Public Policies for Corporate Social Responsibility in Four Nordic Countries: Harmony of Goals and Conflict of Means

Atle Midttun, Maria Gjølberg, Arno Kourula, Susanne Sweet, Steen Vallentin

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Resumé

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) was historically a business-oriented idea that companies should voluntarily improve their social and environmental practices. More recently, CSR has increasingly attracted governments’ attention, and is now promoted in public policy, especially in the European Union (EU). Conflicts can arise, however, when advanced welfare states introduce CSR into public policy. The reason for such conflict is that CSR leaves key public welfare issues to the discretion of private business. This voluntary issue assignment contrasts starkly with advanced welfare states’ traditions favoring negotiated agreements and strong regulation to control corporate conduct. This article analyzes the conflicts and compatibilities arising when advanced welfare states introduce CSR, focusing on how the two traditions diverge and on how conflicts are reconciled. Empirically the study focuses on four Nordic countries Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden—widely recognized as the most advanced welfare states, and increasingly as leaders in CSR public policy. From interviews of 55 officials of government ministries, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), labor
unions, and employer associations, the authors conclude that tension indeed
exists between CSR public policies and advanced welfare state traditions in all four countries. Whereas CSR’s aims are compatible with Nordic institutional traditions, the means promoted in CSR is in conflict with such Nordic traditions as corporatist agreements and rights-based welfare state regulation of social and environmental issues. There is harmony of goals, but conflict in means between the four Nordic countries studied.
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) was historically a business-oriented idea that companies should voluntarily improve their social and environmental practices. More recently, CSR has increasingly attracted governments’ attention, and is now promoted in public policy, especially in the European Union (EU). Conflicts can arise, however, when advanced welfare states introduce CSR into public policy. The reason for such conflict is that CSR leaves key public welfare issues to the discretion of private business. This voluntary issue assignment contrasts starkly with advanced welfare states’ traditions favoring negotiated agreements and strong regulation to control corporate conduct. This article analyzes the conflicts and compatibilities arising when advanced welfare states introduce CSR, focusing on how the two traditions diverge and on how conflicts are reconciled. Empirically the study focuses on four Nordic countries Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden—widely recognized as the most advanced welfare states, and increasingly as leaders in CSR public policy. From interviews of 55 officials of government ministries, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), labor
unions, and employer associations, the authors conclude that tension indeed
exists between CSR public policies and advanced welfare state traditions in all four countries. Whereas CSR’s aims are compatible with Nordic institutional traditions, the means promoted in CSR is in conflict with such Nordic traditions as corporatist agreements and rights-based welfare state regulation of social and environmental issues. There is harmony of goals, but conflict in means between the four Nordic countries studied.
SprogEngelsk
TidsskriftBusiness & Society
Vol/bind54
Udgave nummer4
Sider464-500
Antal sider37
ISSN0007-6503
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 2015

Emneord

  • Business and political strategies
  • Politics
  • Regulation
  • Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

Citer dette

Midttun, Atle ; Gjølberg, Maria ; Kourula, Arno ; Sweet, Susanne ; Vallentin, Steen. / Public Policies for Corporate Social Responsibility in Four Nordic Countries : Harmony of Goals and Conflict of Means . I: Business & Society. 2015 ; Bind 54, Nr. 4. s. 464-500
@article{49da7924369248a2a8a98657b94b414c,
title = "Public Policies for Corporate Social Responsibility in Four Nordic Countries: Harmony of Goals and Conflict of Means",
abstract = "Corporate social responsibility (CSR) was historically a business-oriented idea that companies should voluntarily improve their social and environmental practices. More recently, CSR has increasingly attracted governments’ attention, and is now promoted in public policy, especially in the European Union (EU). Conflicts can arise, however, when advanced welfare states introduce CSR into public policy. The reason for such conflict is that CSR leaves key public welfare issues to the discretion of private business. This voluntary issue assignment contrasts starkly with advanced welfare states’ traditions favoring negotiated agreements and strong regulation to control corporate conduct. This article analyzes the conflicts and compatibilities arising when advanced welfare states introduce CSR, focusing on how the two traditions diverge and on how conflicts are reconciled. Empirically the study focuses on four Nordic countries Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden—widely recognized as the most advanced welfare states, and increasingly as leaders in CSR public policy. From interviews of 55 officials of government ministries, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), laborunions, and employer associations, the authors conclude that tension indeedexists between CSR public policies and advanced welfare state traditions in all four countries. Whereas CSR’s aims are compatible with Nordic institutional traditions, the means promoted in CSR is in conflict with such Nordic traditions as corporatist agreements and rights-based welfare state regulation of social and environmental issues. There is harmony of goals, but conflict in means between the four Nordic countries studied.",
keywords = "Business and political strategies, Politics, Regulation, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)",
author = "Atle Midttun and Maria Gj{\o}lberg and Arno Kourula and Susanne Sweet and Steen Vallentin",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1177/0007650312450848",
language = "English",
volume = "54",
pages = "464--500",
journal = "Business & Society",
issn = "0007-6503",
publisher = "Sage Publications, Inc.",
number = "4",

}

Public Policies for Corporate Social Responsibility in Four Nordic Countries : Harmony of Goals and Conflict of Means . / Midttun, Atle; Gjølberg, Maria; Kourula, Arno; Sweet, Susanne; Vallentin, Steen.

I: Business & Society, Bind 54, Nr. 4, 2015, s. 464-500.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Public Policies for Corporate Social Responsibility in Four Nordic Countries

T2 - Business & Society

AU - Midttun,Atle

AU - Gjølberg,Maria

AU - Kourula,Arno

AU - Sweet,Susanne

AU - Vallentin,Steen

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Corporate social responsibility (CSR) was historically a business-oriented idea that companies should voluntarily improve their social and environmental practices. More recently, CSR has increasingly attracted governments’ attention, and is now promoted in public policy, especially in the European Union (EU). Conflicts can arise, however, when advanced welfare states introduce CSR into public policy. The reason for such conflict is that CSR leaves key public welfare issues to the discretion of private business. This voluntary issue assignment contrasts starkly with advanced welfare states’ traditions favoring negotiated agreements and strong regulation to control corporate conduct. This article analyzes the conflicts and compatibilities arising when advanced welfare states introduce CSR, focusing on how the two traditions diverge and on how conflicts are reconciled. Empirically the study focuses on four Nordic countries Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden—widely recognized as the most advanced welfare states, and increasingly as leaders in CSR public policy. From interviews of 55 officials of government ministries, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), laborunions, and employer associations, the authors conclude that tension indeedexists between CSR public policies and advanced welfare state traditions in all four countries. Whereas CSR’s aims are compatible with Nordic institutional traditions, the means promoted in CSR is in conflict with such Nordic traditions as corporatist agreements and rights-based welfare state regulation of social and environmental issues. There is harmony of goals, but conflict in means between the four Nordic countries studied.

AB - Corporate social responsibility (CSR) was historically a business-oriented idea that companies should voluntarily improve their social and environmental practices. More recently, CSR has increasingly attracted governments’ attention, and is now promoted in public policy, especially in the European Union (EU). Conflicts can arise, however, when advanced welfare states introduce CSR into public policy. The reason for such conflict is that CSR leaves key public welfare issues to the discretion of private business. This voluntary issue assignment contrasts starkly with advanced welfare states’ traditions favoring negotiated agreements and strong regulation to control corporate conduct. This article analyzes the conflicts and compatibilities arising when advanced welfare states introduce CSR, focusing on how the two traditions diverge and on how conflicts are reconciled. Empirically the study focuses on four Nordic countries Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden—widely recognized as the most advanced welfare states, and increasingly as leaders in CSR public policy. From interviews of 55 officials of government ministries, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), laborunions, and employer associations, the authors conclude that tension indeedexists between CSR public policies and advanced welfare state traditions in all four countries. Whereas CSR’s aims are compatible with Nordic institutional traditions, the means promoted in CSR is in conflict with such Nordic traditions as corporatist agreements and rights-based welfare state regulation of social and environmental issues. There is harmony of goals, but conflict in means between the four Nordic countries studied.

KW - Business and political strategies

KW - Politics

KW - Regulation

KW - Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

U2 - 10.1177/0007650312450848

DO - 10.1177/0007650312450848

M3 - Journal article

VL - 54

SP - 464

EP - 500

JO - Business & Society

JF - Business & Society

SN - 0007-6503

IS - 4

ER -