Corporate Social Responsibility: A Case Study in Subsidiaries from Brazil and China

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Corporate Social Responsibility refers to the business' role in providing Sustainable Development through fair and appropriate relationships with its stakeholders. This study aimed to describe and analyze the CSR evolution in two subsidiaries within the same group, one located in Brazil and other in China. In general, observed similarities in CSR evolution. In both companies, the order in which the dimensions received incentives was the same, first the economic, then the environmental and lastly the social dimension. However, some differences were noted, such as the initial situation of dimensions and the time to consolidate the pillars. In Chinese company, the inicial situation about environmental and social dimension was worst. Other point refers to time toward CSR. In Brazilian' subsidiary, the CSR evolution occurredrslower. The last point refers to requirements of second order, given the non-observance of these in both subsidiaries.

Related collections

Most cited references 44

Record: found
Abstract: found
Book: not found

An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change

Richard R. Nelson (1982)

This book contains the most sustained and serious attack on mainstream, neoclassical economics in more than forty years. Nelson and Winter focus their critique on the basic question of how firms and industries change overtime. They marshal significant objections to the fundamental neoclassical assumptions of profit maximization and market equilibrium, which they find ineffective in the analysis of technological innovation and the dynamics of competition among firms. To replace these assumptions, they borrow from biology the concept of natural selection to construct a precise and detailed evolutionary theory of business behavior. They grant that films are motivated by profit and engage in search for ways of improving profits, but they do not consider them to be profit maximizing. Likewise, they emphasize the tendency for the more profitable firms to drive the less profitable ones out of business, but they do not focus their analysis on hypothetical states of industry equilibrium. The results of their new paradigm and analytical framework are impressive. Not only have they been able to develop more coherent and powerful models of competitive firm dynamics under conditions of growth and technological change, but their approach is compatible with findings in psychology and other social sciences. Finally, their work has important implications for welfare economics and for government policy toward industry.