IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/liu/liuced/142.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) as a model of "extended" corporate governance. an explanation based on the economic theories of social contract, reputation and reciprocal conformism

Author

Abstract

This paper first sets a definition of corporate social responsibility (CSR) as an extended model of corporate governance and then accounts for a voluntary approach to CSR, meant as voluntary compliance with CSR strategic management standards, in terms of an economic theory of self-regulation based on the concepts of social contract, reputation and reciprocal conformism. The paper argues that extended fiduciary duties toward all the firm's stakeholders are needed because of the same neo-institutional analysis of the firm that justifies it as a unified system of governance of economic transactions based on authority relations and residual rights of control. The key concept here is that of abuse of firm's authority vis-à-vis the stakeholders who hold incomplete contracts with the firm. Extended fiduciary duties are singled out from the model of a Social Contract amongst the firm's stakeholders. This provide for a clear cut and calculable criterion of strategic management no less able to set a bottom-line to the firm management than the profit maximisation principle, while being able of answering legitimate claims of fair treatment from all the firm's stakeholders. Such a task is accomplished by an application of the theory of bargaining games to the Social Contract of the firm, which employs the Nash-Harsanyi bargaining solution as a normative criterion for strategic management and corporate governance, providing an answer to the deficit of uniqueness problem raised by Michael Jensen (2001) against the notion of stakeholders value. Then, the paper distinguishes two models of self regulation (the discretionary one, and the explicit-norms-cum-self-enforcement one) and argues that while incomplete contracts and imperfect knowledge debar form resorting to reputation effects in order to support discretional self-regulation, on the contrary an explicit standard for CSR strategic management, based on general and abstract business ethics principles and precautionary protocols and rules of behaviour - both publicly shared by stakeholders and firms through social dialog - make possible to put again at work the reputation mechanism inducing endogenous incentives of compliance with a voluntary standard. The paper here suggests how (by both fuzzy logic and default reasoning ) a CSR Strategic Management Standard may work as a cognitive gap filling tool with respect to the firm's commitments and the stakeholders' expectations in presence of incomplete information. Moreover recent developments in the theory of conformist non-purely-self-interested preferences add motivational force to the basic result about self-enforcement of a CSR management standard. Hence, conformist preferences solve the problem of optimal mixed strategies that otherwise could enable the firm inducing the stakeholders to “trust” it without really conforming to a CSR standard. This result is given a formal proof in sec.11. The paper concludes with a collusion-proof design of intermediate social bodies (civil society institutions) that may answer the demand for assurance and external verifiability of CSR standards compliance by independent third-parties.

Suggested Citation

  • Lorenzo Sacconi, 2004. "Corporate social responsibility (CSR) as a model of "extended" corporate governance. an explanation based on the economic theories of social contract, reputation and reciprocal conformism," LIUC Papers in Ethics, Law and Economics 142, Cattaneo University (LIUC).
  • Handle: RePEc:liu:liuced:142
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://biblio.liuc.it/liucpap/pdf/142.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hart, Oliver & Moore, John, 1990. "Property Rights and the Nature of the Firm," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1119-1158, December.
    2. Michael C. Jensen, 2010. "Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 22(1), pages 32-42, January.
    3. Hart, Oliver, 1995. "Firms, Contracts, and Financial Structure," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198288817.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Juan Pineiro-Chousa & Marcos Vizcaíno-González & M. Ángeles López-Cabarcos, 2016. "Reputation, Game Theory and Entrepreneurial Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-13, November.
    2. Lorenzo Sacconi & Giacomo Degli Antoni, 2009. "A Theoretical Analysis of the Relationship between Social Capital and Corporate Social Responsibility: Concepts and Definitions," Chapters, in: Silvia Sacchetti & Roger Sugden (ed.), Knowledge in the Development of Economies, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Ojo, Marianne, 2016. "E commerce as a tool for resource expansion: postal partnerships, data protection legislation and the mitigation of implementation gaps," MPRA Paper 70175, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Tortia, Ermanno C., 2017. "The firm as a common. The case of the accumulation and use of capital resources in co-operative enterprises," MPRA Paper 76735, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Storchevoy, Maxim A., 2010. "A general theory of the firm: From Knight to relationship marketing," Working Papers 765, Graduate School of Management, St. Petersburg State University.
    6. Nair, Tara S. & Pradhan, Rachayeeta, 2010. "Binding stakeholders into moral communities: A review of studies on social responsibility of business," MPRA Paper 20767, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Aishah Sheikh Abu Bakar & Rashid Ameer, 2011. "Readability of Corporate Social Responsibility communication in Malaysia," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(1), pages 50-60, January.
    8. Silvia Sacchetti & Carlo Borzaga, 2021. "The foundations of the “public organisation”: governance failure and the problem of external effects," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 25(3), pages 731-758, September.
    9. Ermanno C. Tortia & Florence Degavre & Simone Poledrini, 2020. "Why are social enterprises good candidates for social innovation? Looking for personal and institutional drivers of innovation," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 91(3), pages 459-477, September.
    10. Giorgia Nigri & Mara Del Baldo & Armando Agulini, 2020. "Governance and accountability models in Italian certified benefit corporations," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(5), pages 2368-2380, September.
    11. Ishmael Botshabelo & Christian Mbekomize & Percy Phatshwane, 2017. "Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting in Banking Industry: An Analysis of Disclosure Levels in Botswana," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(12), pages 224-224, November.
    12. Ermanno C. Tortia, 2018. "The Firm as a Common. Non-Divided Ownership, Patrimonial Stability and Longevity of Co-Operative Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-18, March.
    13. Simone Poledrini & Florence Degavre & Ermanno Tortia, 2018. "Editorial: Background and Further Perspectives on Social Innovation in Social Enterprises," Journal of Entrepreneurial and Organizational Diversity, European Research Institute on Cooperative and Social Enterprises, vol. 7(1), pages 1-13.
    14. Samuel Mansell, 2013. "Shareholder Theory and Kant’s ‘Duty of Beneficence’," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 117(3), pages 583-599, October.
    15. Riillo, Cesare Fabio Antonio & Sarracino, Francesco, 2014. "Motivations for Corporate Social Responsibility: all talk and no walk?," MPRA Paper 60211, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Magali Fia & Lorenzo Sacconi, 2019. "Justice and Corporate Governance: New Insights from Rawlsian Social Contract and Sen’s Capabilities Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 160(4), pages 937-960, December.
    17. Pineiro-Chousa, Juan & Vizcaíno-González, Marcos, 2016. "A quantum derivation of a reputational risk premium," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 304-309.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Magali Fia & Lorenzo Sacconi, 2019. "Justice and Corporate Governance: New Insights from Rawlsian Social Contract and Sen’s Capabilities Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 160(4), pages 937-960, December.
    2. Mahoney, Joseph T., 2012. "Towards a Stakeholder Theory of Strategic Management," Working Papers 12-0100, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    3. Giacomo Degli Antoni & Lorenzo Sacconi, 2010. "Modeling Cognitive Social Capital and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) as Preconditions for Sustainable Networks of Relations," Econometica Working Papers wp19, Econometica.
    4. Lorenzo Sacconi, 2011. "A Rawlsian View of CSR and the Game Theory of its Implementation (Part I): the Multi-stakeholder Model of Corporate Governance," International Economic Association Series, in: Lorenzo Sacconi & Margaret Blair & R. Edward Freeman & Alessandro Vercelli (ed.), Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Governance, chapter 7, pages 157-193, Palgrave Macmillan.
    5. Robé Jean-Philippe, 2011. "The Legal Structure of the Firm," Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-88, January.
    6. Alessandro Zattoni, 2011. "Who Should Control a Corporation? Toward a Contingency Stakeholder Model for Allocating Ownership Rights," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 103(2), pages 255-274, October.
    7. Degli Antoni, Giacomo & Sacconi, Lorenzo, 2013. "Social responsibility, activism and boycotting in a firm–stakeholders network of games with players’ conformist preferences," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 216-226.
    8. Windsperger, Josef, 2001. "The fee structure in franchising: a property rights view," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 219-226, November.
    9. Peter G. Klein & Michael E. Sykuta, 2010. "Editors’ Introduction," Chapters, in: Peter G. Klein & Michael E. Sykuta (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Transaction Cost Economics, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Surajeet Chakravarty & W. Bentley MacLeod, 2006. "Construction Contracts (or “How to Get the Right Building at the Right Price?”)," CESifo Working Paper Series 1714, CESifo.
    11. Oliver Hart, 2013. "Noncontractible Investments and Reference Points," Games, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-20, August.
    12. Schmitz, Patrick W., 2021. "On the optimality of outsourcing when vertical integration can mitigate information asymmetries," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    13. Foss Kirsten & Foss Nicolai & Klein Peter G. & Klein Sandra K., 2002. "Heterogeneous Capital, Entrepreneurship, and Economic Organization," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, March.
    14. Nathan H. Miller, 2008. "Competition When Consumers Value Firm Scope," EAG Discussions Papers 200807, Department of Justice, Antitrust Division.
    15. Patrick W. Schmitz, 2006. "Book Review," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 162(3), pages 535-542, September.
    16. Markus Solf, 2004. "Unternehmenskooperationen als Folge von Informations- und Kommunikations-technologieveränderungen: Eine theoretische Analyse," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 146-167, March.
    17. Sharon Novak & Scott Stern, 2009. "Complementarity Among Vertical Integration Decisions: Evidence from Automobile Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(2), pages 311-332, February.
    18. Kim, Jongwook & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2008. "A Strategic Theory of the Firm as a Nexus of Incomplete Contracts: A Property Rights Approach," Working Papers 08-0108, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    19. Patrick W. Schmitz, 2006. "Information Gathering, Transaction Costs, and the Property Rights Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 422-434, March.
    20. Hoppe, Eva I. & Kusterer, David J. & Schmitz, Patrick W., 2013. "Public–private partnerships versus traditional procurement: An experimental investigation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 145-166.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:liu:liuced:142. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Laura Ballestra (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/liuccit.html .

    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.