Abstract
In this chapter we will discuss the ethical foundations of CSR. The chapter consists of three major parts. First, we discuss three different approaches to CSR, namely (a) an instrumental approach, (b) an ethical approach and (c) a hybrid approach, attempting to combine the instrumental and the ethical approach. We will conclude that the ethical approach to CSR is the most reasonable of the three alternatives. Second, we introduce some of the most influential ethical theories and their key principles, namely (a) the utilitarian principle of maximizing well-being, (b) theories of rights, and (c) social contract principles concerning fairness, and discuss how they might relate to CSR in general. Third, we present and discuss some specific ethical challenges characteristic for CSR including whether companies should focus solely on avoiding harmful actions or whether they also have obligations to actively do good.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
We do not differentiate between the terms ”ethics” and ”morality”.
- 2.
However, there seems to be good evidence that businesses do view their engagement with CSR as being an ethical enterprise. See Arlbjørn, Warming-Rasmussen, Liempd, and Mikkelsen (2008).
- 3.
For further reading, see Frederiksen and Nielsen (2013).
- 4.
The idea of rights being trumps is beautifully laid out in from Dworkin(1984).
- 5.
For this, see Gjerris, Nielsen, and Sandøe (2013).
- 6.
For further reading on the (admittedly multi-facetted) relation between ethics of rights and CSR, see, e.g., Arnold and Harris (2012).
- 7.
Although much early CSR-theory and business ethics revolved around notions of “the social contract” between society and business, not overly much has (yet) been written on the relation between contractualism as we define it here and CSR, despite contractualism’s recent rise in moral and political philosophy. For some reflections akin to those made here, see Sacconi, Blair, Freeman, and Vercelli (2010), Chaps. 1, 7, 8.
References
Arlbjørn, J. S., Warming-Rasmussen, B., Liempd, D. V., & Mikkelsen, O. S. (2008). A European survey on corporate social responsibility. Kolding: Department of Entrepreneurship and Relation Management, University of Southern Denmark.
Arnold, D. G., & Harris, J. D. (2012). Kantian business ethics: Critical perspectives. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Donaldson, T. (1993). Fundamental rights and international duties. In T. L. Beauchamp & N. E. Bowie (Eds.), Ethical theory and business (Vol. 4). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Dworkin, R. (1984). Rights as trumps. In J. Waldron (Ed.), Theories of rights (pp. 153–167). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Frederiksen, C. S. (2010). The relation between policies concerning corporate social responsibility (CSR) and philosophical moral theories—An empirical investigation. Journal of Business Ethics, 93, 357–371.
Frederiksen, C. S., & Nielsen, M. E. J. (2013). Utilitarianism and CSR. In S. O. Idowu (Ed.), Encyclopedia of corporate social responsibility (pp. 2643–2649). Berlin: Springer.
Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Parmar, B. L., & Colle, S. D. (2011). Stakeholder theory. The state of the art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Freeman, R. E., & Phillips, R. A. (2002). Stakeholder theory: A libertarian defense. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(3), 331–349.
Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine, 122–126.
Gjerris, M., Nielsen, M. E. J., & Sandøe, P. (2013). The good, the right, and the fair. London: College Publications.
Habermas, J. (1983). Moralbewusstsein und kommunikatives Handeln. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.
Kaler, J. (2009). An optimally viable version of stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 86, 297–312.
Kant, I. (1994). Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten. Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag.
Rawls, J. (1999). A theory of justice (Rev. ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Sacconi, L., Blair, M., Freeman, R., & Vercelli, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
Scanlon, T. M. (1998). What we owe to each other. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Scheffler, S. (1997). Relationships and responsibilities. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 26(3), 189–209.
Singer, P. (1993). Practical ethics (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Stieb, J. A. (2009). Assessing Freeman’s stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 401–414.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Frederiksen, C.S., Nielsen, M.E.J. (2013). The Ethical Foundations for CSR. In: Okpara, J., Idowu, S. (eds) Corporate Social Responsibility. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40975-2_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40975-2_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-40974-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-40975-2
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)