Corporate social responsibility: Insights from COVID‐19 and stakeholder theory

Abstract

The transition from primary sustainable goals to crisis management exemplifies a new era of corporate social responsibility, sustainable business models, corporate sustainability, and stakeholder theory. This study examines the varied dynamics of corporate social responsibilities (CSR) during COVID‐19, as well as its potential and limitations, in order to gain a better understanding of CSR. The results expand upon the instrumental version of CSR and the application of stakeholder theory during COVID‐19. It reflects on the necessity for a wider integration of societal issues in CSR's driving philosophy as well as the underlying need to study diverse sectors of governance across the globe due to the increased potential for exploitation of the weak, particularly during times of crisis. This study examines the theoretical foundations of the themes and the lines of divergence between CSR's past and present by reviewing the social, intellectual, and conceptual structure of the literature. It emphasizes the importance of post‐COVID‐19 policies that prioritize job creation by implementing stronger labor market standards. Governments should eliminate barriers and implement pro‐SME laws and programs. A sustainable fiscal policy takes future generations into account. Sustainable corporate finance incorporates long‐term financial goals and social values into stakeholder theory.

Labour market in sustainability transitions: a systematic literature review

“…The main research method Source critical analysis of literature Ayres (1997), Samers (1998), Camarero and Oliva (2019), Antal and Van Den Bergh (2013), Oldekop et al (2018), Sommers and Woolfson (2014), Keyzer et al (2008), Novitz (2020), Phillips (1999), Fauchald et al (2017), Maier et al (2007), Meelen et al (2021), Evans (2007), Eppel (1999), Härri et al (2020), Mamedov (2018), Bohnenberger (2022a), Bohnenberger (2022b), Pearse and Bryant (2022), Agostini and Natali (2016), Casano (2019), Klasen et al (2019), Hosgelen and Saikia (2016), Turnock (2000), Charni (2020), Bansal et al (2023), Jakovljevic et al (2021, Kuné (2009), Renner (2000), Sankaran (2022), Reese-Taylor et. al.…”

Philosophy of science and research paradigm for business research in the transformative age of automation, digitalization, hyperconnectivity, obligations, globalization and sustainability

“…In the realm of business research, ethics can play a significant role in guiding decision-making processes (Lim et al. , 2023b), corporate responsibilities (Bansal et al. , 2023) and stakeholder interactions (Mahajan et al.…”

“…There are several branches within moral philosophy that offer distinct lenses through which to study and understand ethics: consequentialism posits that the morality of an action is determined by its outcomes or consequences; deontology, on the other hand, emphasizes duties, rules or obligations as the foundation for determining the ethicality of actions, irrespective of their outcomes; whereas, virtue ethics focuses on the moral character of individuals and the virtues they embody rather than the actions themselves (Garcia-Rosell and Moisander, 2008). In the realm of business research, ethics can play a significant role in guiding decision-making processes (Lim et al, 2023b), corporate responsibilities (Bansal et al, 2023) and stakeholder interactions (Mahajan et al, 2023). Depending on the research paradigm, moral philosophy can be leveraged in various ways to study business phenomena.…”