Evolution of corporate social responsibility towards sustainability in Mexico 2013-2019
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22567/rep.v11i2.848Palabras clave:
Social Responsibility, Corporate Social Responsibility, Sustainability, Objectives for Sustainable Development Goals-SDGs.Resumen
Since the Millennium Development Goals set out in 1999 by the UN, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) under the framework of ISO 26000, 2011 and the Objectives for Sustainable Development Goals Agenda 2030, 2015, Mexico's Business Sector has been taking full relevance in the triple Bottom Line actions (economic, social and environmental). This study shows the results of a questionnaire structured under the ISO 26000 reference framework, designed by ResPonsable, which was applied to a representative sample of the Mexican Business Sector in 2013-2019, to describe, infer and project the degree of knowledge, interest and management of CSR in large companies and MSMEs in Mexico. The main results are flattering since companies during these six years (2013-2019) have decided to create CSR Committees, this being more frequent in large companies and have an annual budget for Social Responsibility activities, with more trained managers in the area, and with more knowledge, importance and maturity of CSR. The term Social Responsibility has evolved as an investment and not as an expense for large companies, while MiPymes still see it as an expense. It is possible to see a decline in CSR indicators as a profitable investment in the short, medium and long term. Concerning the CSR employees’ profile, the positions are vastly occupied by women, between 32 and 42 years, with a professional education level with CSR studies. The most active sector in the CSR is transportation and logistics, banking, energy and extractive industry, food and beverage, automotive and construction and infrastructure, focusing on labor practices, environment and human rights, being Corporate Governance the least developed in the companies.
Citas
Agenda 2030-ODS, Argentina, (2018) Manual para la adaptación local del objetivos de desarrollo sostenible, Consejo Nacional de Coordinación de Políticas Sociales, Ministerio del Interior, obras públicas y Vivienda, Argentina.
Barcenas. Alicia et al. (2018), Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals, an Opportunity for Latin America, United Nations. https://repositorio.cepal.org/bitstream/handle/11362/40155/24/S1801141_es.pdf
Brundtland, G. H. (1987) World Commission on Enviroment ONU. Our common Future. Oxford University press. NY
Bustamante, Alejandro. (2018) Methodological guide: planning for the implementation of Agenda 2030 in Latin America and the Caribbean, UN-EPAL
Cadbury, A. (2002). Corporate Governance and Chairmanship, Oxford.
Clarke, T. (2004). Theories of Corporate Governance, Routledge
Carroll, A.B. A. (1979). "Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance". Academy of Management. The Academy of Management Review, 4(4)
Cochran, P.L., Wood, R.A. (1984). Corporate Social Responsibility and social performance. Academy of Management Journal, 27(1)
Davis, K. (1960). "Can business Afford to Ignore Social Responsibilities?". California Management Review, 2(3), pp. 70-76 https://doi.org/10.2307/41166246
Donaldson,T. Preston, L. E. (1995). " the Stakeholder theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and implications" Academy of Magement Review, 20(1) pp. 65-91
Drucker, P.F. (1984). "The new Meaning of Corporate Social Responsibilities". California Management Review,26(2)
Drucker, P. F. (1993). Post-Capitalist Society. NY: Harper Business.
Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: the triple bottom line of 21st century business. Oxford.
Ellis, J. Juan. (2016). Methodological Guide for the Emerging and Sustainable Cities Program, Third Edition, Inter-American Development Bank
Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Johnson,H.L. (1971). Business in contemporary society: framework and issues. Belmont, Cal. Wadsworth Pub. Co.
Lipman, Frederik y Lipman Keith. (2006). Corporate Governance. Best Practices, Wiley.
ODS2030 Goals, UN-Mexico. http://www.onu.org.mx/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/180131_ODS-metas-digital.pdf
Mexico, Agenda 2030, Monitoring and evaluation of the ODS in Mexico with a gender perspective, 2018 https://www.coneval.org.mx/Eventos/Documents/seminario-de-perspectiva-genero/Presidencia-Seguimiento-a-ODS.pdf
Porter, M. E., Kramer, M. R. (2002). "The Competitive Advantage of Corporate Philanthropy". Havard Business Review, 80(12), pp.56-69
Porter Michael and Kramer Mark, Creating Shared Value, HBR, Jan-2011
Rafflet, E., Lozano A. J., Duque B. Ernesto y de la Torre G. Consuelo, (2012) Corporate Social Responsibility, Editorial Pearson, Mexico.
Sethi, S.P. (1975). "Dimensions of corporate social performance and analytical framework". California Management Review, 17(3) pp 58-64
Soto De La Rosa, Humberto y Bustamante, Alejandro, (2019). Methodological Guide: Planning for the Implementation of Agenda 2030 in Latin America and the Caribbean. Website: http://aprende.uag.mx/pluginfile.php/740163/mod_resource/content/1/Guia%20metodol%C3%B3gica%20agenda%202030%2C%20CEPAL.pdf
Wood, D. J. (1991) "Corporate Social Perfomance Revisited". Academy of Management Review, Vol. 16 Nª 4, Oct. pp. 691-71
www.sistemab.org
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2022 REVISTA ENIAC PESQUISA

Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.




