Article2013

CSR schemes in agribusiness: opening the black box

Katharina Anna Poetz · Rainer Haas · Michaela A. Balzarova

28 citations0/0 files storedBritish Food Journal

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainability Global trade, sustainability, and social impact

Abstract

Purpose The rise of CSR followed a demand for CSR standards and guidelines. In a sector already characterized by a large number of standards, the authors seek to ask what CSR schemes apply to agribusiness, and how they can be systematically compared and analysed. Design/methodology/approach Following a deductive‐inductive approach the authors develop a model to compare and analyse CSR schemes based on existing studies and on coding qualitative data on 216 CSR schemes. Findings The authors confirm that CSR standards and guidelines have entered agribusiness and identify a complex landscape of schemes that can be categorized on focus areas, scales, mechanisms, origins, types and commitment levels. Research limitations/implications The findings contribute to conceptual and empirical research on existing models to compare and analyse CSR standards. Sampling technique and depth of analysis limit this research, but the authors offer insights into patterns of CSR standard development in agribusiness and point to important research avenues. Practical implications These findings can help agribusiness managers to select and analyse CSR standards and other forms of CSR guidance. Social implications Standard and guidance setting activities can be expected to have real‐life effects on CSR outcomes. These effects need to be better understood by policy makers and stakeholders. The authors' meta‐analysis contributes to further research on who or what influences standard development. Originality/value Models to compare CSR schemes are rare and often focus on a small number of cases. The authors provide decision makers and researchers with insights into structural conditions through a meta‐analysis of a larger number of CSR schemes.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 28 citations exist upstream.

References

1968The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research.1968The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research 2010Strategic management a stakeholder approach 1997Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of who and What Really Counts 2006How corporate social responsibility is defined: an analysis of 37 definitions 2006Corporate Social Responsibility: Strategic Implications*2004Doing Better at Doing Good: When, Why, and How Consumers Respond to Corporate Social Initiatives 1981Business and Society: Ethics and Stakeholder Management

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.