4.6 Article

Governing Corporate Social Responsibility Decoupling: The Effect of the Governance Committee on Corporate Social Responsibility Decoupling

期刊

JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ETHICS
卷 185, 期 2, 页码 349-374

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10551-022-05181-3

关键词

Corporate social responsibility; CSR decoupling; Corporate governance; CSR Committee; Committee size; Gender diversity; Independence; Agency theory

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper examines the relationship between the presence and composition of a corporate social responsibility (CSR) committee on the corporate governance board and CSR decoupling. The study finds that the presence of a CSR committee on the corporate board is negatively associated with CSR decoupling, and this association is strengthened by the nature of the industry, a firm's level of CSR orientation, and corporate governance quality. Furthermore, the analysis shows that a larger CSR committee size and a greater independence and longer tenure of its members negatively affect CSR decoupling.
This paper presents an examination of the relationship between the presence and composition of a corporate social responsibility (CSR) committee on the corporate governance board and CSR decoupling. Using a sample of listed firms drawn from 41 countries, we found that the presence of a CSR committee on the corporate board is negatively associated with CSR decoupling. We also noted that the nature of the industry to which a firm belongs, a firm's level of CSR orientation, and corporate governance quality strengthen such association. Further analysis of the relationship between the structure of the CSR committee and CSR decoupling shows that larger CSR committee size and a greater independence and longer tenure of its members negatively affect CSR decoupling. Our results are robust to various alternative specifications and offer important research and managerial implications. The findings of this study contribute to the growing literature on corporate governance and CSR.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据