IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01297088.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The weighting of CSR dimensions: one size does not fit all

Author

Listed:
  • Gunther Capelle-Blancard

    (CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Aurélien Petit

    (CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

Although the concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) is fundamentally multidimensional, most studies use composite scores to assess corporate social performance (CSP). How relevant are such composite scores? How the CSR dimensions are weighted? Should the weighting scheme be the same across sectors? This article proposes an original weighting scheme of CSR strengths and concerns, at the sector level, which is proportional to media and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) scrutiny. The authors show that previous CSP assessments underweight environmental and corporate governance concerns. Moreover, findings suggest that firms that are exposed to the closest scrutiny are usually criticized on one single dimension: for instance, banks for bad corporate governance, and basic-resource firms for environmental damage. Composite scores based on equal weights hence misrepresent CSP and the difference in CSR between sectors.

Suggested Citation

  • Gunther Capelle-Blancard & Aurélien Petit, 2016. "The weighting of CSR dimensions: one size does not fit all," Post-Print hal-01297088, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01297088
    DOI: 10.1177/0007650315620118
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elena Escrig‐Olmedo & María Jesús Muñoz‐Torres & María Ángeles Fernández‐Izquierdo & Juana María Rivera‐Lirio, 2017. "Measuring Corporate Environmental Performance: A Methodology for Sustainable Development," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 142-162, February.
    2. Olivier Boiral & David Talbot & Marie‐Christine Brotherton, 2020. "Measuring sustainability risks: A rational myth?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2557-2571, September.
    3. Marion Dupire & Bouchra M’Zali, 2018. "CSR Strategies in Response to Competitive Pressures," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(3), pages 603-623, March.
    4. Bianca Raluca BADITOIU & Alexandru BUGLEA & Diana Corina GLIGOR-CIMPOIERU & Valentin Partenie MUNTEANU, 2020. "Csr Disclosure Of Financial European Companies Within Integrated Reports," Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 14(1), pages 924-938, November.
    5. Lutfi Abdul Razak & Mansor H. Ibrahim & Adam Ng, 2020. "Which Sustainability Dimensions Affect Credit Risk? Evidence from Corporate and Country-Level Measures," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-22, December.
    6. Luluk Widyawati, 2021. "Measurement concerns and agreement of environmental social governance ratings," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(S1), pages 1589-1623, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01297088. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.