Economies (OxfordUniversity Press, Oxford). Industrial Esping-Andersen, G: 2000, A Welfare Statefor the 21st
Century. Presidency, European European Report Lisbon, Framework Commission: presented March. 2001, for Green Paper: Social Promoting Responsibility. a by the EU Portuguese
work
Jonker,
J. Moon:
2005,
'A Conceptual
Frame
in A. Habisch,
(eds.), Cor
J.
Schmidpeter
(Springer,
en
COM
Corporate
del bienestar
al estado
The Role
relacional. Barcelona. Papers de Formado, No. 23, Diputaci?
beyond
Corporate
statemodels',
ofBusiness
International Journal
Schmidpeter (eds.), Corporate Social Responsibility Across Europe (Springer,Berlin), pp. 317-333. Rosdahl, A: 2001, 'The Policy to Promote Social Re sponsibilityofEnterprises inDenmark', Danish National
of Social Research, country 2001, Copenhagen. Discussion sep 17-18. and Pa Denmark, Expert: * Governance Globalisation, Institute
Rome, N.: 2005, 'The Implications ofNational Agendas for CSR', inA. J.Habisch; Jonker, M. Wegner and R.
Moon,
Moon,
Governance',
in Comparative Perspective. Responsibility: The UK ICCSR Research Paper Series, n. 20-2004, The
University
Moon,
bility
J. and R.
and New
of Nottingham,
pp.
1-27.
Corporate Citizenship', Journal ofCorporateCitizenship l(Spring), 15-23. S.: 2002, Leading Corporate Citizens: Vision, Waddock, Value Added (MacGraw-Hill Irvin, Boston, Values, MA). Zappai, G.:
Government: 4, 2003-2004,
tion27, 384-408.
M.: 2005, 'Inclusive Labour Market
Morsing,
Europe (Springer,Berlin), pp. 23-35. Nelson, J. and S. Zadek: 2000, Partnership Alchemy New Social PartnershipsinEurope (The Copenhagen Centre, Nidasio, C:
The Copenhagen). Role
and R. J. Habisch; Wegner Across Social Responsibility Schmidpeter (eds.), Corporate Jonker, M.
in A.
Strategies',
and Josep M.
Lozano
on a Large Scale:
at the 3rd
URL),
Pedralbes, 60-62, Barcelona, 08034, Spain E-mail: laura.albareda@esade.edu Tamyko Ysa Institute ofPublic Management (IDGP), Business School (UniversityRamon Llull
presented
gerial Practice of Stakeholder Engagement: Develop ingMulti-Stakeholder Learning Dialogues', Journal of CorporateCitizenship 6(2), 37-52.
Payne, S. L.
ESADE Avda.
URL),
Pedralbes, 60-62, Barcelona, 08034, Spain E-mail: tamyko.ysa@esade.edu
Potentials
and J.M.
Calton:
2004,
and Application
for Multi-Stakeholder
'Exploring
Research