Understanding the Conceptual Evolutionary Path and Theoretical Underpinnings of Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Sustainability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To unlock the potential for corporations to play a more proactive role in sustainable development, it is critical to have a fundamental understanding of the pathways leading to a responsible and sustainable business. This study explores contributions of theories of the firm in explicating why and how integrating corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate sustainability (CS) into business strategic decisions and operation processes helps to improve the viability of corporations. The research objective is addressed through a narrative review of relevant literature by following the developmental and evolutionary sequences in business responsibility and sustainability while contemplating the connections between CSR and CS through the lens of the dominant theoretical perspectives underpinning the concepts. The study posits an integrative theoretical framework that offers supports for embedding CSR and CS into a corporate business strategy. It discusses that corporate choice of CSR and CS actions and policies is supported by dual internal and external mechanisms based on resource-based theory and institutional theory. This is to meet the interests and expectations of internal and external stakeholders, the basis upon which stakeholder theory is constructed. Findings from this review corroborate the proposition that the three theories of resource-based, institutional, and stakeholder could be used as the primary approach to explain corporate recognition of the need for CSR and CS, and further build a coherent platform to support corporate choice and adoption of CSR and CS in business strategy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.044 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".