企业社会责任英文原文加翻译.docx

1、企业社会责任英文原文加翻译一英文原文Moral Discourse and Corporate Social Responsibility ReportingBy MaryAnn Reynolds, Kristi YuthasABSTRACTThis paper examines voluntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting as a form of moral discourse. It explores how alternative stakeholder perspectives lead to differing

2、perceptions of the process and content of responsible reporting. We contrast traditional stakeholder theory, which views stakeholders as external parties having a social contract with corporations, with an emerging perspective, which views interaction among corporations and constituents as relationa

3、l in nature. This moves the stakeholder from an external entity to one that is integral to corporate activity. We explore how these alternative stakeholder perspectives give rise to different normative demands for stakeholder engagement, managerial processes, and communication. We discuss models of

4、CSR reporting and accountability: EMAS, the ISO 14000 series, SA8000, AA1000, the Global Reporting Initiative, and the Copenhagen Charter. We explore how these models relate to the stakeholder philosophies and find that they are largely consistent with the traditional atomistic view but fall far sho

5、rt of the demands for moral engagement prescribed by a relational stakeholder perspective. Adopting a relational view requires stakeholder engagement not only in prescribing reporting requiremenu, but also in discourse relating to core aspects of the corporation such as mission,values,and management

6、 systems, Habermas theory of communicative action provides guidelines for engaging stakeholders in this moral discourse.KEY WORDS: stakeholder engagement, stakeholder reporting, relational stakeholder perspective, corporate social responsibility,Theoryof Communicative Action,discourse ethicsIntroduc

7、tionThroughout this paper, we use Habermas theory of communicative action (1984, 1987, 1990) as a means through which to critique current approaches corporate the degree menu forsocial responsibility reporting in terms to which these reports embody require moral discourse. We provide a brief introdu

8、ction to key elements of the theory and ground it in social theory. We then discuss the details as they apply to CSR reporting.Our analysis is conducted in two stages, relying on different portions of Habermas theory. In the first part, we examine the conditions that allow for basic communicative un

9、derstanding. These conditions are the unspoken assumptions underlying communication. In normal communication, four basic universal assumptions are made: that the speaker is telling the truth, that he means what he says, and that what he says is appropriate in its context, and that it is understandab

10、le to the listener. In the first part of the paper, we show how models or frameworks for CSR reporting, taken together, address these assumptions and contribute to the effectiveness of CSR reports as a form of communication.In the second part of our analysis, we rely upon the ethical aspects of Habe

11、rmas theory as a means through which to provide a normative critique of the body of CSR reporting frameworks. The theory of communicative action suggests that social progress can be accomplished through rational discourse under specific conditions. The discourse must be inclusive, democratic, and fr

12、ee of power asymmetries. Apel (1980) has suggested that the ethical nature of an agreement derives from theprocess used to arrive at that agreement (rather than universal or externally-imposed ethical standards).We use Habermas principles as a means to examine the extent to corporate communication i

13、s reflective of moral discourse.We find that while the frameworks generally promote stakeholder consultation,they fall short of providing other conditions needed for moral discourse. In particular, they fail to provide mechanisms that allow stakeholders with differing resources to participate democr

14、atically in discourse.The paper is organized as follows. First,we introduce social responsibility and corporate disclosure concepts related to CSRreporting.Next,we explore widely-used frameworks associated with corporate accountability in the CSR realm. Then, as noted above, we provide a 2-part anal

15、ysis of how concepts from Habermas theory of communicative action are currently realized in guidance provided by CSR reporting models. We close with concluding rem arks.Background: social responsibility and corporate disclosureCorporate social responsibility is addressed in current business, account

16、ing and ethics literature. The issue was widely discussed in the seventies and early eighties and then dropped out of sight. The current re-energized focus includes social, environmental and ethical reporting by corporations. The notion of corporate social disclosure arises from a view of social the

17、ory which holds that the corporation owes a duty to the society; or has a social contract. One widely cited quotation comes from Shocker and Sethi (1974, p.67):Any social institution一and business in no exception一operates in society via a social contract, expressed or implied, whereby its survival an

18、d growth are based on:1 .The delivery of some socially desirable ends to society in general and,2. The distribution of economic, social or political benefits to groups from which it derives its power.In a dnamic society, neither the sources of institutional power nor the needs for its services are p

19、ermanent. Therefore, an institution must constantly meet the twin tests of legitimacy and relevance by demonstrafing that society requires its services and that the groups benefiting from its rewards have societys approval.Carroll and Bucholtz offer a four part definition of corporate social respons

20、ibility, The social responsibility of business encompasses the economic, legal,ethical, and discretionary (philanthropic) expectadons that society has of organizations at a given point in time (2006, p. 35). This definition reflects current thinking on corporate social responsibility and acknowledge

21、s the need to note shifts in social environment, these may be social, legal, or political.Corporate investors are questioning the adequacy of this communication approach and have called for increased reporting on issues of broad societal interest. Presently it is estimated that trillions of dollars

22、are allocated to investments based on some social criteria (Sparkes and Cowton, 2004). Confulion may arise with the lack of comparable reporting.Implementable guidelines have consequently been developed by groups proposing models or frameworks for reporting (communicating) and auditing (verifying).

23、Leading examples in order they were first issued are:EMAS (European, particularly German environmental management and audit) ISO 14001(Internationally recognized environmental management certification)SA 8000 (Social Accountability Internationallabor standard).AA1000 (International accountability as

24、surante reporting standard).Copenhagen Charter(International standard involving stakeholder communications).GRI (Global Reporting Initiative) 2000 (International sustainability report).Models for corporate social responsibility reportingApproaches to social and natural environmental accountability h

25、ave been developed for various purposes. Classifying them under the umbrella of CSR reporting we will discuss some widely used models and introduce a less well-known model, which may provide additional benefit.Eco-Management and Audit Scheme ( EMAS, 1995,2001)The European Commission set down the bas

26、ic principles underlying the EMAS scheme in Council Regulation 1836/93 -EMAS of the European Commission. The purpose was improvement of environmental performance and was initially directed at manufacturing firms. This has since been extended to allow broad participation by any public or private enti

27、ty wishing to participate. The regulation calls for an environmental statement from the entity and requires auditing.Further,there is a continual requirement to document ongoing continual improvement through the of implementation policies, programmes and management systems by a systematic, objective

28、, and periodic evaluation of performance. There is also an obligation to inform the public of the results of the evaluation. The article on participation states that the scheme is open to public or private entities operating in the EU or the European Economic Area (EEA). The site may be registered i

29、f the site has an environmental policy, a site review, an environmental audit,objectives for continuous improvement, a statement from each site, verification covering poficy, programmes, the management system, the review and audit procedure, and the statement provided. The validated environmental st

30、atement is then forwarded to the competent body in the Member State. The statement is also disseminated to the public after the registration of the site has been completed. The statement should be a concise, comprehensible description of activities at the site; with an assessment of significant rele

31、vant environmental issues, including: emissions, waste generation, consumption of raw materials, energy and water, noise and other significant aspects; a presentation of the companys environmental poficy, programme and management system at the site, the deadline for the next statement, and the name

32、of the accredited environmental verifier. The EMAS 2001 was strengthened by requiring ISO 14001 as the environmental management system.Council on Economic Priorities Accreditation Agency Social Accountability Standard (SA8000, 1998)/renamed Social Accountability International (SAI)This standard has

33、a change in focus and is concerned with fair labor practices world wide. It is divided into purpose and scope, normative elements and their interpretation, definitions,and social accountability requirements.The social accountability requirements include: child labor,forced labor, health and safety, freedom of associanon and