FROM CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY TO SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE ECONOMIC ACTIVITY: THE EVOLUTION OF CONCEPTS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15407/econlaw.2026.01.029Keywords:
socially responsible business, corporate social responsibility (CSR), socially responsible management, institutional approach, behavioral approach, risk-oriented approach, ethical approach, economic and legal app roach, business entities, enterprises, consumers, communities, regulation, compliance, due diligence, ESG.Abstract
The article is devoted to a comprehensive study of the genesis, evolution, and contemporary content of socially responsible economic activity as an independent economic and legal phenomenon. The relevance of the topic is driven by the
growing societal expectations toward business, the strengthening role of the state in shaping a socially responsible business environment, as well as the challenges associated with the full-scale war in Ukraine, which have intensified the involvement of business in supporting communities, socially vulnerable groups, and the reconstruction of infrastructure.
The paper analyzes the main stages in the historical development of corporate social responsibility, from phi lanthropic practices of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries to the formation of the doctrine of corporate social responsibility in the mid-twentieth century, its further institutionalization through standards, international initiatives, and non-financial reporting, as well as the current stage characterized by a transition from voluntary practices to the legal consolidation of certain aspects of responsible behavior.
It is substantiated that socially responsible economic activity cannot be reduced either to philanthropy or to purely voluntary initiatives, since in modern conditions it is increasingly integrated into the system of legal regulation and corporate governance. The article provides a clear distinction between socially responsible business behavior and sustainable development, compliance, ESG, and due diligence, demonstrating their interconnection and differences in terms of objectives, instruments, and legal nature.
Special emphasis is placed on methodological approaches to the analysis of socially responsible economic acti vity (institutional, behavioral, risk-oriented, ethical, and economic-legal), which makes it possible to consider it as a multidimensional
phenomenon at the intersection of private and public interests. The conclusion is drawn that contemporary socially responsible economic activity is formed as a result of a combination of voluntary efforts by business and growing regulatory requirements, which is of key importance for the development of economic law and state policy in Ukraine.
References
Bowen H.R. Social Responsibilities of the Businessman. University of Iowa Press, 1953. 276 p. URL: https://ia601509.us.archive.org/20/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.126534/2015.126534.Social-Responsibilities-Of-The-Businessman.pdf
Frederick W. The Growing Concern over Business Responsibility. California Management Review. 1960. Vol. 2. No. 4. P. 54-61. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165405
Levitt T. The Dangers of Social Responsibility. Harvard Business Review. 1958. 36. P. 41-50. URL: http://57ef850e78feaed47e42-3eada556f2c82b951c467be415f62411.r9.cf2.rackcdn.com/Levitt-1958-TheDangersofSR.pdf
Friedman M. A Friedman doctrine — The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits. The New York Times. 1970. P. 17. URL: https://www.nytimes.com/1970/09/13/archives/a-friedman-doctrine-the-social-responsibilityof-business-is-to.html
Davis K. Can Business Afford to Ignore Social Responsibilities? California Management Review. 1960. Vol. 2. Iss. 3. Р. 70. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166246
Stacy R. Stakeholder theory. EBSCO. 2024. URL: https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/social-sciences-andhumanities/stakeholder-theory
Freeman E., Harrison J., Zyglidopoulos S. Stakeholder Theory. Cambridge University Press, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108539500
Triple Bottom Line: what is it and how does it work? IMD Blog. 2023. URL: https://www.imd.org/blog/sustainability/triple-bottom-line/
The Ten Principles of the UN Global Compact. United Nations Global Compact. URL: https://unglobalcompact.org/what-is-gc/mission/principles
Pro standart ISO 26000. System Menedzhment. URL: https://sm-mt.com.ua/services/standart-iso26000/ [in Ukrainian].
Carroll A. The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons. 1991. Vol. 34. Iss. 4. P. 39-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G
Understanding the CSR Pyramid: Economic, Legal, Ethical, Philanthropic. Green Business Benchmark. 2024. URL: https://www.greenbusinessbenchmark.com/archive/csr-pyramid
McBarnet D. Corporate Social Responsibility Beyond Law, Through Law, for Law. University of Edinburgh School of Law Working Paper. 2009. No. 2009/03. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1369305
Measuring a company’s entire social and environmental impact. URL: https://www.bcorporation.net/en-us/certification/
Elkington J. 25 Years Ago I Coined the Phrase “Triple Bottom Line.” Here’s Why It’s Time to Rethink It. Harvard Business Review. June 25, 2018. URL: https://hbr.org/2018/06/25-years-ago-i-coined-the-phrase-triple-bottom-line-hereswhy-im-giving-up-on-it
Directive (EU) 2024/1760 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on corporate sustai nability due diligence and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937 and Regulation (EU) 2023/2859 (Text with EEA relevance). URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj
LOI n° 2017-399 du 27 mars 2017 relative au devoir de vigilance des sociétés mères et des entreprises donneuses d’ordre (1). URL: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/jorf/id/JORFTEXT000034290626/
Elkington J. Saving the Planet from Ecological Disaster Is a $12 Trillion Opportunity. Harvard Business Re view. May 4, 2017. URL: https://hbr.org/2017/05/saving-the-planet-from-ecological-disaster-is-a-12-trillion-opportunity
What is Business Sustainability? Tima Bansal. February 28, 2019. URL: https://www.timabansal.com/musings/2016/3/1/budapest
Bansal P., Song H. Similar But Not the Same: Differentiating Corporate Sustainability from Corporate Res ponsibility. Academy of Management Annals. 2016. Vol. 11. No. 1. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2015.0095
What is corporate social responsibility (CSR)? IBM. URL: https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/corporate-social-responsibility
Who Cares Wins, 2004-8. URL: https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/444801491483640669/pdf/113850-
BRI-IFC-Breif-whocares-PUBLIC.pdf
ESG zvitnist: analiz praktyk rozkryttia informatsii. Ofis Zelenoho Perekhodu. URL: https://gto.dixigroup.org/assets/images/files/gto-reporting-survey.pdf [in Ukrainian].
Yaki tendentsii shchodo staloho zvituvannia zaraz mozhna sposterihaty v Ukraini? Chy vazhlyvi investoram “zeleni” faktory? URL: https://kpmg.com/ua/uk/blogs/home/posts/2022/02/stalyy-rozvytok-ta-esg.html [in Uk rainian].
Das B. Know the Difference Between CSR and ESG. The CSR Universe. April 21, 2024. URL: https://thecsruniverse.com/articles/know-the-difference-between-csr-and-esg
Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. 2011. URL: https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Publications/GuidingPrinciplesBusinessHR_EN.pdf
Corporate Social Responsibility and Institutional Theory: New Perspectives on Private Governance. Global EDGE. URL: https://globaledge.msu.edu/global-resources/resource/5088
Vogel D. The Market for Virtue: The Potential and Limits of Corporate Social Responsibility. Brookings Ins titution Press, 2006. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7864/j.ctt6wpg2c
Matten D., Moon J. “Implicit” and “Explicit” CSR: A Conceptual Framework for a Comparative Understanding of Corporate Social Responsibility. Academy of Management Review. 2008. No. 33 (2). P. 404-424. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2008.31193458
Pro skhvalennia Kontseptsii realizatsii derzhavnoi polityky u sferi spryiannia rozvytku sotsialno vidpovidalnohobiznesu v Ukraini na period do 2030 roku: rozporiadzhennia Kabinetu Ministriv Ukrainy vid 24.01.2020 No. 66-r. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/66-2020-%D1%80#Text [in Ukrainian].
A Sense of Purpose. URL: https://www.fundacionmicrofinanzasbbva.org/revistaprogreso/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/pub-Larry-Finks-letter-to-CEOs-_-BlackRock-1.pdf
Kytle B., Ruggie J. Corporate social responsibility as risk management: A model for multinationals. 2005. URL: https://www.hks.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/centers/mrcbg/programs/cri/files/workingpaper_10_kytle_ruggie.pdf
CSR and risk management — a natural alignment. URL: https://riskonnect.com/thought-leadership/industry-newscsr-and-risk-management/
Harrison J., Freeman E., Sa de Abreu M.C. Stakeholder Theor eholder Theory As an Ethical Appr y As an Ethical Approach to Effective Management: Applying the Theory to Multiple Contexts. Review of Business Ma na gement. 2025. Vol. 17. No. 55. P. 858-869. https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v17i55.2647
Sacconi L. A Social Contract Account for CSR as an Extended Model of Corporate Governance (I): Rational Bargaining and Justification. Journal of Business Ethics. 2006. Vol. 68. P. 259-281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9014-8
OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct. OECD. Paris: OECD Pub li shing, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1787/81f92357-en
Companies Act 2006. URL: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/172
McBarnet D. Corporate Social Responsibility Beyond Law, Through Law, for Law. University of Edinburgh School of Law Working Paper No. 2009/03. 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1369305
Soshnykov A.O. Samorehuliuvannia ta sotsialno vidpovidalne hospodariuvannia: tochky dotyku. Naukovyi vis nyk Uzhhorodskoho natsionalnoho universytetu. Seriia Pravo. 2024. Vyp. 85. Ch. 2. Р. 45-53. https://doi.org/10.24144/2307-3322.2024.85.2.6 [in Ukrainian].
