Abstract
The chapter aims to contextualize the current debate on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in family firms: most academic research maintains that family firms are more committed to socially and environmentally responsible activities and communicate more on CSR than non-family firms. The chapter introduces the concept of CSR and state-of-the-art CSR in family firms. It then explores the role of family firms as place-based enterprises fostering environmental and social responsibility in local communities.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This chapter briefly depicts some definitions and time evolutions of CSR concepts. It is not aimed to provide a detailed excursus of the development of the CSR concepts and definitions over time, although the theme is fascinating. To this extent, please consult, among others, Moir (2001) and Windsor (2001) for a thorough discussion of the changes in CSR in the academic debate; and Latapí Agudelo et al. (2019) for a review of both academic pieces and public international events that have shaped the evolution of CSR.
- 2.
Sustainable development is intended as “the development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (WCED, 1987). Later contributions from the United Nations continued to specify and refine sustainable development components (Tsalis et al., 2020).
- 3.
Although sustainability and sustainable development are concepts somehow related to CSR, it is outside the aim of this chapter to discuss them in detail.
- 4.
In 1947, the ISO was settled, and it is now the largest organization for standardization in the world. The standards published by ISO are voluntary: companies are not obliged to transpose them unless this is imposed by national legislation. For further information, please see www.iso.org
- 5.
The SDGs are 17 in number. They address challenges that affect every human being on the planet: goal 1 “No poverty,” goal 2 “Zero hunger,” goal 3 “Good health and well-being,” goal 4 “Quality education,” goal 5 “Gender equality,” goal 6 “Clear water and sanitation,” goal 7 “Affordable and clean energy,” goal 8 “Decent work and economic growth,” goal 9 “Industry, innovation and infrastructure,” goal 10 “Reduced inequalities,” goal 11 “Sustainable cities and communities,” goal 12 “Responsible consumption and production,” goal 13 “Climate action,” goal 14 “Life below water,” goal 15 “Life on land,” goal 16 “Peace, justice, and strong institutions,” goal 17 “Partnership for the goals.” The goals can be grouped into the social dimension (goals 1–5, 10, 16, and 17), the economic (goals 7–9, 11, and 12), and the environmental one (goals 6, 13–15) (D’Adamo et al., 2021).
- 6.
CSR has generated a significant body of knowledge in academic research (Attig & Brockman, 2017). The other primary research stream investigates the relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial results. However, discussing this literature section is outside this chapter’s aims.
- 7.
Indeed, many theories and approaches contribute to explaining why firms engage in responsible initiatives. As the objectives of this chapter are to disentangle the relationships between CSR, family businesses and their local roots, this part will be selective on the concepts presented, focusing on the basic ideas explaining the main drivers of CSR.
- 8.
Please see Chap. 2, “Defining and Understanding the Family Firm” for a clear picture of what a family firm is and how it differs from other organizations.
- 9.
A global initiative aimed at incentivising family firms to embed sustainability in their strategy is the Family Business Sustainability Pledge. Developed from a partnership between the United Nations and the global family business community. The partnership produced a pledge that family businesses committing to the SDGs can sign and indicators for family firm reporting. The Family Business Sustainability Pledge is available at: https://fbsd.unctad.org/pledge/
- 10.
- 11.
In Italy, trademarks connected to the recognition of the place of production and the practices of that location legally protect the food and drink sectors. Some examples are “indicazione geografica tipica” (IGT, meaning Typical Geographical Indication), “denominaziome di origine controllata” (DOC, meaning Denomination of Controlled Origin), “denominaziome di origine controllata e garantita” (DOCG, meaning Denomination of Controlled and Guaranteed Origin), and “denominazione di origine protetta” (DOP, meaning Denomination of Protected Origin) (Pant, 2016). These terms will be mentioned again in Chap. 7, “Unveiling the origins of local roots: a case study in the Chianti Classico wine cluster.”
- 12.
Chapter 7, will focus on this industry, presenting the case of a small family business in Tuscany with strong bonds to the local area and an interest to preserve it.
References
Amato, S., Patuelli, A., Basco, R., & Lattanzi, N. (2023). Family firms amidst the global financial crisis: A territorial embeddedness perspective on downsizing. Journal of Business Ethics., 183, 213–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04930-0
Attig, N., & Brockman, P. (2017). The local roots of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 142(3), 479–496. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2757-3
Bammens, Y., & Hünermund, P. (2020). Nonfinancial considerations in eco-innovation decisions: The role of family ownership and reputation concerns. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 37(5), 431–453. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12550
Barbier, E. B. (1987). The concept of sustainable economic development. Environmental Conservation, 14(2), 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892900011449
Basco, R. (2015). Family business and regional development—A theoretical model of regional familiness. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 6(4), 259–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JFBS.2015.04.004
Baù, M., Block, J., Discua Cruz, A., & Naldi, L. (2021). Bridging locality and internationalization–a research agenda on the sustainable development of family firms. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 33(7–8), 477–492. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2021.1925846
Bergamaschi, M., & Randerson, K. (2016). The futures of family businesses and the development of corporate social responsibility. Futures, 75, 54–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FUTURES.2015.10.006
Berrone, P., Cruz, C., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2012). Socioemotional wealth in family firms: Theoretical dimensions, assessment approaches, and agenda for future research. Family Business Review, 25(3), 258–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894486511435355
Blombäck, A., & Wigren, C. (2009). Challenging the importance of size as determinant for CSR activities. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 20(3), 255–270. https://doi.org/10.1108/14777830910950658
Bowen, H. R. (1953). Social responsibilities of the businessman. University of Iowa Press.
Le Breton-Miller, I., & Miller, D. (2016). Family firms and practices of sustainability: A contingency view. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 7(1), 26–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfbs.2015.09.001
Brown, N., & Deegan, C. (1998). The public disclosure of environmental performance information—A dual test of media agenda setting theory and legitimacy theory. Accounting and Business Research, 29(1), 21–41.
Campopiano, G., & de Massis, A. (2015). Corporate social responsibility reporting: A content analysis in family and non-family firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 129(3), 511–534. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2174-z
Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505.
Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G
Castelo, M., Lúcia, B., & Rodrigues, L. (2007). Positioning stakeholder theory within the debate on corporate social responsibility. EJBO - Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies, 12(1), 5–15. https://jyx.jyu.fi/handle/123456789/25388.
Chua, J. H., Chrisman, J. J., & Sharma, P. (1999). Defining the family business by behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(4), 19–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879902300402
D’Adamo, I., Gastaldi, M., Imbriani, C., & Morone, P. (2021). Assessing regional performance for the sustainable development goals in Italy. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 24117. https://doi.org/10.1038/S41598-021-03635-8
Davis, K. (1960). Can business afford to ignore social responsibilities? California Management Review, 23–29, 70–76. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166246
DeBoer, J., Panwar, R., & Rivera, J. (2017). Toward a place-based understanding of business sustainability: The role of green competitors and green locales in firms’ voluntary environmental engagement. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(7), 940–955. https://doi.org/10.1002/BSE.1957
Deegan, C., Rankin, M., & Tobin, J. (2002). An examination of the corporate social and environmental disclosures of BHP from 1983-1997: A test of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(3), 312–343. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570210435861/FULL/PDF
Diéguez-Soto, J., Campos-Valenzuela, M., Callejón-Gil, Á. M., & Aldeanueva-Fernández, I. (2021). Family firm heterogeneity on CSR approach: A socio-emotional (SEW) perspective. BRQ Business Research Quarterly., 234094442110638. https://doi.org/10.1177/23409444211063889
Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T. W. (2002). Ties that bind in business ethics: Social contracts and why they matter. Journal of Banking & Finance, 26(9), 1853–1865. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4266(02)00195-4
Elkington, J. (1998). Partnerships from cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st-century business. Environmental Quality Management, 8(1), 37–51. https://doi.org/10.1002/TQEM.3310080106
Ernst, R. A., Gerken, M., Hack, A., & Hülsbeck, M. (2022a). Family firms as agents of sustainable development: A normative perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 174, 121135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121135
Ernst, R. A., Gerken, M., Hack, A., & Hülsbeck, M. (2022b). SMES’ reluctance to embrace corporate sustainability: The effect of stakeholder pressure on self-determination and the role of social proximity. Journal of Cleaner Production, 335, 130273. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2021.130273
European Commission. (2011). A renewed EU strategy 2011–14 for corporate social responsibility.
Fehre, K., & Weber, F. (2019). Why some are more equal: Family firm heterogeneity and the effect on management’s attention to CSR. Business Ethics: A European Review, 28(3), 321–334. https://doi.org/10.1111/BEER.12225
Frederick, W. C. (1960). The growing concern over business responsibility, 2(4), 54–61. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165405
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman Publishing.
Freeman, R. E. (2015). Stakeholder theory. Wiley Encyclopedia of Management, 1–6.
Freeman, R. E., & Dmytriyev, S. (2017). Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder theory: Learning from each other. Symphonya. Emerging Issues in Management, 2(1), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.4468/2017.1.02FREEMAN.DMYTRIYEV
Frynas, J. G., & Yamahaki, C. (2016). Corporate social responsibility: Review and roadmap of theoretical perspectives. Business Ethics, 25(3), 258–285. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12115
Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Haynes, K. T., Núñez-Nickel, M., Jacobson, K. J. L., & Moyano-Fuentes, J. (2007). Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil mills. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(1), 106. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.52.1.106
Gray, R., Kouhy, R., & Lavers, S. (1995). Corporate social and environmental reporting a review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 8(2), 47–77. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513579510146996/FULL/XML
Guthrie, J., & Parker, L. D. (1989). Corporate social reporting: A rebuttal of legitimacy theory. Accounting and Business Research, 19(76), 343–352.
Hermelingmeier, V., Augenstein, K., & Palzkill, A. (2022). The role of place in sha** responsibility logics: Revisiting the relation between place and business sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/BSE.3289
Hsieh, N. H. (2015). The social contract model of corporate purpose and responsibility. Business Ethics Quarterly, 25(4), 433–460. https://doi.org/10.1017/BEQ.2016.1
Izzo, M. F., & Ciaburri, M. (2018). Why do they do that? Motives and dimensions of family firms’ CSR engagement. Social Responsibility Journal, 14(3), 633–650. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-08-2017-0148
Jahn, J., & Brühl, R. (2016). How Friedman’s view on individual freedom relates to stakeholder theory and social contract theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 153(1), 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10551-016-3353-X
Kim, K., Haider, Z. A., Wu, Z., & Dou, J. (2020). Corporate social performance of family firms: A place-based perspective in the context of layoffs. Journal of Business Ethics, 167(2), 235–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10551-019-04152-5/TABLES/11
Lähdesmäki, M., Siltaoja, M., & Spence, L. J. (2019). Stakeholder salience for small businesses: A social proximity perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 158(2), 373–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10551-017-3707-Z/FIGURES/1
Lamb, N. H., & Butler, F. C. (2016). The influence of family firms and institutional owners on corporate social responsibility performance, 57(7), 1374–1406. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650316648443
Lanis, R., & Richardson, G. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and tax aggressiveness: A test of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 26(1), 75–100. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513571311285621/FULL/PDF
Larty, J. (2021). Towards a framework for integrating place-based approaches in entrepreneurship education. Industry and Higher Education, 35(4), 312–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/09504222211021531
Latapí Agudelo, M. A., Jóhannsdóttir, L., & Davídsdóttir, B. (2019). A literature review of the history and evolution of corporate social responsibility. International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, 4(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40991-018-0039-y
Mariani, M. M., Al-Sultan, K., & de Massis, A. (2021). Corporate social responsibility in family firms: A systematic literature review, 1. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2021.1955122
Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2004). Corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics 2004 54:4, 54(4), 323–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10551-004-1822-0
McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117–127. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2001.4011987
Mintzberg, H. (1983). The case for corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Strategy, 4(2), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1108/EB039015/FULL/PDF
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts, 22(4), 853–886. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1997.9711022105
Moir, L. (2001). What do we mean by corporate social responsibility? Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 1(2), 16–22. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005486/FULL/PDF
Pallares-Barbera, M., Tulla, A. F., & Vera, A. (2004). Spatial loyalty and territorial embeddedness in the multi-sector clustering of the Berguedà region in Catalonia (Spain). Geoforum, 35(5), 635–649. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GEOFORUM.2004.03.004
Pant, D. R. (2016). Management consulting in times of austerity: Sustainability & the business-place-community nexus in Italy. In Handbook of anthropology in business (pp. 223–233). Routledge.
Park, J., & Campbell, J. M. (2018). U.S. small business’s philanthropic contribution to local community: Stakeholder salience and social identity perspectives, 30(3), 317–342. https://doi.org/10.1080/10495142.2018.1452823
Patuelli, A., Caldarelli, G., Lattanzi, N., & Saracco, F. (2021). Firms’ challenges and social responsibilities during Covid-19: A Twitter analysis. PLoS One, 16(7), e0254748. https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0254748
Patuelli, A., Carungu, J., & Lattanzi, N. (2022). Drivers and nuances of sustainable development goals: Transcending corporate social responsibility in family firms. Journal of Cleaner Production, 373, 133723. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2022.133723
Pedersen, E. R. (2009). Modelling CSR: How managers understand the responsibilities of business towards society. Journal of Business Ethics, 91(2), 155–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10551-009-0078-0
Purvis, B., Mao, Y., & Robinson, D. (2019). Three pillars of sustainability: In search of conceptual origins. Sustainability Science, 14(3), 681–695. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11625-018-0627-5/FIGURES/1
Randerson, K. (2022). Conceptualizing family business social responsibility. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 174, 121225. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHFORE.2021.121225
Scheyvens, R., Banks, G., & Hughes, E. (2016). The private sector and the SDGs: The need to move beyond ‘business as usual. Sustainable Development, 24(6), 371–382.
Sharafizad, J., Redmond, J., & Parker, C. (2022). The influence of local embeddedness on the economic, social, and environmental sustainability practices of regional small firms. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 34(1–2), 57–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2021.2024889
Shrivastava, P., & Kennelly, J. J. (2013). Sustainability and place-based enterprise. Organization and Environment, 26(1), 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026612475068
Siltaoja, M., & Lähdesmäki, M. (2015). From rationality to emotionally embedded relations: Envy as a signal of power in stakeholder relations. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(4), 837–850. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1987-5
Terlaak, A., Kim, S., & Roh, T. (2018). Not good, not bad: The effect of family control on environmental performance disclosure by business group firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 153(4), 977–996. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3911-5
Tsalis, T. A., Malamateniou, K. E., Koulouriotis, D., & Nikolaou, I. E. (2020). New challenges for corporate sustainability reporting: United Nations’ 2030 agenda for sustainable development and the sustainable development goals. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(4), 1617–1629. https://doi.org/10.1002/CSR.1910
van Marrewijk, M., & Werre, M. (2003). Multiple levels of corporate sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2), 107–119. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023383229086
Venturelli, A., Principale, S., Ligorio, L., & Cosma, S. (2021). Walking the talk in family firms. An empirical investigation of CSR communication and practices. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 28(1), 497–510. https://doi.org/10.1002/CSR.2064
Walck, C. L. (1996). Organizations as places: A metaphor for change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 9(6), 26–40. https://doi.org/10.1108/09534819610150503/FULL/PDF
WCED. (1987). Our common future (The Brundtland report). In Medicine and War (Vol. 4).
Windsor, D. (2001). The future of corporate social responsibility. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9(3), 225–256. https://doi.org/10.1108/EB028934
Zientara, P. (2017). Socioemotional wealth and corporate social responsibility: A critical analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 144, 185–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10551-015-2848-1
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Amato, S., Patuelli, A. (2023). Family Firms, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Place-Based Enterprises. In: Family Firms and Local Roots. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-31793-4_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-31793-4_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-31792-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-31793-4
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)