Download pdf
Pseudo Corporate Social Responsibility Strategies in Natural Asset Companies
- 1 Markville Secondary School, Carleton Rd., Markham
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
The recent withdrawal of the New York Stock Exchange’s (NYSE) proposal of a new asset class prompted a revisit to the purpose of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). The asset class, known as the Natural Asset Company (NAC), exemplifies a stakeholder primacy model that has become popularized by large multinationals working toward a sustainable future. This model has been criticized for serving more optics than actual impact, leading to questions about the purpose of the NAC. Following concerns raised by several attorneys general, the NYSE withdrew its proposal. Among the concerns cited by the attorneys general was the ambiguous language used to explain the NAC’s business model and the threat of private enterprises owning public land. This paper presents an analysis of the underlying pseudo-CSR articulated by the NAC and its impact on the landscape of CSR. The paper concluded that in order to achieve true CSR, companies themselves should not be upheld to a CSR standard, but rather, the employees themselves through their own decision-making.
Keywords
corporate governance, corporate social responsibility, stakeholder primacy, sustainable development
[1]. Sheehy, B. (2015). Defining CSR: Problems and Solutions. Journal of Business Ethics, 131, 625-648.
[2]. Hatami, A., Hermes, J., & Firoozi, N. (2023). Moral laxity – the cognitive gap between true and pseudo corporate social responsibility. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 19(4), 526-549.
[3]. Ebner, D., & Baumgartner, R. J. (2006). The relationship between Sustainable Development and Corporate. Corporate Responsibility Research Conference (CRRC).
[4]. Karnani, A. (2013). Corporate Social Responsibility Does Not Avert the Tragedy of the Commons. Ross School of Business Paper No. 1210.
[5]. Berle, A., & Means, G. (1932). The Modern Corporation and Private Property. Transaction Publishers.
[6]. Baden, D. A., Harwood, I. A., & Woodward, D. G. (2009). The effect of buyer pressure on suppliers in SMEs to demonstrate CSR practices: An added incentive or counter productive? European Management Journal, 27(6), 429-441.
[7]. Manteaw, B. O. (2007). From tokenism to social justice: Rethinking the bottom line for sustainable community development. Community Development Journal, 43(4), 428-443.
[8]. World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Brundtland Report. Oxford: Oxford Univresity Press.
[9]. Pinchot, G. (1910). The Fight for Conservation.
[10]. Agudelo, M. A., Jóhannsdóttir, L., Davídsdóttir, & Brynhildur. (2019). A literature review of the history and evolution of corporate social responsibility. International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, 4(1).
[11]. Friedman, M. (1997). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[12]. Public Broadcasting Service. (2019). Napalm and The Dow Chemical Company. Retrieved December 15, 2023, from https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/two-days-in-october-dow-chemical-and-use-napalm/
[13]. Yoon, Y. (2008). The Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Activities on Companies With Bad Reputations. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(4), 377-390.
[14]. Stout, L. A. (2002). Bad and Not-so-Bad Arguments for Shareholder Primacy. Southern California Law Review, 75, 1189-1210.
[15]. Harrison, J. S., Phillips, R. A., & Freeman, R. E. (2019). On the 2019 Business Roundtable “Statement on the Purpose of a Corporation”. Journal of Management, 46(7), 1223-1237.
[16]. Paine, L. S. (2024, August 19). The Business Roundtable’s Stakeholder Pledge, Five Years Later. (Harvard Business Review) Retrieved August 22, 2024, from https://hbr.org/2024/08/the-business-roundtables-stakeholder-pledge-five-years-later
[17]. Winston, A. (2019, August 30). Is the Business Roundtable Statement Just Empty Rhetoric? (Harvard Business Review) Retrieved February 18, 2024, from https://hbr.org/2019/08/is-the-business-roundtable-statement-just-empty-rhetoric
[18]. Bebchuk, L. A., & Tallarita, R. (2020). The Illusory Promise of Stakeholder Governance. Cornell Law Review(Discussion Paper No. 1052), 1-77.
[19]. Cheng, I.-H., Hong, H., & Shue, K. (2013). Do Managers Do Good with Other People’s Money? The Review of Corporate Finance Studies, 12(3), 443-487.
[20]. Office of Science and Technology Policy; Office of Management and Budget; Department of Commerce. (2023). National Strategy to Develop Statistics for Environmental-Economic Decisions. Washington, D.C.: The White House.
[21]. Securities Exchange Commission. (2023). Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change to Amend the NYSE Listed Company Manual to Adopt Listing Standards for Natural Asset Companies. Washington, D.C. .
[22]. States of Utah and Kansas; Offices of the Attorney General. (2024). Order Instituting Proceedings .
[23]. Spash, C. L. (2022). Conservation in conflict: Corporations, capitalism and sustainable development. Biological Conservation, 269, 109528.
[24]. Skilton, P. F., & Purdy, J. M. (2017). Authenticity, Power, and Pluralism: A Framework for Understanding Stakeholder Evaluations of Corporate Social Responsibility Activities. Business Ethics Quarterly, 27(1), 99-123.
[25]. Kellner, D. (n.d.). T.W. Adorno and the Dialectics of Mass Culture. UCLA School of Education & Information Studies, 1-22.
[26]. Karnani, A. (2010). Doing Well by Doing Good: The Grand Illusion. California Management Review, 53(2), 69-85.
[27]. Nash, R. (1970). The American Invention of National Parks. American Quarterly, 22(3), 726-735.
Cite this article
Zhang,H. (2024). Pseudo Corporate Social Responsibility Strategies in Natural Asset Companies. Advances in Economics, Management and Political Sciences,132,1-7.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer/Publisher's Note
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
About volume
Volume title: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Economic Management and Green Development
© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who
publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this
series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published
version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial
publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and
during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See
Open access policy for details).