A Bibliometric Analysis of 30 Years of Research and Theory on Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Social Performance
Social responsibilities of businesses and their managers have been discussed since the 1950s. Yet no consensus about progress has been achieved in the corporate social responsibility/corporate social performance literature. In this article, we seek to analyze three views on this literature. One view...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Business & society 2005-09, Vol.44 (3), p.283-317 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 317 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 283 |
container_title | Business & society |
container_volume | 44 |
creator | De Bakker, Frank G. A. Groenewegen, Peter Den Hond, Frank |
description | Social responsibilities of businesses and their managers have been discussed since the 1950s. Yet no consensus about progress has been achieved in the corporate social responsibility/corporate social performance literature. In this article, we seek to analyze three views on this literature. One view is that development occurred from conceptual vagueness, through clarification of central constructs and their relationships, to the testing of theory—a process supported by increased sophistication in research methods. In contrast, other authors claim that hardly any progress is to be expected because of the inherently normative character of the literature. A final view is that progress in the literature on the social responsibilities of business is obscured or even hampered by the continuing introduction of newconstructs. This article explores which of these three views better describes the evolution of the literature during a period of 30 years and suggests implications for further research. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0007650305278086 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_59983623</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0007650305278086</sage_id><sourcerecordid>888880081</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3266-2f3ec1543d6e03e2e3f17ac497721b858388c3ee2bc2bc9437a3319d06e29d0d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU1Lw0AQhhdRsFbvHhdBb9H9SHaTYy1-QUHRevAUNpuJ3ZJk6256yMXf7qYtKIowzAzMM-8wMwidUnJJqZRXhBApEsJJwmRKUrGHRjRJWBQzkuyj0VCOhvohOvJ-SQhlTMgR-pzga1PUxjbQOaPxpFV1743HtsKc4DdQbpM_gw-pXmDVlni-AOt6bFs8tW5lneoAv1htVD1wK9t6U5jadP2G_sM8gausa1Sr4RgdVKr2cLKLY_R6ezOf3kezx7uH6WQWac6EiFjFQdMk5qUAwoEBr6hUOs6kZLRIk5SnqeYArNDBsphLxTnNSiKABV_yMbrY6q6c_ViD7_LGeA11rVqwa58nWZZywXgAz36BS7t24Sg-p1kWxlAqAkS2kHbWewdVvnKmUa7PKcmHb-S_vxFazne6ymtVVy5sb_x3nySC0TgNXLTlvHqHH7P_0_0C5dKVxQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>199388116</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Bibliometric Analysis of 30 Years of Research and Theory on Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Social Performance</title><source>SAGE Complete</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><creator>De Bakker, Frank G. A. ; Groenewegen, Peter ; Den Hond, Frank</creator><creatorcontrib>De Bakker, Frank G. A. ; Groenewegen, Peter ; Den Hond, Frank</creatorcontrib><description>Social responsibilities of businesses and their managers have been discussed since the 1950s. Yet no consensus about progress has been achieved in the corporate social responsibility/corporate social performance literature. In this article, we seek to analyze three views on this literature. One view is that development occurred from conceptual vagueness, through clarification of central constructs and their relationships, to the testing of theory—a process supported by increased sophistication in research methods. In contrast, other authors claim that hardly any progress is to be expected because of the inherently normative character of the literature. A final view is that progress in the literature on the social responsibilities of business is obscured or even hampered by the continuing introduction of newconstructs. This article explores which of these three views better describes the evolution of the literature during a period of 30 years and suggests implications for further research.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-6503</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-4205</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0007650305278086</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BUSOBE</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Bibliometrics ; Corporations ; Economic sociology ; General studies. Economic systems ; Literature Reviews ; Progress ; Research Methodology ; Social Responsibility ; Social Theories ; Society ; Sociology ; Sociology of economy and development ; Studies</subject><ispartof>Business & society, 2005-09, Vol.44 (3), p.283-317</ispartof><rights>2006 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC. Sep 2005</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3266-2f3ec1543d6e03e2e3f17ac497721b858388c3ee2bc2bc9437a3319d06e29d0d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3266-2f3ec1543d6e03e2e3f17ac497721b858388c3ee2bc2bc9437a3319d06e29d0d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0007650305278086$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0007650305278086$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,21799,27323,27903,27904,33753,33754,43600,43601</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=17062148$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>De Bakker, Frank G. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Groenewegen, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Den Hond, Frank</creatorcontrib><title>A Bibliometric Analysis of 30 Years of Research and Theory on Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Social Performance</title><title>Business & society</title><description>Social responsibilities of businesses and their managers have been discussed since the 1950s. Yet no consensus about progress has been achieved in the corporate social responsibility/corporate social performance literature. In this article, we seek to analyze three views on this literature. One view is that development occurred from conceptual vagueness, through clarification of central constructs and their relationships, to the testing of theory—a process supported by increased sophistication in research methods. In contrast, other authors claim that hardly any progress is to be expected because of the inherently normative character of the literature. A final view is that progress in the literature on the social responsibilities of business is obscured or even hampered by the continuing introduction of newconstructs. This article explores which of these three views better describes the evolution of the literature during a period of 30 years and suggests implications for further research.</description><subject>Bibliometrics</subject><subject>Corporations</subject><subject>Economic sociology</subject><subject>General studies. Economic systems</subject><subject>Literature Reviews</subject><subject>Progress</subject><subject>Research Methodology</subject><subject>Social Responsibility</subject><subject>Social Theories</subject><subject>Society</subject><subject>Sociology</subject><subject>Sociology of economy and development</subject><subject>Studies</subject><issn>0007-6503</issn><issn>1552-4205</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kU1Lw0AQhhdRsFbvHhdBb9H9SHaTYy1-QUHRevAUNpuJ3ZJk6256yMXf7qYtKIowzAzMM-8wMwidUnJJqZRXhBApEsJJwmRKUrGHRjRJWBQzkuyj0VCOhvohOvJ-SQhlTMgR-pzga1PUxjbQOaPxpFV1743HtsKc4DdQbpM_gw-pXmDVlni-AOt6bFs8tW5lneoAv1htVD1wK9t6U5jadP2G_sM8gausa1Sr4RgdVKr2cLKLY_R6ezOf3kezx7uH6WQWac6EiFjFQdMk5qUAwoEBr6hUOs6kZLRIk5SnqeYArNDBsphLxTnNSiKABV_yMbrY6q6c_ViD7_LGeA11rVqwa58nWZZywXgAz36BS7t24Sg-p1kWxlAqAkS2kHbWewdVvnKmUa7PKcmHb-S_vxFazne6ymtVVy5sb_x3nySC0TgNXLTlvHqHH7P_0_0C5dKVxQ</recordid><startdate>200509</startdate><enddate>200509</enddate><creator>De Bakker, Frank G. A.</creator><creator>Groenewegen, Peter</creator><creator>Den Hond, Frank</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>SAGE</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYYUZ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200509</creationdate><title>A Bibliometric Analysis of 30 Years of Research and Theory on Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Social Performance</title><author>De Bakker, Frank G. A. ; Groenewegen, Peter ; Den Hond, Frank</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3266-2f3ec1543d6e03e2e3f17ac497721b858388c3ee2bc2bc9437a3319d06e29d0d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Bibliometrics</topic><topic>Corporations</topic><topic>Economic sociology</topic><topic>General studies. Economic systems</topic><topic>Literature Reviews</topic><topic>Progress</topic><topic>Research Methodology</topic><topic>Social Responsibility</topic><topic>Social Theories</topic><topic>Society</topic><topic>Sociology</topic><topic>Sociology of economy and development</topic><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>De Bakker, Frank G. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Groenewegen, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Den Hond, Frank</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>Global News & ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Business & society</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>De Bakker, Frank G. A.</au><au>Groenewegen, Peter</au><au>Den Hond, Frank</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Bibliometric Analysis of 30 Years of Research and Theory on Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Social Performance</atitle><jtitle>Business & society</jtitle><date>2005-09</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>44</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>283</spage><epage>317</epage><pages>283-317</pages><issn>0007-6503</issn><eissn>1552-4205</eissn><coden>BUSOBE</coden><abstract>Social responsibilities of businesses and their managers have been discussed since the 1950s. Yet no consensus about progress has been achieved in the corporate social responsibility/corporate social performance literature. In this article, we seek to analyze three views on this literature. One view is that development occurred from conceptual vagueness, through clarification of central constructs and their relationships, to the testing of theory—a process supported by increased sophistication in research methods. In contrast, other authors claim that hardly any progress is to be expected because of the inherently normative character of the literature. A final view is that progress in the literature on the social responsibilities of business is obscured or even hampered by the continuing introduction of newconstructs. This article explores which of these three views better describes the evolution of the literature during a period of 30 years and suggests implications for further research.</abstract><cop>Thousand Oaks, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/0007650305278086</doi><tpages>35</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0007-6503 |
ispartof | Business & society, 2005-09, Vol.44 (3), p.283-317 |
issn | 0007-6503 1552-4205 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_59983623 |
source | SAGE Complete; Sociological Abstracts |
subjects | Bibliometrics Corporations Economic sociology General studies. Economic systems Literature Reviews Progress Research Methodology Social Responsibility Social Theories Society Sociology Sociology of economy and development Studies |
title | A Bibliometric Analysis of 30 Years of Research and Theory on Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Social Performance |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-24T07%3A40%3A46IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20Bibliometric%20Analysis%20of%2030%20Years%20of%20Research%20and%20Theory%20on%20Corporate%20Social%20Responsibility%20and%20Corporate%20Social%20Performance&rft.jtitle=Business%20&%20society&rft.au=De%20Bakker,%20Frank%20G.%20A.&rft.date=2005-09&rft.volume=44&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=283&rft.epage=317&rft.pages=283-317&rft.issn=0007-6503&rft.eissn=1552-4205&rft.coden=BUSOBE&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0007650305278086&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E888880081%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=199388116&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0007650305278086&rfr_iscdi=true |