Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
2010 | 10(25) | z. 3 | 15--32
Tytuł artykułu

Corporate Social Responsibility in the Agri-Food Sector: The Case of GMOs

Treść / Zawartość
Warianty tytułu
Języki publikacji
Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are handled differently in different countries Whereas global acreage of GMOs jumped to 134 million hectares in 2009 [Cultivation... 2010], in many European countries opposition to GMOs is still strong, and their acreage is very small. This situation poses a difficult situation for many companies and their corporate social responsibility [CSR] strategies. Against this background, we conducted an online survey of 170 agribusiness firms in order to shed some light on how companies handle the conflict between, on the one hand, the growing use of GMOs worldwide and, on the other, the rejection of GMOs by European consumers. The empirical results show that many agribusiness firms perceive the use of GMOs as a highly relevant management issue that shapes their CSR strategies. All in all, agribusiness firms apply a wide spectrum of CSR activities; furthermore, CSR is considered a top management responsibility. GMOs are of aboveaverage relevance in firms that have been criticized for their attitudes towards and use of GMOs. The empirical results have interesting implications for the management of CSR and legitimacy in the agribusiness sector. (original abstract)
Opis fizyczny
  • Georg August University of Goettingen, Germany
  • Georg August University of Goettingen, Germany
  • Agribusiness and Society: Corporate Responses to Environmentalism, Market Opportunities and Public Regulation. [2004]. K. Jansen & S. Vellema (eds.) London.
  • Al-Subaihi A.A. [2008]: Comparison of Web and Telephone Survey Response Rates in Saudi Arabia. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods no. 6(2), pp. 123-132.
  • Ashforth B.E., Gibbs B.W. [1990]: The Double-Edge of Organizational Legitimation. Organization Science no. 1(2), pp. 177-194.
  • Babcock B., Duffy M., Wisner R. [2006]: Availability and Market Penetration of GMO Corn and Soybeans. [In:] Economic Perspectives on GMO Market Segregation. [Available at:] [Accessed: April 23, 2006].
  • Bakker de F.G., Groenewegen P. den Hond F. [2005]: A Bibliometric Analysis of 30 Years of Research and Theory on Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Social Performance. Business & Society no. 44(3), pp. 283-317.
  • Berger P.L., Luckmann T. [1966]: The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Garden City, New York.
  • Brookes G., Craddock N. N., Kniel N. [2005]: Der Globale Markt fuer GVO-Produkte: Eine Analyse der Kennzeichnungsvorschriften, Marktdynamik und Kosten. PG Economics. [Available at:] [Accessed: May 3, 2006].
  • Carroll A.B. [1998]: The Four Faces of Corporate Citizenship. Business & Society Review no. 100(1), pp. 1-4.
  • Carroll A.B. [1999]: Corporate Social Responsibility: Evolution of a Definitional Construct. Business & Society no. 38(3), pp. 268-295.
  • Chern W.S., Rickertsen K. [2002]: Consumer Acceptance of GMO. Working Paper, Ohio State University.
  • Cultivation of GM Plants: Rapid Increase Worldwide, Cautious Start in Europe. [2010]. [Available at:] [Accessed: August 12, 2010].
  • Dahlsrud A. [2006]: How Corporate Social Responsibility Is Defined: An Analysis of 37 Definitions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, no. 15(1), pp. 1-13.
  • Dennis W. [2003]: Raising Response Rates in Mail Surveys of Small Business Owners: Results of an Experiment. Journal of Small Business Management no. 41, pp. 278-296.
  • Dubielzig F., Schaltegger S. [2005]: Corporate Social Responsibility. [In:] Handlexikon Public Affairs. M. Althaus, M. Geffken, S. Rawe [eds.]. Muenster, pp. 240-243.
  • Elkington J. [1994]: Towards the Sustainable Corporation: Win-win-win Business Strategies for Sustainable Development. California Management Review no. 369(2), pp. 90-100.
  • Gawron J.C., Theuvsen L. [2008]: Kosten der Verarbeitung gentechnisch veraenderter Organismen: Eine Analyse am Beispiel der Raps- and Maisverarbeitung. [In:] Agrar- and Ernaehrungswirtschaft im Umbruch. T. Glebe et al. (eds.). Muenster-Hiltrup, pp. 143-152.
  • Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops 2009. Executive Summary. ISAAA Brief 41-2009. [2009]. [Available at:] [Accessed: July 8, 2010].
  • Greer J., Bruno K. [1996]: Greenwash: The Reality behind Corporate Environmentalism. Third World Network, Penang.
  • Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products. [2009]. UNEP - United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi.
  • Hampel J. [2004]: Die Akzeptanz gentechnisch veraenderter Lebensmittel in Europa. Stuttgarter Beitraege zur Risiko- und Nachhaltigkeitsforschung no. 3. Institut fuer Sozialwissenschaften, University of Stuttgart.
  • Heyder M., Theuvsen L. [2008]: Legitimating Business Activities using Corporate Social Responsibility: Is there a Need for CSR in Agribusiness? [In:] System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks. M. Fritz, U. Rickert, G. Schiefer (eds.). Bonn, pp. 175-187.
  • Hiss S. [2006]: Warum uebernehmen Unternehmen gesellschaftliche Verantwortung: Ein soziologischer Erklaerungversuch. Frankfurt a. Main & New York.
  • Jørgensen A., Le Bocq A., Nazarkina L., Hauschild M. [2008]: Methodologies for Social Life Cycle Assessment. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment no. 13, pp. 96-103.
  • Koppelmann U., Willers C. [2008]: Marketing in Widerstandsmaerkten. Absatzwirtschaft - Zeitschrift fuer Marketing no. 2, pp. 28-32.
  • Loew T., Ankele K., Braun S., Clausen J. [2004]: Bedeutung der internationalen CSR-Diskussion fuer Nachhaltigkeit and die sich daraus ergebenden Anforderungen an Unternehmen mit Fokus Berichterstattung. Muenster & Berlin.
  • Mackey A., Mackey T.B., Barney J.B. [2007]: Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Performance: Investor Preferences and Corporate Strategies. Academy of Management Review no. 32(3), pp. 817-835.
  • Moir L. [2001]: What Do We Mean by Corporate Social Responsibility? Corporate Governance no. 1(2), pp. 16-22.
  • Mueller M., Seuring S. [2007]: Legitimitaet durch Umwelt- and Sozialstandards gegenueber Stakeholdern - eine vergleichende Analyse. Zeitschrift fuer Umweltpolitik & Umweltrecht no. 30(3), pp. 257-286.
  • Muenstermann M. [2007]: Corporate Social Responsibility: Ausgestaltung und Steuerung von CSR-Aktivitaeten. Wiesbaden.
  • Napier T.L., Tucker M., Henry C., Whaley S.R. [2004]: Consumer Attitudes toward GMOs: The Ohio Experience. Journal of Food Science no. 69(3), pp. 69-76.
  • Oeffentliches Standortregister beim Bundesamt fuer Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit. [2010]. BVL. [Available at:] [Accessed: July 8, 2010].
  • Oliver C. [1991]: Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes. Academy of Management Review no. 16, pp. 145-179.
  • Orlitzky M., Schmidt F.L., Rynes S.L. [2003]: Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A Meta-analysis. Organization Studies no. 24(3), pp. 403-441.
  • Palazzo G., Richter U. [2005]: CSR Business as Usual? The Case of the Tobacco Industry. Journal of Business Ethics no. 61(4), pp. 387-401.
  • Palazzo G., Scherer A.G. [2006]: Corporate Legitimacy as Deliberation: A Communicative Framework. Journal of Business Ethics no. 66(1), pp. 71-88.
  • Parsons T. [1956]: Suggestions for a Sociological Approach to the Theory of Organizations I. Administrative Science Quarterly no. 1(1), pp. 63-85.
  • Parsons T. [1960]: Structure and Process in Modern Society. New York.
  • Pfeffer J., Salancik G. [1978]: The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York.
  • Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility. [2001]. Green Paper. European Commission, Brussels.
  • Schein E. H. [1992]: Organizational Culture and Leadership. 2nd ed., San Francisco.
  • Scott W.R. [1995]: Grundlagen der Organisationstheorie. Frankfurt a. Main & New York.
  • Scott W.R., Meyer J.W. [1994]: Developments in Institutional Theory. [In:] Institutional Environments and Organizations: Structural Complexity and Individualism. W.R. Scott & J.W. Meyer (eds.).Thousand Oaks.
  • Schiefer J., Reynolds N. [2009]: Mail and Internet Surveys in the Agribusiness: How Can We Tackle Decreasing Response Rates? Paper presented at 3rd International Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks, February 16-20, 2009, Innsbruck-Igls.
  • Shultz C.J., Holbrook M.B. [1999]: Marketing the Tragedy of the Commons: A Synthesis, Commentary, and Analysis for Action. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing no. 18(2), pp. 218-229.
  • Suchanek A. [2004]: Gewinnmaximierung als soziale Verantwortung von Unternehmen? Milton Friedman und die Unternehmensethik. [In:] Milton Friedmans oekonomischer Liberalismus, Konzepte der Gesellschaftstheorie 10. I. Piesm & M. Leschke (eds.). Tuebingen, pp. 105-124.
  • Suchman M.C. [1995]: Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches. Academy of Management Review no. 20(3), pp. 571-610.
  • The Business Case for Sustainable Development: Making a Difference toward the Johannesburg Summit 2002 and Beyond. [2002]. World Business Council on Sustainable Development , Geneva.
  • Walgenbach P. [2007]: Façade and Means of Control: The Use of ISO 9001 Standards. [In:] Quality Management in Food Chains. L. Theuvsen, A. Spiller, M. Peupert & G. Jahn (eds.). Wageningen, pp. 29-42.
  • Willers C. [2007]: Marketing in Widerstandsmaerkten - untersucht am Beispiel gentechnisch veraenderter Lebensmittel. Cologne.
  • Wilson W.W., Dahl B.L. [2005]: Costs and Risks of Testing and Segregating Genetically Modified Wheat. Review of Agricultural Economics no. 27(2), pp. 212-228.
  • Zerfass A., Scherer A.G. [1993]: Die Irrwege der Imagekonstrukteure. Ein Plaedoyer gegen die sozialtechnologische Verkuerzung der Public-Relations-Forschung. Discussion Paper, University of Erlangen-Nuernberg.
Typ dokumentu
Identyfikator YADDA

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Musisz być zalogowany aby pisać komentarze.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.