2019
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-12793-0_3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sharīʿah-Based Ethical Performance Measurement Framework and Relevant Data to Measure Development in Light of Maqāṣid al-Sharīʿah

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
10
0
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
10
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…After reviewing the available literature, we can divide the models of the Islamic approach to CSR into several groupings that will be discussed shortly. These groupings are based on: four ethical axioms approach: Unity, equilibrium, free will and responsibility (Hanić, 2020); the objectives of the Shariah ( Maqasid al-Shariah ) and public interest ( maslahah ) approach (Asutay and Harningtyas, 2015; Bedoui, 2012; Darrag and E‐Bassiouny, 2013; Darus et al , 2013; Dusuki and Abdullah, 2007; Mergaliyev et al , 2021; Mohd Nor, 2012); mandatory and recommended forms of Islamic CSR approach (Farook, 2007); social welfare paradigms approach (Muhamad et al , 2008); taqwa paradigms approach (Dusuki, 2008b); application of public interest and importance of social capital approach (Yusuf and Bahari, 2015); extended Carroll model (Carroll, 1991) from an Islamic perspective approach (Khurshid et al , 2014); paradigms of Tawhid and Shariah approach (Abu Bakar and Yusof, 2015); the Islamic model of CSR based on four types of responsibility approaches (Turker, 2016); and the Islamic corporate governance approach (Abu-Tapanjeh, 2009; Murphy and Smolarski, 2020). …”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…After reviewing the available literature, we can divide the models of the Islamic approach to CSR into several groupings that will be discussed shortly. These groupings are based on: four ethical axioms approach: Unity, equilibrium, free will and responsibility (Hanić, 2020); the objectives of the Shariah ( Maqasid al-Shariah ) and public interest ( maslahah ) approach (Asutay and Harningtyas, 2015; Bedoui, 2012; Darrag and E‐Bassiouny, 2013; Darus et al , 2013; Dusuki and Abdullah, 2007; Mergaliyev et al , 2021; Mohd Nor, 2012); mandatory and recommended forms of Islamic CSR approach (Farook, 2007); social welfare paradigms approach (Muhamad et al , 2008); taqwa paradigms approach (Dusuki, 2008b); application of public interest and importance of social capital approach (Yusuf and Bahari, 2015); extended Carroll model (Carroll, 1991) from an Islamic perspective approach (Khurshid et al , 2014); paradigms of Tawhid and Shariah approach (Abu Bakar and Yusof, 2015); the Islamic model of CSR based on four types of responsibility approaches (Turker, 2016); and the Islamic corporate governance approach (Abu-Tapanjeh, 2009; Murphy and Smolarski, 2020). …”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…the objectives of the Shariah ( Maqasid al-Shariah ) and public interest ( maslahah ) approach (Asutay and Harningtyas, 2015; Bedoui, 2012; Darrag and E‐Bassiouny, 2013; Darus et al , 2013; Dusuki and Abdullah, 2007; Mergaliyev et al , 2021; Mohd Nor, 2012);…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The sharia-based financial industry is also in great demand, not only Muslim customers but also non-Muslim customers. The sharia financial industry, in its implementation, is based on Islamic sharia principles and must follow the rules applied in sharia [2]. The Islamic finance and banking industry has gained strong trust and support, especially after the success of Islamic banking survived the 2008 economic crisis.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite the theoretical assumption that IFIs are ethical, criticisms of their lack of contribution to the aspirations of Sharia and Islamic socioeconomic objectives have been increasingly noticed in recent literature. When trying to diagnose this issue, researchers usually subscribe to the claim that IFIs do not work to achieve broader Sharia objectives (e.g., Asutay, ; Badr El Din & Ibrahim, ; Bedoui, ; Bedoui & Mansour, ; Mohammed, Abdul Razak, & Taib, ; Sairally, 2008; Antonio, Sanrego & Taufiq, 2012; Zaman & Asutay, 2009). Studies addressing this issue vary from subjective arguments to empirical evidence based on models developed to operationalize Sharia objectives and accordingly gauge the ethical performance of IFIs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The common denominator for empirical studies is that they tend to measure Sharia objectives through proxies denoting the achievement of specific ethical aspects of performance (e.g., Antonio, Sanrego, & Taufiq, ; Bedoui, ; Bedoui & Mansour, Mohammed et al, ; Mohammed & Taib, , ; Sairally, 2008). However, such methods for gauging ethical aspects usually ignore key methodological issues including the intention of the management and shareholders, the context dependence of moral actions, the control of companies over their actions, and the level of disclosure of good deeds (Graafland, Eijffinger, & SmidJohan, ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%