The government of self-regulation: on the comparative dynamics of corporate social responsibility

Figures & data

Table 1  Five CSR-government configurations

Relationship type	Description	Mechanism of coordination	Influence of corporations	Influence of the legal framework	Illustrations
1. CSR as self-government	Corporate discretion independent of but alongside government	Absence of coordination, disconnection or coincidence of private and public initiatives	StrongLittle state interference in CSR initiatives	WeakTypical case of ‘CSR beyond law’	Philanthropic contributions to society, strategic CSR
2. CSR as facilitatedby government	Governments provide incentives for CSR or encourage CSR through rhetoric	Ex antegovernmental influence through the design of incentive systems and ex post encouragement through rhetoric	Strong – medium Governments contribute to CSR but it is mainly drivenby corporations	Medium CSR indirectly shaped by legal intervention Indirect form of ‘CSR through law’	Governmental subsidies, tax expenditures, imprimatur; socially responsible public procurement
3. CSR as a partnership with government	Governments and business organizations (and often civil society) combine their resources and objectives	Various modes of coordination and interaction of government and business resourcesand strategies	Strong – medium State likely to influence weakly the content and strongly the processof CSR initiatives	Medium Indirect mobilization of the legal framework for shaping CSR	Multi-actor institutions to deliver social goods or norms/codes using some governmental resources (as above)
4. CSR as mandatedby government	Governments regulate for CSR	Ex antegovernmental framing of CSR initiatives through the controlof outcomes or disclosure	Medium – weakState likely to influence strongly the contentof corporate CSR initiatives	Strong CSR shapedby the legal framework; direct form of ‘CSR through law’	French law on social reporting (NRE); UK Companies Act amendment
5. CSR as a form of government	Firms act as if they were governments where there are government deficits	Firm level or through stakeholder processes/ institutions	StrongState power vacuum, delegation or substitution by CSR	Weak Corporations act as government ‘CSR for law’	CSR in pre-welfare state; post-privatization; global governance; new/‘wicked’ issues
Source: Adapted from Fox et al. (2002) and McBarnet (2007) with authors’ additions.

Table 2   The changing social responsibility doctrine in Western Europe

Period	Stage of development	Key concept	Corporate legitimacy	Main motivations
1880–1900	Spread of industrialization; philanthropy	Self-government: philanthropy/	Context of labour movements,	Mixed: religious, legitimacy,
		paternalism alongside regulatory state	industrial regulation	productivity
1900–1945	Growth of welfare state; narrowing of business SR	Self-government: philanthropy/paternalism alongside various state forms	Contested by labour/socialist movements/governments; incorporated in fascist systems	Legitimacy (often linked with nationalism)
1945–1980	Consolidation of welfare state; expansion of industrial state; growth of neo-corporatism; narrowing of business SR	Implicit role in enabling and mandating government/modest self-government in philanthropy	Incorporation in mixed economy/ welfarism	Legitimized in Social Democracy/Christian Democracy/Liberalism/ Conservatism. Marginal values-led motivation
1980–present	Liberalization/privatization/new governance; globalization yields wider corporate discretion	Explicit CSR: community, market, workplace, environment	Global citizenship; focus on individual firm (as opposed to business in general or collectively)	Legitimacy, stakeholder approval, business strategy
Source: Compiled by authors.