Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Corporate Social Responsibility Policy in the United States of America

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Corporate Social Responsibility in Times of Crisis

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

Abstract

This contribution evaluates the United States (U.S.) government’s policies on corporate social responsibility (CSR) and environmentally-sustainable behaviors. It looks at the establishment of particular corporate citizenship procedures and expectations. US entities, including bureaus, agencies and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have often interpreted their own view on business ethics and stakeholder engagement, within their own regulatory context. This conceptual paper suggests that relevant policies, guidelines and communication on corporate citizenship and their disclosures can change the companies’ attitudes toward CSR, sustainability and corporate governance reporting. It has presented numerous opportunities for businesses to engage in CSR practices in order to create value for themselves and for others. In conclusion, as corporate citizenship and social responsibility policies are widely-understood, accepted and implemented by stakeholders, there will be greater convergence of laudable behaviors. This will ultimately bring positive implications for a sustainable and fair future for all.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
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

  • Albareda, L., Lozano, J. M., & Ysa, T. (2007). Public policies on corporate social responsibility: The role of governments in Europe. Journal of Business Ethics, 74(4), 391–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albareda, L., Lozano, J. M., Tencati, A., Midttun, A., & Perrini, F. (2008). The changing role of governments in corporate social responsibility: Drivers and responses. Business Ethics: A European Review, 17(4), 347–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albinger, H. S., & Freeman, S. J. (2000). Corporate social performance and attractiveness as an employer to different job seeking populations. Journal of Business Ethics, 28(3), 243–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aupperle, K. E., Carroll, A. B., & Hatfield, J. D. (1985). An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 28(2), 446–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basu, K., & Palazzo, G. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: A process model of sensemaking. Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 122–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S., & Pavelin, S. (2005). Corporate community contributions in the United Kingdom and the United States. Journal of Business Ethics, 56(1), 15–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, L., & Logsdon, J. M. (1996). How corporate social responsibility pays off. Long Range Planning, 29(4), 495–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camilleri, M. A. (2015). Valuing stakeholder engagement and sustainability reporting. Corporate Reputation Review, 18(3), 210–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B., & Shabana, K. M. (2010). The business case for corporate social responsibility: A review of concepts, research and practice. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 85–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, S., & Bouvain, P. (2009). Is corporate responsibility converging? A comparison of corporate responsibility reporting in the USA, UK, Australia, and Germany. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(1), 299–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, M. E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doh, J. P., & Guay, T. R. (2006). Corporate social responsibility, public policy, and NGO activism in Europe and the United States: An Institutional-Stakeholder perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 47–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EITI. (2015). Extractive industries transparencies initiative. Retrieved November 20, 2015, from https://eiti.org/eiti

  • Fifka, M. S. (2013). Corporate citizenship in Germany and the United States—Differing perceptions and practices in transatlantic comparison. Business Ethics: A European Review, 22(4), 341–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun, C. J. (1998). Indices of corporate reputation: An analysis of media rankings and social monitors’ ratings. Corporate Reputation Review, 1(4), 327–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fryxell, G. E., & Wang, J. (1994). The fortune corporate ‘reputation’ index: Reputation for what? Journal of Management, 20(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greendex. (2012). Consumer choice and the environment. A worldwide tracking survey. Retrieved November 25, 2015, from http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-content/file/NGS_2012_Final_Global_report_Jul10-cb1341951434.pdf

  • Griffin, J. J., & Mahon, J. F. (1997). The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate twenty-five years of incomparable research. Business and Society, 36(1), 5–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • HRDF. 2015. DRL programs: Human rights and democracy fund. Retrieved November 17, 2015, from http://www.state.gov/j/drl/p/

  • Hunt, S. D., Wood, V. R., & Chonko, L. B. (1989). Corporate ethical values and organizational commitment in marketing. The Journal of Marketing, 53(3), 79–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • INL. (2006). U.S. strategy to internationalize efforts against kleptocracy: Combating high-level public corruption. Denying Safe Haven, and Recovering Assets. Retrieved November 20, 2015, from http://2001-2009.state.gov/p/inl/rls/fs/70365.htm

  • Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (2005). Corporate social responsibility. Doing the most good for your company and your cause. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maignan, I., Ferrell, O. C., & Hult, G. T. M. (1999). Corporate citizenship: Cultural antecedents and business benefits. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(4), 455–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D., & Crane, A. (2005). Corporate citizenship: Toward an extended theoretical conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 166–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza, X. (1996). Las transformaciones del sector público en las sociedades avanzadas. Del estado del bienestar al estado relacional. Papers de Formació 23 Diputació de Barcelona.

    Google Scholar 

  • Midttun, A. (2005). Policy making and the role of government. Realigning business, government and civil society. Emerging embedded relational governance beyond the (neo)liberal and welfare state models. Corporate Governance: International Journal of Business in Society, 5(3), 159–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moratis, L., & Slaa, A. M. (2016). Sticks in a bundle are unbreakable: The creation of a Kenyan CSR knowledge centre and business network. In Key initiatives in corporate social responsibility (pp. 399–417). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • NEPA. (1969). Summary of the national environmental policy act. Law and Regulations, US Environmental Protection Agency. Retrieved November 16, 2015, from http://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-national-environmental-policy-act

  • Pinkston, T. S., & Carroll, A. B. (1994). Corporate citizenship perspectives and foreign direct investment in the US. Journal of Business Ethics, 13(3), 157–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2002). The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, 80(12), 56–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating shared value: How to reinvent capitalism—And unleash a wave of innovation and growth. Harvard Business Review, 89(January/February), 62–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • PPACA. (2010). The patient protection and affordable care act: An overview of its potential impact on state health programs. Retrieved October 2, 2015, from http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2010/hlth/fed_healthcare/fed_healthcare_051310.aspx

  • Rasche, A., De Bakker, F. G., & Moon, J. (2013). Complete and partial organizing for corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(4), 651–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reuters. (2010). Factbox-U.S. healthcare bill would provide immediate benefits. Retrieved October 31, 2015, from http://www.reuters.com/article/usa-healthcare-rollout-idUSN1914020220100322#vlGrBoWEAWZE7UER.97

  • Schwartz, M. S., & Carroll, A. B. (2003). Corporate social responsibility: A three-domain approach. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(4), 503–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, J., & Del Bosque, I. R. (2008). Understanding corporate social responsibility and product perceptions in consumer markets: A cross-cultural evaluation. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(3), 597–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singhapakdi, A., Kraft, K. L., Vitell, S. J., & Rallapalli, K. C. (1995). The perceived importance of ethics and social responsibility on organizational effectiveness: A survey of marketers. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23(1), 49–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanwick, P. A., & Stanwick, S. D. (1998). The relationship between corporate social performance, and organizational size, financial performance, and environmental performance: An empirical examination. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(2), 195–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strand, R., & Freeman, R. E. (2013). Scandinavian cooperative advantage: The theory and practice of stakeholder engagement in Scandinavia. Journal of Business Ethics, 127(1), 65–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • TIP. (2015). Office to monitor and combat trafficking in persons. Retrieved November 14, 2015, from http://www.state.gov/j/tip/

  • U.S. Geological Survey. (2010). Mineral commodity summaries. U.S. department of the interior. Retrieved November 10, 2015, from http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/mcs/2010/mcs2010.pdf

  • Van Riel, C. B., & Fombrun, C. J. (2007). Essentials of corporate communication: Implementing practices for effective reputation management. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Varadarajan, P. R., & Menon, A. (1988). Cause-related marketing: A co-alignment of marketing strategy and corporate philanthropy. The Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 58–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wartick, S. L., & Cochran, P. L. (1985). The evolution of the corporate social performance model. Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 758–769.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, D. J., Mohr, L. A., & Harris, K. E. (2008). A re-examination of socially responsible consumption and its measurement. Journal of Business Research, 61(2), 91–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, D., Colbert, B., & Freeman, R. E. (2003). Focusing on value: Reconciling corporate social responsibility, stakeholder theory and sustainability in a network world. Journal of General Management, 28(3), 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16(4), 691–718.

    Google Scholar 

  • WorldWatch. (2015). U.S. must commit to sustainability to overcome mounting economic and ecological strains. Retrieved November 25, 2015, from http://www.worldwatch.org/us-must-commit-sustainability-overcome-mounting-economic=-and-ecological-strains

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Malta, Msida, Malta

    Mark Anthony Camilleri

Authors
  1. Mark Anthony Camilleri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark Anthony Camilleri .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Guildhall School of Business and Law, London Metropolitan University, London, United Kingdom

    Samuel O. Idowu

  2. School of Applied Social Studies, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, United Kingdom

    Stephen Vertigans

  3. Economics and Business Administration, University of Craiova, Craiova, Romania

    Adriana Schiopoiu Burlea

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Camilleri, M.A. (2017). Corporate Social Responsibility Policy in the United States of America. In: Idowu, S., Vertigans, S., Schiopoiu Burlea, A. (eds) Corporate Social Responsibility in Times of Crisis. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52839-7_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation