Types of Social Responsibility: Sustainability

Types of Social Responsibility: Sustainability

One type of corporate social responsibility focuses on three key dimensions of sustainability—environmental, social, and economic.

Many efforts to show corporate social responsibility, or CSR, focus on environmental, social, and economic sustainability. Sustainability is the capacity to endure over the long term through renewal, maintenance, and sustenance. From an organizational perspective, sustainability is a criteria used to make decisions about business conduct and to evaluate outcomes.

Environmental sustainability involves efforts to protect air, water, and land from any harmful effects. It also encompasses stewardship for natural resources, such as trees and wildlife. Sustainable business practices consider not only the use of resources in production, but also the assurance that those resources can be replenished for future use. Energy is another area of interest in environmental sustainability. Reducing greenhouse gasses harmful to the atmosphere and embracing alternative, renewable fuel sources such as wind and energy are examples of business practices in this area.

The social dimension of sustainability addresses concerns such as peace and social justice. Efforts to improve education, to expand worker rights, to minimize the use of child labor, and to increase the political empowerment of women, especially in developing countries, are examples of social sustainability practices. Reducing poverty by helping people develop the skills to earn their own livelihoods is another example of social sustainability. Projects that provide access to clean water and sanitation are also aimed at improving social sustainability by reducing illness and mortality rates.

Economic sustainability refers to business practices that do not diminish the prospects of future persons to enjoy levels of consumption, wealth, utility, or welfare comparable to those enjoyed in the present. This means companies’ operational practices reduce environmental damage and resource depletion. Efforts to influence business practices toward economic sustainability include pricing mechanisms, such as carbon taxes, that pass on the cost of environmental impact to the users of those resources.

Triple bottom line: Sustainable design of a business can be an aspect of corporate social responsibility.

Tracking sustainability measures can be performed using sustainability accounting, in which a corporation discloses its performance with respect to activities that have a direct impact on the societal, environmental, and economic performance of an organization. According to common definitions, sustainability has three key dimensions: environmental, social, and economic. The three pillars—also known as the “triple bottom line”—have served as a common ground for numerous sustainability standards and certification systems in recent years, though a universally accepted definition of sustainability remains elusive.

Types of Social Responsibility: Ecocentric Management

According to the ecocentric model of CSR, environmental protection and sustainability are more important than economic or social benefits.

Corporate social responsibility, also referred to as CSR, can be described as a business’s efforts to assume responsibility for its actions and to encourage a positive impact through its activities on the environment, consumers, employees, communities, and other stakeholders. Ecocentric management is one type of CSR that adopts a deeply ecological view of business.

The ecocentric model differs from more human-centered interpretations of sustainability or responsibility. “Deep” ecology is a form of environmentalism that seeks to protect and improve the quality of the natural environment. It values environmental good above economic or even social benefits. For this reason, ecocentric CSR activities, more than any other type of CSR efforts, are not expected to provide business benefits. Instead, they reflect an organization’s commitment to the environment as the primary core value for conducting business.

Emerging Values: Environmentalism and Green Energy: Image of an energy plant.

Ecocentric supporters believe that low-impact technology and self-reliance are more desirable than technological control over nature. As a result, the ecocentric manager may argue against using ecologically damaging products, such as pesticides and nuclear power, even if these products benefit people. In this way, the ecocentric approach contrasts with that of a more traditional CSR environmental sustainability, which seeks to maintain economic performance while reducing the impact of those products or making parallel investments in alternatives.

Ecocentric CSR activities are typically integrated with business operations. For example, they may incorporate life-cycle assessment, a technique aimed at assessing the environmental impacts associated with all the stages of a product’s life, from raw material extraction through materials processing, manufacture, distribution, use, repair and maintenance, and disposal or recycling. The more environmentally harmful stages can be identified and targeted for improvement so that every part of the value chain demonstrates the paramount importance of ecocentric CSR.

Arguments for and against Corporate Social Responsibility

Most arguments both for and against CSR are based on how a company’s attempts to be socially responsible affect its bottom line.

Corporate social responsibility, also referred to as CSR, can be described as embracing responsibility for a company’s actions and encouraging a positive impact through its activities on the environment, consumers, employees, communities, and other stakeholders.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR): CSR refers to the practice of companies integrating ethical, social, environmental, and other global issues into their business operations and in their interaction with their stakeholders (employees, customers, shareholders, investors, local communities, government).

While some evidence links CSR practices to business performance, most organizations point to the non-financial benefits of their efforts. Proponents of CSR argue that socially responsible practices can have a positive impact on the organization by improving employee recruitment and retention, managing environmental risks by reducing harmful accidents, and differentiating brand to achieve greater consumer loyalty. CSR proponents may also argue for the recognition of a “triple bottom line” performance that includes not only financial returns for owners but also social and environmental benefits for the greater society.

Milton Friedman and other conservative critics have argued against CSR, stating that a corporation’s purpose is to maximize returns to its shareholders (or shareholder value) and that it does not have responsibilities to society as a whole. Part of the critics’ argument is that managers should not select social causes on behalf of a diverse set of owners. Rather, CSR opponents believe that corporations benefit society best by distributing profits to owners, who can then make charitable donations or take other socially responsible actions as they see fit.

Other critics, rather than targeting the concept of CSR, point to examples of weak CSR programs. For example, the term greenwashing refers to instances where businesses have spent significantly more resources advertising being “green“ (that is, operating with consideration for the environment) than investing in the environmentally sound practices themselves. Critics view these as misleading, even cynical, attempts to shape public perception about a company without its actually having to benefit the environment.