Skip to main content

The Rationales of Lawyers, Accountants and Financial Analysts in Shaping the EU Agenda on CSR

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Stages of Corporate Social Responsibility

Part of the book series: CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance ((CSEG))

Abstract

This contribution focuses on the relation between CSR ideas and policies. On the basis of a series of interviews and documents’ analyses, it identifies three professional élites—activist-lawyers; financial analysts; and international accountants—as the “architects” of the current debate on CSR policies, in the EU context. The author questions why and how they succeeded in shaping the public debate on business social and environmental accountability. He claims that their views on CSR are underpinned by rather different underlying rationales, coming from Law, Finance, and Accountancy, and by distinct professional interests. The chapter shows how these actors used these arguments to push their (partially) competing agendas and professional claims. In particular, the paper focuses on the impact of these professions on the European regulatory debate on social and environmental reporting, as a lens to study these distinct approaches. The conclusions highlight the need for a more reflexive sociological approach to CSR, which would reveal and openly discuss the co-existence—under the officialized story—of different rationales and interests. As different ideas about what CSR is would have major social, economic and environmental implications, it also suggests that advances in CSR depend also from the ability of law- and policy-makers to design a regulatory framework that would reconcile these different instances.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Augestein, D. (2010). Study of the legal framework on human rights and the environment applicable to European enterprises operating outside the European Union. This is a study prepared by the University of Edinburgh for the European Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sustainable-business/files/business-human-rights/101025_ec_study_final_report_en.pdf

  • Bauer, R., & Hann, D. (2010). Corporate environmental management and credit risk. Maastricht University. Available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1660470

  • Bebbington, J., & Gray, R. (2001). An account of sustainability: Failures, success and a reconceptualisation. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 12, 557–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Botzem, S. (2012). The politics of accounting regulation: Organizing transnational standard setting in financial reporting. Cheltenham/Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Buhr, N. (2007). Histories of and rationales for sustainability reporting. In J. Unerman, J. Bebbington, & B. O’Dwyer (Eds.), Sustainability accounting and accountability. New York and London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities. (2009a). European Workshops in Disclosure of Environmental, Social and Governance Information. Workshop 1—the enterprise perspective. Friday 18 September, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities. (2009b). European Workshops in Disclosure of Environmental, Social and Governance Information, Workshop 3 – Civil society, consumer and media perspectives. Friday 4 December, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities. (2009c). European Workshops in Disclosure of Environmental, Social and Governance Information, Workshop 6—The final workshop. Friday 25 February, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities. (2010). Disclosure of non-financial information by companies. Directorate General for Internal Markets and Services, Public Consultation on Disclosure of Non-Financial Information by Companies, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities. (2011). Single Market Act—Twelve levers to boost growth and strengthen confidence. Working together to create new growth. COM(2011) 206, 13 April (Brussels).

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities. (2012). Impact assessment accompagnying the document Communication from the Commission on Building the Single Market for Green Products. Facilitating better and credible information on environmental performance of products and organisation. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/pdf/ia_report.pdf

  • Commission of the European Communities. (2013). Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and the Council amending Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC as regards disclosure of nonfinancial and diversity information by certain large companies and groups. COM(2013) 207 final 16.04.2013 The proposal can be retrieved at: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/accounting/docs/non-financial-reporting/com_2013_207_en.pdf

  • CORE. (2011). Simply put. Towards an effective UK regime for environmental and social reporting by companies. CORE. The report can be retrieved at http://corporate-responsibility.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Simply-Put.pdf

  • Crouch, C. (2010). CSR and changing modes of governance: Towards corporate noblesse oblige? In P. Utting & J. C. Marques (Eds.), Corporate social responsibility and regulatory governance. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave UNRISD.

    Google Scholar 

  • CSR Europe. (2010, May). Valuing non-financial performance: A European framework for company-investor dialogue. Final Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Schutter, O. (2008). Corporate social responsibility European style. European Law Journal, 14, 203–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deloitte and The Economist Intelligence Unit. (2004). In the dark: What boards and executives don’t know about the heath of their business, Deloitte. http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-NewZealand/Local%20Assets/Documents/In%20the%20dark(4).pdf

  • Deutsche Bank. (2012). Sustainable investing. Establishing long-term value and performance, DB Climate Change Advisors. The report can be downloaded at: http://www.dbcca.com/dbcca/EN/investment-research/investment_research_2413.jsp

  • Dewin, I., & Russell, P. O. (2007). The role of private actors in global governance and regulation: US, European and international convergence of accounting and auditing standards in a post-Enron world. In H. Overbeek, A. Nölke, & B. van Apeldoorn (Eds.), The transnational politics of corporate governance regulation. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dezalay, Y. (1991). Territorial battles and tribal disputes. Modern Law Review, 54(6), 792–809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dezalay, Y., & Madsen, M. R. (2012). The force of law and lawyers: Pierre Bourdieu and the reflexive sociology of law. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 8, 433–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dingwerth, K., & Eichinger, M. (2010). Tamed transparency: How information disclosure under the global reporting initiative fails to empower. Global Environmental Politics, 30(3), 74–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Djelic, M. L., & Etchanchu, H. (2014). Contextualizing corporate political responsibilities: Neoliberal CSR in historical perspective. Available at: SSRN 2462772.

    Google Scholar 

  • Djelic, M. L., & Quack, S. (2007). Overcoming path dependency: path generation in open systems. Theory and Society, 36(2), 161–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Djelic, M.-L., & Quack, S. (Eds.). (2010). Transnational communities: Shaping global economic governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Djelic, M. L., & Sahlin-Andersson, K. (Eds.). (2006). Transnational governance: Institutional dynamics of regulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • DVFA/EFFAS. (2009). KPI for ESG. A guideline for integrating ESG into financial analysis and corporate valuation. Frankfurt: DVFA.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECCJ. (2008). Fair law: Legal proposals to improve corporate accountability for environmental and human rights abuses. The document can be retrieved at: http://frankbold.org/o-nas/publikace/fair-law-legal-proposals-improve-corporate-accountability-environmental-and-human-ri

  • ECCJ. (2010). Principles and pathways: Legal opportunities to improve Europe’ corporate accountability framework, ECCJ. The report can be retrieved at: http://www.corporatejustice.org/IMG/pdf/eccj_principles_pathways_webuseblack.pdf

  • ECCJ. (2011). Response to the public consultation public consultation on disclosure of non-financial information by companies. The document can be retrieved at http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/2010/non-financial_reporting_en.htm

  • ECCJ. (2014). EU Directive on the disclosure of non-financial information by certain large companies: an analysis. The article can be retrieved at: http://www.corporatejustice.org/On-15-April-2014-the-European.html?lang=en

  • EFFAS. (2009). EFFAS partnering with major European CSR initiative. The press release can be retrieved at: http://www.effas-esg.com/?m=200901

  • EurActive. (2010). Corporate social responsibility: Back on the European Agenda? http://www.euractiv.com/socialeurope/csr-corporate-social-responsibility/article-153515

  • EurActive. (2013, April 17). Proposed CSR rules too strong for business, too weak for civil society. http://www.euractiv.com/specialreport-corporate-governan/proposed-reporting-obligations-s-news-519163.

  • Eurosif. (2009, April 15). Position paper on greater transparency from companies and institutional investors on Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) issues. Eurosif. http://www.fee.be/images/publications/sustainability/Eurosif_Public_Policy_Position_Paper_related_to_Sustainable_and_Responsible_Investment_-_Press_Release2742009321454.pdf

  • European Parliament. (2007). European Parliament resolution of 13 March 2007 on corporate social responsibility: a new partnership. 2006/2133/, INI. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?Type = TA&Reference = P6-TA-2007-0062&language = EN

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament. (2013). Corporate social responsibility: Accountable, transparent and responsible business behaviour and sustainable growth. 2012/2098(INI). http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef = -//EP//TEXT + REPORT + A7-2013-0017 + 0 + DOC + XML + V0//EN

    Google Scholar 

  • Eurosif. (2010). European SRI Study. The study can be retrieved at the following link: http://www.eurosif.org/publication/european-sri-study-2010/

  • Everett, J. (2004). Exploring (false) dualisms for environmental accounting praxis. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 15(8), 1061–1084.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairbrass, J. (2011). Exploring corporate social responsibility policy in the European Union: A discursive institutionalist analysis. JCMS, 49(5), 949–970.

    Google Scholar 

  • FEE. (2008, December). Sustainability information in annual reports—Building on implementation of the modernisation directive. FEE Discussion Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • FEE. (2009, January). Sustainability. The contribution of the accountancy profession. FEE Policy Statement.

    Google Scholar 

  • FEE. (2011). Response to the public consultation public consultation on disclosure of non-financial information by companies. The document can be retrieved at: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/2010/non-financial_reporting_en.htm

  • FEE/EUROSIF. (2009). Sustainability disclosure in financial information can be improved. Join Call following the Roundtable discussion on “Sustainability Disclosure” The European Parliament, Brussels, 29 April.

    Google Scholar 

  • FIDH. (2010). Corporate accountability for human rights abuses. A guide for victims and NGOs on resource mechanisms. Paris: International Federation for Human Rights.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gjolberg, M. (2010). Varieties of corporate social responsibility (CSR): CSR meets the “Nordic Model”. Regulation and Governance, 4(2), 203–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R. (2005). Taking a long view on what we now know about social and environmental accountability and reporting. Radical Organisation Theory. Available online at: https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/media/csear/discussion-papers/CSEAR_dps-socenv-longview.pdf

  • Graz, J.-C., & Nolke, A. (2007). Transnational private governance and its limits. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howitt, R. (2014, April 16). The EU law on non-financial reporting—How we got there. The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/eu-non-financial-reporting-how-richard-howitt

  • IIRC. (2011). Towards Integrated reporting. Communicating value in the 21st century. Discussion Paper available at: http://theiirc.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/IR-Discussion-Paper-2011_spreads.pdf

  • IIRC. (2013, December). International <IR> framework for integrated reporting. The Framework can be retrieved at: http://integratedreporting.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/13-12-08-THE-INTERNATIONAL-IR-FRAMEWORK-2-1.pdf

  • Kinderman, D. (2013). Corporate social responsibility in the EU, 1993–2013: Institutional ambiguity, economic crises, business legitimacy and bureaucratic politics. Journal of Common Markets Studies, 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, M. (2012). Keynote address by Mervyn King at the Australian GRI Conference on Sustainability and Integrated Reporting ‘Innovate, Integrate, Collaborate’. 26–28 March, Melbourne, Australia. The transcript of the entire speech can be retrieved at: http://www.mervynking.co.za/news/archives/12_03_melbourne.htm

  • KPMG. (2008). International survey of corporate responsibility reporting. Amsterdam: KPMG Global Sustainability Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • KPMG, Unit for Corporate Governance University of Stellenbosch Business School, GRI, UNEP. (2010). Carrots and sticks—Promoting transparency and sustainability. An update on trends in voluntary and mandatory approaches to sustainability reporting. Amsterdam: KPMG, UNEP, GRI and Unit for Corporate Governance in Africa.

    Google Scholar 

  • KPMG, Unit for Corporate Governance University of Stellenbosch Business School, GRI, UNEP. (2013). Carrots and Sticks—2013 Edition. Sustainability reporting policies worldwide—Today’s best practices, tomorrow’s trends. Amsterdam: KPMG, UNEP, GRI and Unit for Corporate Governance in Africa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruse, C., & Lundbergh, S. (2010). The governance of corporate sustainability. Rotman International Journal of Pension Management, 3(2).

    Google Scholar 

  • Langley, A. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691–710.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maclean, C., & Crouch, C. (2012). The responsible corporation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madsen, M. R. (2006). Transnational fields: Elements of a reflexive sociology of the internationalisation of law. Retfaerd, 3(114), 23–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, J. (2001). Beyond correlational analysis: Recent innovations in theory and method. Sociological Forum, 16(3), 575–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mares, R. (Ed.). (2011). Business and human rights at crossroads: The legacy of John Ruggie. Leiden/Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, M. (2005). The new accountability: Environmental responsibility across borders. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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(2), 404–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayntz, R. (2004). Mechanisms in the analysis of social macro-phenomena. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 34(2), 237–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, A. V., & Sikka, P. (2005). Taming the corporations. Basildon: Association for Accountancy & Business Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monciardini, D. (2013). Quello che conta. Accounting for sustainable companies (Vol. 43). Lund Studies in Sociology of Law, Lund University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monciardini, D. (2014). Regulating accounting for sustainable companies: Some considerations on the forthcoming EU directive. European Company Law, 11(2).

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgera, E. (2009). Corporate accountability in international environmental law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ocean Tomo (2010). Ocean Tomo’s intangible asset market value study.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierson, P. (2004). Politics in time: History, institutions, and social analysis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M., & Kramer, M. (2011, January-February). The big idea: Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • SOMO. (2013). Time for transparency. SOMO and ICN Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN PRI. (2011). 5 years of PRI. Report on progress 2011. UNEP FI and UN GC. Available at: https://www.kfw.de/nachhaltigkeit/migration/PRI-Report-on-Progress-2011.pdf

  • Ungericht, B., & Hirt, C. (2010). CSR as a political arena: The struggle for a European framework. Business and Politics, 12(4), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verheugen, G. (2009, February 10). CSR Essential for Public Trust in Business. Speech at the CSR Forum, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zumbansen, P. (2011). Transnational law, evolving (Osgoode CLPE Research Paper, No. 27).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Monciardini .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Annex

Annex

See Table 1.1.

Table 1.1 Annex list of interviews

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Monciardini, D. (2017). The Rationales of Lawyers, Accountants and Financial Analysts in Shaping the EU Agenda on CSR. In: Idowu, S., Vertigans, S. (eds) Stages of Corporate Social Responsibility. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43536-7_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics