Įmonių socialinės atsakomybės įgyvendinimo regioniniai skirtumai

Direct Link:
Mokslo publikacijos / Scientific publications
Document Type:
Straipsnis / Article
Lietuvių kalba / Lithuanian
Įmonių socialinės atsakomybės įgyvendinimo regioniniai skirtumai
Alternative Title:
Regional differences of corporate social responsibility implementation
In the Journal:
Regional formation and development studies. 2016, Nr. 2 (19), p. 127-136
Įmonių socialinė atsakomybė; Regioniniai skirtumai; Regionų lyginamoji analizė.
Corporate social responsibility; Comparative country studies; Regional welfare.
Summary / Abstract:

LTStraipsnyje analizuojami įmonių socialinės atsakomybės įgyvendinimo regioniniai skirtumai. Mokslininkų darbuose pripažįstama, kad įmonių socialinės atsakomybės įgyvendinimo skirtumai egzistuoja įvairiuose regionuose, atsižvelgiant į pabrėžiamus aspektus, įmonių socialinės atsakomybės sritis, teikiamas ataskaitas ir pan. Šiame straipsnyje siekiama išanalizuoti įmonių socialinės atsakomybės regioninius skirtumus, regionus suskirstant pagal socialinius-ekonominius modelius. Europos valstybes susiskirsčius pagal socialinius-ekonominius modelius ir jas įvertinus, remiantis taikomais tarptautiniais standartais bei gairėmis, nustatyta, kad Rytų ir Vidurio Europos regionas atsilieka, kontinentinis ir skandinaviškasis regionai pirmauja pagal GRI ataskaitų teikimą. Viduržiemio jūros regionas išsiskiria mažų ir vidutinių įmonių aktyvumu teikiant GRI ataskaitas, diegiant SA8000 standartą ar dalyvaujant Jungtinių Tautų Pasaulinio susitarimo tinkle. [Iš leidinio]

ENThe paper analyzes regional differences in implements corporate social responsibility. There are recognized in scientific studies, which exists regional disparities in implementation corporate social responsibility depending on the highlighted aspects, themes, reporting and so on. The aim of this article is to analyze what are regional differences in implementing corporate social responsibility when countries are divided into groups according to socio-economic models. Corporate Social Responsibility (hereinafter – CSR) concept is analyzed for quite a long time, but measurement and evaluation of this concept according to H. Shaw (2007) is a major problem. There is lack of this concept standardization, there are no universal criteria and rules, it is difficult to compare the company‘s operations in accordance with social responsibility not only in the same sector, but also in different countries or regions. It should be noted that during the economic crisis, according to V. Juščius (2009), there was revealed one of the most important business and public mutual connection problems in recent decades: companie‘s only formally incorporate CSR values into management schemes and structures. In the scientific literature, a broad analysis of the evolution of the CSR concept can be identified (Marčinskas, Seiliūtė, 2008; Marens, 2008; Carroll and Shabana, 2010; Virvilaitė and Daubaraitė, 2011; Navickaitė, Ruževičius, 2007; Juščius, 2007; Štreimikienė, Kovaliov, 2008), main corporate social responsibility theories are discussed (Juščius, 2007; Balčiūnienė et al., 2012), there are examined factors that have impact on CSR development (Bakanauskas and Vanagienė, 2012; Bernatonytė et al., 2009; Astromskienė, Adamonienė, 2009; Juščius, 2007), variuos conceptual models are constructed (Matten and Moon, 2008; Carroll, 1991; Wood, 1991). Despite that, CSR implementation and evaluation faces with certain problems.It should be notes that there ar noticeable differences in the implementation this concept in various regions. R. Steurer et al. (2012) indicates that European countries have a longstanding tradition of integrating economic and social policies. On a superficial level, the literature speaks of a European socio-economic model that is defined by public pension systems with a relatively wide coverage, health care systems that are open to most citizens, and inclusive labor market policies. Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian, and Continental socio- economic models represent more or less mature ideal-type welfare state variations that correspond with liberal, social-democratic, and conservative ideologies, the characteristics of the transitional model are still emerging. Anglo-Saxon countries UK and Ireland are not significantly more active than those from the Scandinavian model. This finding is remarkable because the two socio-economic models mark the opposite ends of the European welfare state spectrum, representing liberal and social-democratic ideological tendencies. High levels of activity in Anglo-Saxon countries can be explained historically with the origins of CSR as a liberal concept under right-wing governments, and the similarly high levels of activity in Scandinavian countries may be spurred by current trends that transform CSR into a mature agenda of embedding businesses in society that corresponds increasingly well with social-democratic welfare state models. The transition countries from the CEE region are the least active in promoting CSR. After the general trends analysis, it can be stated that there are significant differences in terms of social responsibility initiatives, based on international standards and guidelines. Eastern and Central European countries in this region are far behind the general trends.In these countries, more attention is paid to the dissemination of information, awareness raising, but companies have been slow in applying the international standards in its activities. It should be noted that the situation is improving, compared with 2006. Companies attributed in Anglo-Saxon region the least adopt the SA8000 standard, as well as the relatively small number of companies belongs to the United Nations Global Compact. Even though the concept of CSR is based on liberalism, which would be typical to this region, but the analysis of the data showed that the region is lagging behind the leading continental, Scandinavian and Mediterranean regions. Mediterranean region was in the third place according to provided GRI reports. The regional companies are actively implementing the SA8000 standard, are active part of the United Nations Global Compact network. The uniqueness of this region is that there are very active small and medium-sized enterprises in comparison with other regions. Scandinavian companies in the region is far behind the application of the SA8000 standard, compared with other regions, but are in the lead by GRI reports, and a relatively significant number of companies belong to the United Nations Global Compact network. It must be emphasized that after analyzing the trends of implementing three international standards and guidelines, there was found that companies attributed to the continental region usually provides GRI reports, company active United Nations Global Compact States. It can be formulated the main conclusion that when EU countries memebers are divided to the groups according socio-economic models, there can be found significant differences. According to the applicable standards and guidelines, East and Central European region is lagging behind, although noticeable improvement in the trend. [...]. [From the publication]

Related Publications:
2022-02-09 17:47:48
Views: 11    Downloads: 3