Next Article in Journal
Inflation _targeting with an Optimal Nonlinear Monetary Rule—The Case Study of Colombia
Previous Article in Journal
Trends in the Literature About the Adoption of Digital Banking in Emerging Economies: A Bibliometric Analysis
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JRFM
Volume 17
Issue 12
10.3390/jrfm17120546
jrfm-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Researching the Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Economic Growth and Inequality: Methodological Aspects

by
Mihail Chipriyanov
1,
Galina Chipriyanova
2,*,
Radosveta Krasteva-Hristova
2,
Atanas Atanasov
2 and
Kiril Luchkov
3
1
Department of Strategic Planning, Tsenov Academy of Economics, 5250 Svishtov, Bulgaria
2
Department of Accounting, Tsenov Academy of Economics, 5250 Svishtov, Bulgaria
3
Department of Economics, Industrial Engineering and Management Faculty of Management, Technical University, 1000 Sofia, Bulgaria
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Risk Financial Manag. 2024, 17(12), 546; https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm17120546
Submission received: 7 October 2024 / Revised: 26 November 2024 / Accepted: 28 November 2024 / Published: 30 November 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research on Economic Growth and Inequality)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The study focuses on analyzing the impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on economic growth and reducing inequality, highlighting the importance of CSR in achieving sustainable development and social justice. The main aim is to analyze how different CSR initiatives contribute to economic development, social prosperity, and the reduction in inequality by reviewing the methods used to assess their impact. The research methodology includes a detailed literature review, bibliometric analysis and scientific mapping, surveys of various business organizations, and a gap analysis regarding the identification of gaps between the current state of CSR activities and the expected outcomes. The research shows that companies perceive CSR as a key tool for improving corporate image, responding to stakeholder expectations, and investing in social justice. Despite positive intentions, challenges include the lack of clearly defined methodologies for measuring the impact on economic inequality, as well as difficulties in assessing the long-term effects of CSR initiatives. Key conclusions highlight the need for more structured approaches to assessing the social and economic effects of CSR, recommending that companies improve their transparency and accountability and implement clear indicators of success to achieve sustainable economic and social outcomes.

1. Introduction

In the contemporary business world, corporate social responsibility (CSR) plays an increasingly important role in defining companies’ strategies for pursuing sustainable development and social justice. CSR not only reflects on organizations’ ethical commitments to society but also provides opportunities to reduce social and economic inequality. In the context of managing internal business processes, the implementation of CSR strategies promises significant benefits, including improving corporate reputation, increasing employee engagement, and stimulating long-term economic growth.
The interest in CSR is based not only on ethical considerations but also on the practical benefits it can bring to optimize operations and create a fairer and more inclusive business environment. The application of CSR initiatives requires not only changes in the organizational structure but also in the work culture, focusing on the importance of social responsibility and ethical practices.
The focus of this study is on the methodological aspects of researching the trends and challenges faced by organizations in integrating CSR strategies and their impact on reducing inequality. The attitudes of business organizations towards these initiatives will be analyzed, focusing on the factors that influence their adoption and successful implementation. The analysis from a methodological point of view will be provided by a systematic literature review, bibliometric analysis with appropriate visualization, conducting a survey, and gap analysis.
This study defends that CSR has the potential to make a significant contribution to reducing economic and social inequality, but this potential often remains untapped due to various barriers. However, it is the authors’ position that overcoming these barriers is possible through individualized strategies, the establishment of ethical standards, and active learning.
The object of study is CSR, and the subject is its potential for improving social justice and reducing inequality. The main goal is to investigate the methodological aspects of the Analysis of attitudes and behavior towards the implementation of CSR as a means to reduce inequality. Specific sub-goals include approaches to measuring the degree of readiness and adoption of socially responsible practices by organizations, and the identification of factors influencing the success or failure of these initiatives.
The research has the ambition to improve the knowledge in the field of CSR and to serve as a basis for developing future strategies for successful implementation in business practices. Considering the current needs and challenges of organizations in this context, the study aims to provide concrete and relevant recommendations to promote a sustainable and equitable transition towards more responsible management of business processes.
The relationship between CSR, economic growth, and economic inequality is complex and multifaceted, and our research attempts to provide a clear framework for understanding these interactions. By focusing on the methodological aspects, we lay the foundations for future research that will allow for a deeper analysis of the links between these phenomena. Although a full explanation of these processes requires further in-depth research, we believe that in the context of this study, we clearly illustrate how CSR can play a significant role in reducing economic inequality and promoting sustainable economic growth.

2. Literature Review

CSR is a concept that emerged in the 20th century and has established itself as an important aspect of the management of contemporary organizations. CSR refers to the ethical responsibility of business towards society and the environment, transcending purely economic profit objectives. It includes a variety of activities, such as voluntary initiatives that improve social welfare, environmental protection, and the maintenance of ethical standards in business. The importance of CSR is supported by stakeholder theory (Freeman 1984; Freeman and McVea 2017; Katsoulakos and Katsoulacos 2007), which emphasizes that companies must consider the interests of all those affected by their activities, including employees, customers, suppliers, and society as a whole (Ntiamoah et al. 2014).
Concerning CSR and inequality, inequality is a serious social problem that has become the subject of growing public and academic interest. It refers to differences in income, wealth, and access to resources between different segments of society (Bruton et al. 2021; Falkowski 2024; Koh 2020; Ravallion 2014; Schmidt and Juijn 2024; Simangunsong et al. 2023; Tweedie and Hazelton 2019; Voitchovsky 2011). In this context, CSR is being viewed as a tool to reduce inequalities through various mechanisms, such as ensuring equal employment opportunities, fair payment, and investment in public projects. According to some studies, companies that invest in CSR can contribute to a fairer and more equitable society (Carroll 1991, 1999, 2009, 2016; Schwartz and Carroll 2003).
CSR initiatives have significant potential to reduce inequality, especially when they address issues such as poverty, education, health, and access to basic services. By investing in these areas, companies can directly improve the living standards of marginalized communities and provide better opportunities for economic inclusion. For example, CSR activities in education and vocational training can provide disadvantaged people with skills that improve their employment prospects, thereby reducing income inequality (Asongu and Odhiambo 2021; Elkington 1997; Enderle 2018).
Despite this potential, CSR is often criticized for its limited impact on the structural causes of inequality. Critics argue that CSR initiatives may offer temporary benefits to marginalized groups but rarely address systemic issues such as unequal access to resources, concentration of wealth, and discriminatory labor practices (Ahen and Amankwah-Amoah 2018). CSR is sometimes used as a “corporate window dressing” where companies engage in superficial philanthropic activities with little effect on reducing deep-rooted inequality.
In addition, CSR often prioritizes issues that are consistent with a company’s brand image rather than addressing urgent social issues. For example, a company may focus on environmental sustainability as part of its CSR efforts, which, although important, may not directly address income inequality or gender and racial inequality in the workplace (Kolk and van Tulder 2010). This selective engagement with social issues can maintain the status quo without challenging the systemic structures contributing to inequality.
Concerning CSR and economic growth, CSR is traditionally recognized as a voluntary activity that companies engage in to improve their reputation, attract customers, and maintain compliance with ethical standards. However, recent publications suggest that CSR can play a direct role in promoting economic growth. According to Porter and Kramer (2011), CSR initiatives that focus on shared value creation—where businesses generate profits while meeting societal needs—can lead to more sustainable and inclusive growth. The authors argue that CSR strategies that respond to societal needs can contribute to economic progress by fostering innovation, improving enterprise competitiveness, and enhancing social capital. By addressing social challenges such as healthcare, education, and work opportunities, CSR can stimulate economic activity and promote long-term growth (Porter and Kramer 2011).
The literature review shows that the concept of CSR is based on several key theoretical frameworks:
As the theoretical framework and the essence of CSR have already been outlined, it is logical to pose the question of the methodological assessment of its impact on organizations on economic growth and inequality. This leads us to the need to identify key economic and social indicators that are influenced by CSR, on one hand, and to develop approaches and tools in a corporate context to analyze and measure this influence, on the other. The results of such research will enrich the scientific knowledge in the outlined field and will provide valuable information for further development of research work. This will create a basis for a deeper understanding of the connections between corporate social responsibility, economic growth, and social inequality and will support future research on the topic.
Monitoring the relationship between CSR and corporate performance. Researching the relationship between CSR and corporate performance is diverse and often controversial. Some researchers (Deng et al. 2023; Fu et al. 2024; Orlitzky 2009; Orlitzky et al. 2003; Pekovic and Vogt 2021) have pointed to a positive correlation between CSR and financial performance, arguing companies that invest in social responsibilities often benefit from better reputations, customer loyalty, and greater talent attraction. However, other studies (Kim et al. 2023; Margolis and Walsh 2003; Volchek et al. 2024) suggest that the relationship is not always direct, and the benefits of CSR depend on the context and how these policies are implemented.
Regarding CSR and social justice. Social justice is a key element of CSR discussions (Balaceanu et al. 2012; Etikan 2024; Michelon et al. 2020; Newell and Frynas 2007). The concept of social justice in the context of CSR includes efforts to ensure equal opportunities, fair payment, and working conditions, and to protect the rights of vulnerable groups. Companies can play an important role in promoting social justice by creating inclusive policies and supporting diversity and inclusion in the work environment.
Despite the potential benefits of CSR, there are also a number of challenges that can make its effective implementation difficult. These include (see Table 1) the following:
The role of CSR in reducing inequality. CSR has the potential to be a powerful tool for reducing social and economic inequality. To effectively reduce inequality, CSR must be integrated into a strategy that combines social, economic, and environmental objectives. Research indicates that CSR initiatives focusing on shared value—generating profit while meeting societal needs—promote sustainable and inclusive growth (Porter and Kramer 2011). Whenever it is aligned with the principles of equity, inclusion, and sustainability, CSR can make a significant contribution to reducing inequality, especially in sectors that are essential for social stability, such as education, healthcare, and employment. In order to have a long-term impact, CSR needs to go beyond individual programs and integrate into the core business strategy, reflecting a commitment to ethical practices, fair wages, equal opportunities, and a long-term pursuit of social equality. In addition, companies need to engage with local communities and collaborate with governments and other stakeholders to create systemic changes that address the fundamental causes of inequality (Kolk and van Tulder 2010).
The theoretical framework of CSR highlights its multiple dimensions, including adherence to sustainable development goals (Malay 2021), globalization (Sandoval-Gomez et al. 2022), climate change (Allen and Craig 2016; Michetti and Pinar 2019; Vo et al. 2024), ecological footprint, energy use, carbon emissions, governance effectiveness, economic prosperity, and financial stability (Imran et al. 2024; Shang et al. 2022), labor relations and employment (Gutterman 2024), innovation (Zhang et al. 2023), and its relevance in contemporary society. Despite the many challenges to its successful implementation, CSR remains a key instrument for achieving sustainable development and reducing inequality (Gutterman 2024).

3. Materials and Methods

The achievement of the research goals is realized through the application of a specific methodological apparatus that forms a multi-stage research design. This means that the results of one method are used as a basis or input for the next method, creating a cascade (chain reaction) of research steps.
First, a systematic review of the literature in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) protocol was used. Scientific publications were extracted from the Scopus database, and appropriate inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to the results. After conducting the systematic selection, the quantitative and qualitative analysis of the publications was performed using the Bibliometrix tool of R-Studio, including the Biblioshiny 4.1 application.
Second, several specific visualization tools were used in the analysis process, including Three Fields Plot, which illustrates the relationships between authors, keywords, and publication sources, as well as Thematic Map, which provides a graphical representation of the main themes and their evolution over time. These tools allow further analysis of thematic areas and support the extraction of scientific conclusions, trends, and perspectives for future research. The research findings at this stage are the basis for continuing the process of research in the direction of constructing a questionnaire and generating conclusions.
Third, a sample survey was conducted. It covers 147 companies (including 32 small enterprises, 97 medium enterprises, and 18 large enterprises) operating in Bulgaria and Romania. The sample included companies selected using the method of random non-recurrent selection, with a focus on the manufacturing sector, which plays a significant role in the economies of both countries. The choice to focus on manufacturing enterprises in Bulgaria and Romania is based on several factors. First, the two neighboring countries completed their economic transitions in similar time frames, which allows for a comparison of the data in a common regional context. Over the last ten years, both countries have shown comparable rates of economic growth, which provides an appropriate basis for examining broader patterns. Furthermore, their similarities in the process of European integration provide a consistent regulatory framework that facilitates a better understanding of CSR practices.
The aim of the study is to research the attitude of these companies towards the impact of CSR on reducing economic inequality. Focusing on the manufacturing industry, which includes approximately 28,500 companies in Bulgaria and 46,100 in Romania, ensures that the results are based on a significant and relevant segment of each country’s economy. Considering the importance of this sector, the study provides valuable insights into the role of CSR in addressing social and economic inequalities in an environment where industrial activity and workforce employment are particularly significant. The sample design recognizes both geographical and economic factors, making the results useful for understanding the impact of CSR in the broader context of the EU-centric Eastern European economy. A method of random non-recurrent selection was implemented in the sample design to ensure a high degree of representativeness and statistical validity of the results. Using this approach, each unit of the population (in this case, manufacturing enterprises in Bulgaria and Romania) has an equal probability of being included in the sample, which reduces the risk of systematic errors and biases. The non-sampling nature of the sample guarantees the independence of the observations, eliminating the possibility of repeated inclusion of units, which could bias the estimates and compromise the objectivity of the statistical analyses.
In our study, we used the univariate and bivariate distribution functions in SPSS Statistics to analyze the main characteristics of the sample and the distribution of variables related to corporate social responsibility (CSR) and economic inequality.
The survey contains 16 questions, combining both closed and open formats. The questions cover topics such as the impact of CSR on social justice, the benefits and challenges of implementing CSR practices, the adoption of ethical standards, companies’ commitments to social and environmental issues, and opportunities for staff training and development. The surveys were distributed by email to the companies in the sample. This publication focuses on the methodological aspects of the study, making it clear that it is part of a larger research project aimed at further exploring the multiple impacts of CSR.
Fourth, in addition to the survey, a gap analysis is applied as a strategic tool to assess the gaps between the current condition of CSR initiatives and the _targeted outcomes. The gap analysis identifies areas where existing practices are not meeting optimal standards and suggests opportunities for improvement. This enables organizations to formulate and implement effective strategies to integrate CSR better into their corporate policy and operational practice.

4. Results

The initial phase of the research process is the definition of keywords and terms and a search field in the Scopus database. It is the result of a panel discussion between academics and businesses in the field of CSR and sustainable business transformation. The search and information retrieval phase of data collection involves the use of various search techniques such as Booleans, using parentheses, quotation marks, and truncations. The selected keywords span three directions, regarding CSR (“corporate social responsibility”, CSR), on economic growth (“economic grow*”), and concerning the field of inequality–(inequalit*). The appropriate Booleans OR and AND, quotation marks, and truncations, are used. Querying the database for these keywords was performed on 20 June 2024 in a specifically selected field in Scopus–(All fields) and generated 4430 documents as a result.
The selected PRISMA protocol provides additional search criteria to be defined to restrict the sample. The criteria were selected using the search filters suggested in the Scopus database. Depending on the number and type of documents in the sample, the criteria that delimit the sample can be inclusion and exclusion criteria.
The selected exclusion criteria options restrict the sample to the following:
  • Open Access—all open access resulting in 1574 documents;
  • Year—a research publication period between 2015 and 2024 was selected, resulting in 1504 documents;
  • Subject area—the selected fields are business, management, and accounting; social sciences; decision sciences; economics, econometrics, and finance with a result of 1152 documents;
  • Document Type—only the articles with a result of 981 documents are of interest;
  • Publication Stage—only fully completed articles with the Final option with a result of 946 documents are examined;
  • Source Type—the selection of articles is of those published in journals with a result of 946 documents;
  • Language—the survey covers only articles in English with English option with a result of 932 documents.
The other filters as Author name, Source title, Keyword, Affiliation, Funding Sponsor, and Country/territory, are not used. They function as inclusion criteria. Querying the database after applying these additional criteria sorts the data into a result and forms a sample size of 932 documents.
A very important part of the data processing process is technical cleaning. It involves eliminating some of the records. The PRISMA protocol requires that the research materials (in our case, 932 scientific publications) are reviewed for duplicates in order to eliminate them. No duplicates were identified during the review.
The subsequent deep cleaning of the data consists of their full-text reading, which limits them to a sample of 531 scientific publications. The processed scientific information from the studied articles through a systematic literature review served as the basis for the construction of the conceptual framework of the study: the CSR of organizations has an impact on economic growth and inequality in society, and they should apply specific methodological tools to measure and evaluate these effects.
As a result of the systematic literature review, the relationship between keywords, countries, and scientific journals was also researched. The visualization of these interrelationships is by the tool of Bibliometrix “Three Fields Plot” developed based on the Sankey diagram. The chart allows a user-defined number of values of a variable (e.g., keywords used to describe the research topic) to be placed in a central position, and then values of two other variables (e.g., authors, countries, universities, sources, etc.) to be placed on either side of it. The Three Fields Plot shows how interest in and/or activity of the side variables is relative to the central variable.
In this case, the keywords in the publications in the sample are set as the central variable, and their number is set to 15, resulting in terms appearing in different colored and sized rectangles. These visually correspond to similar rectangles on both sides, which in the example are countries/regions and sources (see Figure 1).
This three-dimensional graph, reflecting the relationship between the main research themes, the geographical distribution of the research, and the leading journals, provides the necessary basis for outlining the next research direction, i.e., the survey. Specifically, the diagram identifies three key directions:
  • The indicators on which the CSR of the organizations has an impact, i.e., the economic inequalities in the society, including the impact of the CSR initiatives of the corresponding organization on them, the specific indicators and metrics to assess the contribution of the CSR initiatives to their reduction, and the methodological approaches to assess the long-term impact of the CSR initiatives on them.
  • The territorial scope of the respondents in the survey, i.e., among the active countries, Romania was chosen as it is the only one neighboring Bulgaria;
  • The relevant scientific journal to which this article will be directed for publication.
The next important research focus is to establish how the impact of an organization’s CSR initiatives on economic inequality in society is measured. Measuring this impact is pivotal to understanding the real contribution of organizations to social justice and the reduction in income and opportunity gaps. It allows companies to assess the effectiveness of their CSR programs and identify areas where improvements or adjustments can be made. In addition, clearly measuring impact provides actionable data that can be used to communicate with stakeholders and demonstrate a company’s commitment to sustainability and social responsibility.
The results of the empirical research are as follows (see Figure 2):
The main conclusions are as follows:
  • Monitoring changes in wages and working conditions (MCWWC). A total of 23.1% show a strong focus on the internal aspects of employees and their rights. This measurement is directly linked to the assessment of income and working conditions as key factors of economic inequality.
  • Assessing access to services and resources (AASR). A significant proportion of companies (17.7%) are paying attention to access to services and resources, demonstrating a commitment to reducing social inequalities by improving accessibility to important services. This includes support for education, health, and other social programs.
  • Stakeholder surveys and interviews (SSI). They are used by many organizations (15.6%), reflecting the importance of direct communication with those affected by CSR initiatives. This helps to understand the perception of the company’s efforts and the effect on the local community and employees.
  • Using social and economic indicators (USEI). The largest proportion is organizations (29.3%) using social and economic indicators to assess impact, highlighting the need for objective and quantitative data for analysis. These indicators allow a broader view of the impact of CSR initiatives on economic inequality at national and local levels.
  • Others (Os). A small proportion of respondents (6.8%) use other measurement methods, indicating the diversity in approaches and the possibility of using alternative methods that may be specific to certain industries or companies.
  • Lack of a systematic method of measurement (LSMM). Some organizations (7.5%) have not yet developed systematic methods to measure the impact of CSR initiatives. This points to the need to develop more structured evaluation and monitoring approaches.
These results highlight the diversity in the methods used by companies to measure the impact of CSR initiatives on economic inequalities. Although most organizations use structured and quantitative approaches, there are still gaps in systematic measurement, suggesting the need for the development and standardization of methodologies (Gutterman 2024; Santoso et al. 2024).
In an effort to deepen the analysis, we provide the bivariate distributions in Table 2 (cross-tabulation) below. The row “In %” refers to the % of the indicator Categories of businesses (Accountancy Act, am. SG/79 of 2024).
Researching the methods used by different business organizations to measure the impact of CSR initiatives on economic inequalities reveals interesting trends and differences between small, medium, and large enterprises. For example, monitoring changes in wages and working conditions is the most popular method among small organizations (28.1%) choosing this approach. This is probably due to more limited resources and the need for direct control over internal working conditions and wages. Medium-sized companies (23.7%) and large companies (11.1%) demonstrated less emphasis on this method. This may reflect the complexity of internal structures and the presence of a variety of metrics that large companies use to assess.
Assessing access to services and resources is another important aspect (method), as it is used by 22.2% of large business organizations. This is likely a result of their broader scope of social initiatives, which include support for education, healthcare, and other social programs. Medium-sized businesses (18.6%) and small businesses (12.5%) demonstrate less focus on this approach, which may be due to limited resources and less engagement with a wide range of social services.
Stakeholder surveys and interviews also play an important role. A total of 22.2% of large companies and 17.5% of medium-sized companies, significantly more than small companies (6.3%), use these methods to obtain direct feedback from stakeholders. This may be a result of the more structured and systematic communication processes available in larger companies.
Using social and economic indicators is most popular among small enterprises (34.3%) and large enterprises (33.3%). This highlights the need for objective data to assess the impact of CSR initiatives. Medium-sized enterprises (26.8%) also use social and economic indicators, but they are more limited, probably due to the more complex nature of evaluations and the need for different types of data.
A small percentage of companies surveyed (6.8%) use non-standard measurement methods, indicating that these approaches are not widespread and are likely specific to certain industries.
It is noteworthy that 7.5% of organizations still do not have a systematic method to measure the impact of CSR initiatives, which reveals the lack of readiness and the need to develop more structured and effective methods to assess the impact of social responsibility.
The differences in approaches between small, medium, and large business organizations show how size and resources influence the choice of methods for measuring the impact of CSR initiatives. Small organizations tend to use simpler and more direct methods, while large companies rely on more complex and broad approaches that reflect their ability to manage and evaluate social responsibility on a broader basis.
These results provide a detailed analysis of the differences in approaches to measuring the impact of CSR initiatives depending on the categories of businesses (size of business organizations).
The other defining guideline of our study relates to which specific indicators and metrics a particular business organization uses to assess the contribution of CSR initiatives to reducing economic inequality. This aspect is essential for understanding the effectiveness and transparency of these initiatives. Choosing appropriate metrics allows companies to track and analyze specific aspects of economic impact, such as wage equality and access to resources. The question also provides valuable information on the level of commitment and accountability of organizations in measuring the long-term impact of their social commitments, which is very important for improving CSR policies and practices.
The data collected from the survey are presented in Figure 3:
The results regarding the indicators and metrics used to assess the contribution of CSR initiatives to reducing economic inequality indicate the following:
  • Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI). A significant proportion of organizations (22.3%) use this index, indicating many aspects of poverty, including access to basic services, accommodation and education.
  • Unemployment rate among certain social groups (URACSG)—18.7%. Using this indicator reflects companies’ interest in the impact of CSR initiatives on unemployment among vulnerable social groups.
  • Access to education and health services (AEHS). The highest proportion of organizations (25.4%) are monitoring access to education and healthcare, highlighting the importance of these essential services in reducing economic inequality.
  • Increase in local economic opportunities (ILEO). The indicator is used by a significant number of companies (20.1%) seeking to measure the effects of CSR initiatives on the creation of new economic opportunities locally.
  • Corporate social responsibility indicators (CSRI). Some organizations (11.3%) use specific CSR metrics, which may include internal metrics and standards for achieving social objectives.
  • Others (Os). A small proportion of organizations (2.2%) use other indicators, which may suggest diversity in approaches or the availability of industry-specific assessment methods.
These distributions highlight differences in companies’ approaches to measuring the impact of CSR initiatives. The most commonly used indicators are those relating to access to basic services and socio-economic conditions, while specific CSR metrics and other indicators have less weight (Abell et al. 2015; Alkire 2015; Chungyalpa 2019).
In addition, there is the question of the methodological approaches used to assess the long-term impact of CSR initiatives on economic inequality. It is essential to understand the effectiveness and sustainability of organizations’ social commitments. It provides information on how companies systematically monitor and analyze the long-term impact of their initiatives, which is key to assessing their real contribution to social and economic justice. The right methodological approaches provide a deeper understanding of the effects of economic inequality and help organizations optimize their strategies and practices for maximum positive impact (see Figure 4).
The data collected reveal the following:
  • Longitudinal studies and analyses (LSA). The highest proportion of organizations (27.4%) use longitudinal research, indicating their commitment to long-term tracking of the impact of CSR initiatives. This allows for monitoring changes over time and assessing the long-term effects of economic inequality.
  • Qualitative research and case studies (QRCS). Many companies (22.1%) are using qualitative research and case studies, which implies a focus on in-depth and contextualized case studies. This helps uncover specific effects and practices that cannot be fully captured through quantitative methods.
  • Comparative analysis using other companies or industries (CAUOCI). Comparative analysis has been chosen by 18.9% of organizations, reflecting the interest in comparing the effectiveness of CSR initiatives across companies and industries. This can provide useful insights into successful practices and areas for improvement.
  • Socio-economic impact modeling (SEIM). Socio-economic impact modeling is used by 15.3% of organizations, which implies an approach to quantifying complex social and economic interactions and consequences. It allows companies to predict and measure the impact of their initiatives in a detailed way.
  • Periodic reporting and revision of CSR programs (PRRCSRP)—14.4%. Periodic reporting and revisions of CSR programs are important to monitor the progress and effectiveness of initiatives. They provide up-to-date information and help organizations make timely adjustments to their strategies.
  • Others (Os). Approximately 1.9% of companies use other methodological approaches that may be specific to their needs. This highlights the diversity in methods and the scope for innovation in impact assessment approaches.
The decompositions above show that organizations use a combination of different methodological approaches to assess the long-term impact of CSR initiatives. Longitudinal studies and qualitative research are the most frequently chosen, demonstrating a commitment to in-depth and sustainable analysis. Comparative analysis and socio-economic impact modeling also play an important role, providing contextual and quantitative data to improve the effectiveness of CSR initiatives.
Special attention is paid to Bibliometrix’s potential for a deeper analysis of the terminology in the issues covered by generating a so-called “thematic map”. The map is composed of four quadrants formed as a result of the intersection of the degree of development (density) and the degree of relevance (centrality) of the represented keywords, terms, and concepts. As a result, the four quadrants contain information about the concepts that compose:
  • Basic themes (bottom right)—important but also very general themes that are not yet sufficiently developed in the research field;
  • Emerging or declining themes (bottom left)—themes with low density and low centrality represent barely perceptible, emerging or gradually declining themes;
  • Motor themes (top right)—well-developed and important themes to structure the research area;
  • Niche themes (top left)—very highly specialized and peripheral themes (Mühl and De Oliveira 2022).
The thematic map generates insights into the conceptual structure of the issues of methodological aspects of measuring the impact of CSR initiatives on economic growth and inequality in the economy and society (see Figure 5 and Table 3).
In the context of analyzing the impact of CSR on economic inequality, gap analysis provides a valuable perspective to reveal the gaps between the current status and the desired goals of CSR initiatives. It reveals key areas where organizations can improve their efforts to address economic inequality and achieve greater effectiveness in their social responsibilities (Table 4).
Gap analysis provides very useful information to identify differences and gaps in current approaches to measuring the impact of CSR initiatives on economic inequality. Addressing these gaps by applying systematic methods and expanding the indicators used will help to manage social responsibility more effectively and better achieve the goals of reducing economic inequality. Therefore, the implementation of the recommended measures from the gap analysis is key to optimizing CSR strategies and achieving sustainable social outcomes.

5. Discussion

By examining the impact of CSR on economic inequality, the study reveals important aspects discussed in the theoretical literature, as well as in the current practices and approaches used by business organizations.
Integrating CSR into corporate strategies plays a transformative role in linking economic growth to inequality. By focusing on sustainable development goals and promoting inclusive growth, CSR initiatives help link economic profitability with social responsibility. Through the emerging themes of digital finance and human capital, CSR is creating new ways for economic inclusion, especially in the developing world. The focus on energy efficiency, innovation, and environmental governance further demonstrates how responsible corporate practices can stimulate economic development while addressing environmental challenges. As companies adopt CSR-based approaches, they contribute to reducing inequality by supporting fairer labor relations, sustainable wages, and improved access to opportunities. These efforts ultimately promote a more balanced economic structure in which growth is both socially and environmentally sustainable. CSR thus continues to be central to promoting a future in which economic progress is consistent with the values of social justice and environmental governance, advancing the global commitment to sustainable development.
By analyzing data from 146 companies based in Bulgaria and Romania, the study identifies key gaps and areas where efforts to address economic inequality could be improved. These can be used to form the following conclusions:
  • Methodological differences according to the size of enterprises (categories of businesses). One of the key findings is that approaches to measuring the impact of CSR initiatives vary considerably depending on the scale of the work. Small companies often use simpler methods, such as monitoring changes in wages and working conditions, while large companies resort to more complex approaches, such as social and economic indicators. This difference in approaches highlights the need for more tailored strategies adapted to the resources and specific conditions of different-sized companies.
  • Lack of systematic methodologies. The survey reveals that a significant proportion of organizations (6.8%) do not have systematic methods for measuring the impact of CSR initiatives. This lack of structured approaches means that companies may not be completely aware of the impact of their efforts on economic inequalities, leading to inefficiencies and a lack of accountability.
  • Using social and economic indicators. The most commonly used method for impact assessment is social and economic indicators (27.2%). These tools provide objective data and help monitor the long-term effects of CSR initiatives. However, there is potential to expand the range of indicators used, which could provide a more complete view of social and economic outcomes.
  • Variety of assessment methods. The analysis reveals that many organizations (17.7%) use stakeholder surveys and interviews, which indicates the importance of direct feedback from people covered by CSR initiatives. However, incorporating additional and more complex methods, such as qualitative research and socio-economic impact modeling, can improve the understanding and effectiveness of these initiatives.
Based on the results, the recommendations are focused on improving the methodology and effectiveness of CSR initiatives to better address economic inequality:
  • Development of systematic measurement methods. Organizations should develop and implement systematic methods to measure the impact of CSR initiatives. This includes establishing standardized evaluation procedures and indicators to enable more accurate and consistent assessment of social and economic outcomes. The development of structured methodologies will help to better understand the effects and to adequately correct strategies.
  • Customized approaches according to company size (categories of businesses). It is recommended to develop customized impact assessment strategies that reflect the size and resources of the business organization. Small companies can start with basic methods and gradually implement more complex approaches, while large organizations can focus on innovations in evaluation and the use of advanced indicators.
  • Integration of additional indicators. Due to the importance of social and economic indicators, it is important to consider integrating additional indicators and measurements to provide a more complete and justified view of impact. This could include new indicators specific to the industry or region and improving existing methods.
  • Supporting innovation and expanding methodology. Organizations should be open to innovation and new evaluation methods. Introducing new approaches such as qualitative research, socio-economic impact modeling, and comparative analyses can provide a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of the effects of CSR initiatives. Investing in these areas will lead to more effective management and optimization of social responsibility.
  • Periodic reporting and revisions. Regular reporting and revision of CSR programs are important to monitor long-term effects and ensure accountability. Periodic reviews will help organizations identify problems and make necessary corrections in a timely manner, ensuring greater sustainability and effectiveness of initiatives.
The expectation is that by implementing these recommendations, organizations will significantly improve their CSR strategies and achieve more significant results in reducing economic inequality. Successful integration of innovation and systematic approaches will improve social equity and contribute to the sustainable development of society.

6. Conclusions

The systematic literature review, conducted using the PRISMA protocol, analyzes the impact of CSR on economic growth and inequality. A total of 531 relevant scientific publications were selected and analyzed using tools such as Bibliometrix, including a thematic map. The review identifies key themes such as sustainable development, economic growth, and corporate strategy and emphasizes the importance of CSR in promoting inclusive growth and addressing social inequality. The results highlight the role of CSR in promoting energy efficiency, innovation, and fair labor relations while contributing to economic and environmental sustainability.
Researching the impact of CSR on economic inequality also provides valuable insights into understanding current practices and methodologies used by business organizations. The results of the study highlight how different methodological approaches to evaluating the effectiveness of CSR initiatives can help reduce economic inequality and reveal areas where further development is needed.
Our study identified significant differences in approaches to measuring the impact of CSR initiatives depending on the size of enterprises (categories of businesses) and the resources available. Smaller companies often focus on simpler methods, such as monitoring changes in wages and working conditions, while larger organizations use more advanced social and economic indicators. This broadening of methodologies is essential to ensure an accurate and consistent assessment of the impact of CSR initiatives.
The study also identified a lack of systematic methodologies in some organizations. The lack of structured approaches to measuring impact highlights the need to develop better methodologies and tools to enable companies to understand and maximize the impact of their social responsibility efforts.
The study also has some limitations. First, the limited representation of companies from Bulgaria and Romania only may limit the generalizations of the results to broader geographical and industry contexts. Second, survey data are only one of many possible sources of information and may not fully reflect the complexity of the issue. Third, the existence of different interpretations of impact measurement terms and methodologies may create difficulties in comparing results.
Despite these limitations, the survey results suggest significant opportunities for the implementation and application of CSR initiatives. To successfully implement the proposed recommendations, companies need to adapt and increase their assessment methods, invest in innovation, and develop customized strategies. Developing the indicators used and introducing new methods of analysis will allow organizations to gain a more complete and substantiated perspective on the effects of CSR initiatives.
The guidelines for future research include the following:
  • Expanding the geographical and industrial scope of research. Studies that cover different countries and industries will provide a more complete view of the effectiveness of CSR initiatives in a global context.
  • Integrating qualitative research. In addition to quantitative data, future research should include qualitative studies to provide a deeper understanding of the impact of CSR initiatives on different social groups.
  • The development of new measurement methodologies. Developing innovative methodologies for assessing the long-term impact of CSR initiatives can help organizations achieve more accurate and reliable results.
As a result of our research, we can conclude that the categories “Corporate Social Responsibility” (CSR), “Economic Growth”, and “Inequality” interact in a specific way, generating added value and synergy, reflected in the following connections: between CSR and economic growth, a sustainable business model is formed, which not only improves the financial performance of companies but also contributes to their long-term stability. The relationship between CSR and inequality manifests in the development of ethical practices for social justice and inclusion, leading to a more equitable distribution of resources and opportunities in society. On the other hand, economic growth and inequality deepen economic disparities, potentially creating new social challenges.
Most significant, however, is the triple interaction between CSR, economic growth, and inequality. This interaction is a key condition for building an integrated sustainable strategy.
Such a strategy can successfully combine social, economic, and environmental goals, contributing to the long-term sustainability of businesses and a fairer distribution of the benefits of economic growth (see Figure 6).
Our model of the synergies between CSR, economic growth, and inequality is designed as a basic framework to explore these complex relationships. Although it currently provides mostly conceptual guidance, we believe it will serve as a solid foundation for future research and practical applications. We consider that the model has significant potential to be further developed and supported with empirical data and examples, which will establish it as an important tool for analysis and management in the field of corporate social responsibility.
By actively implementing the proposed recommendations and guidelines, companies would improve their social responsibility strategies to make a significant contribution to reducing economic inequality. These efforts would not only improve social justice but also strengthen corporate image and contribute to the sustainable development of society. Investment in better working conditions, more equitable access to services and resources, and innovation in evaluating CSR initiatives will lead to a fairer economy.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.C. and G.C.; methodology, G.C. and R.K.-H.; software, K.L.; validation, M.C., A.A. and K.L.; formal analysis, A.A.; investigation, M.C., G.C., A.A. and K.L.; resources, K.L.; data curation, R.K.-H.; writing—original draft preparation, M.C.; writing—review and editing, G.C. and A.A.; visualization, R.K.-H.; supervision, G.C.; project administration, M.C. and R.K.-H.; funding acquisition, G.C., A.A. and K.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

Institute for Scientific Research of Tsenov Academy of Economics, Svishtov, Bulgaria: 4-2024.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available upon request from the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Abell, Peter, Ofer Engel, and Henry P. Wynn. 2015. Corporate Social Responsibility, Inequality and Corporate Governance. In The True Value of CSR. Edited by Barbara Fryzel. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 163–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Ahen, Frederick, and Joseph Amankwah-Amoah. 2018. Institutional Voids and the Philanthropization of CSR Practices: Insights from Developing Economies. Sustainability 10: 2400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Alkire, Sabina. 2015. Global Multidimensional Poverty Index. The Pakistan Development Review 54: 287–99. [Google Scholar]
  4. Allen, Myria W., and Christopher A. Craig. 2016. Rethinking corporate social responsibility in the age of climate change: A communication perspective. International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility 1: 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Asongu, Simplice, and Nicholas Odhiambo. 2021. Thresholds of income inequality that mitigate the role of gender inclusive education in promoting gender economic inclusion in sub-Saharan Africa. Social Responsibility Journal 17: 106–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Balaceanu, Cristina, Diana Apostol, and Daniela Penu. 2012. Sustainability and Social Justice. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 62: 677–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Bruton, Garry, Christopher Sutter, and Anna-Katharina Lenz. 2021. Economic Inequality–Is Entrepreneurship the Cause or the Solution? A Review and Research Agenda for Emerging Economies. Journal of Business Venturing 36: 106095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Carroll, Archie B. 1991. The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders. Business Horizons 34: 39–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Carroll, Archie B. 1999. Corporate Social Responsibility: Evolution of a Definitional Construct. Business & Society 38: 268–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Carroll, Archie B. 2009. A History of Corporate Social Responsibility: Concepts and Practices. In The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility, 1st ed. Edited by Andrew Crane, Dirk Matten, Abagail McWilliams, Jeremy Moon and Donald S. Siegel. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 19–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Carroll, Archie B. 2016. Carroll’s Pyramid of CSR: Taking Another Look. International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility 1: 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Chungyalpa, Wangchuk. 2019. Understanding Business Sustainability: The What, the Why, and the How of Sustainable Business Practices. Indian Journal of Sustainable Development 5: 24–37. [Google Scholar]
  13. Cradden, Conor. 2020. Repoliticizing Management: A Theory of Corporate Legitimacy. Corporate Social Responsibility Series; London and New York: Routledge, pp. 1–179. [Google Scholar]
  14. Deng, Dejun, Yi Wu, and Linyi Qin. 2023. CSR Preference, Market Competition, and Corporate Financial Performance. Managerial and Decision Economics 44: 1396–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Derevianko, Olena H. 2019. Corporate Reputation Management: Theory and Applied Rating Approach. In Innovative Entrepreneurship: Approach to Facing Relevant Socio-Humanitarian and Technological Challenges. Lviv: Publishing House “Liha-Pres.”, pp. 118–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Donaldson, Thomas, and Thomas W. Dunfee. 2017. Toward a unified conception of business ethics: Integrative social contracts theory. In Corporate Social Responsibility. London: Routledge, pp. 175–207. [Google Scholar]
  17. Elkington, John. 1997. Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. Oxford: Capstone. 402p. [Google Scholar]
  18. Enderle, Georges. 2018. Corporate responsibility for less income inequality. Review of Social Economy 76: 399–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Esenyel, Vildan. 2020. Key elements of corporate reputation. Journal of Ekonomi 2: 76–79. [Google Scholar]
  20. Etikan, Julie. 2024. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Its Influence on Organizational Reputation. Journal of Public Relations 2: 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Falkowski, Krzysztof. 2024. Economic Inequality and Its Relevance to Social and Economic Resilience in East Asia. In Regional Cooperation and Resilience in East Asia, 1st ed. Edited by Sebastian Bobowski. London: Routledge, pp. 101–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Freeman, R. Edward. 1984. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Pitman Series in Business and Public Policy; Boston: Pitman. 276p. [Google Scholar]
  23. Freeman, R. Edward. 2015. Stakeholder Theory. In Wiley Encyclopedia of Management, 1st ed. Edited by Cary L. Cooper. Hoboken: Wiley, pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Freeman, R. Edward, and John McVea. 2017. A Stakeholder Approach to Strategic Management. In The Blackwell Handbook of Strategic Management. Hoboken: Wiley, pp. 183–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Friedman, Andrew L., and Samantha Miles. 2002. Developing Stakeholder Theory. Journal of Management Studies 39: 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Fu, Shuke, Mengxia Tian, Yingchen Ge, Tingting Yao, and Jiali Tian. 2024. Influencing Factors and Mechanisms of Corporate Social Responsibility Reputation under Green and Low-Carbon Transition: Evidence from Chinese Listed Companies. Energies 17: 2044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Gutterman, Alan S. 2024. Strategic Planning for Sustainability. A Guide for Sustainable Entrepreneurs. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 309p. [Google Scholar]
  28. Imran, Muhammad, Muhammad Kamran Khan, Shabbir Alam, Salman Wahab, Muhammad Tufail, and Zhang Jijian. 2024. The implications of the ecological footprint and renewable energy usage on the financial stability of South Asian countries. Financial Innovation 10: 102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Inusah, Husein, and Peter Sena Gawu. 2021. The Social Contract Theory and Corporation Moral Obligation. E-LOGOS 28: 4–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Jamali, Dima. 2008. A Stakeholder Approach to Corporate Social Responsibility: A Fresh Perspective into Theory and Practice. Journal of Business Ethics 82: 213–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Janang, Joanne Shaza, Corina Joseph, and Roshima Said. 2020. Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsibility Society Disclosure: The Application of Legitimacy Theory. International Journal of Business and Society 21: 660–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Javed, Muzhar, Muhammad Amir Rashid, Ghulam Hussain, and Hafiz Yasir Ali. 2020. The Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility on Corporate Reputation and Firm Financial Performance: Moderating Role of Responsible Leadership. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 27: 1395–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Kakabadse, Nada K., Cecile Rozuel, and Linda Lee-Davies. 2005. Corporate Social Responsibility and Stakeholder Approach: A Conceptual Review. International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics 1: 277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Katsoulakos, Takis, and Yannis Katsoulacos. 2007. Integrating Corporate Responsibility Principles and Stakeholder Approaches into Mainstream Strategy: A Stakeholder-oriented and Integrative Strategic Management Framework. The International Journal of Business in Society 7: 355–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Kim, Byung-Jik, Youngkyun Chang, and Tae-Hyun Kim. 2023. Translating Corporate Social Responsibility into Financial Performance: Exploring Roles of Work Engagement and Strategic Coherence. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 30: 2555–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Koh, Sin Yee. 2020. Inequality. In International Encyclopedia of Human Geography. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 269–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kolk, Ans, and Rob van Tulder. 2010. International business, corporate social responsibility and sustainable development. International Business Review 19: 119–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Malay, Olivier E. 2021. Improving government and business coordination through the use of consistent SDGs indicators. Ecological Economics 184: 106991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Margolis, Joshua D., and James P. Walsh. 2003. Misery Loves Companies: Rethinking Social Initiatives by Business. Administrative Science Quarterly 48: 268–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Menezes, David Curtinaz, Diego Mota Vieira, and Jessica Eloísa de Oliveira. 2022. Stakeholder Theory: Evolution and the Proposal of a Research Agenda. Revista Ibero-Americana Estratégia 21: e18882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Michelon, Giovanna, Michelle Rodrigue, and Elisabetta Trevisan. 2020. The Marketization of a Social Movement: Activists, Shareholders and CSR Disclosure. Accounting, Organizations and Society 80: 101074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Michetti, Melania, and Mehmet Pinar. 2019. Forest Fires Across Italian Regions and Implications for Climate Change: A Panel Data Analysis. Environmental and Resource Economics 72: 207–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Mühl, Diego Durante, and Letícia De Oliveira. 2022. A Bibliometric and Thematic Approach to Agriculture 4.0. Heliyon 8: e09369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Newell, Peter, and Jedrzej George Frynas. 2007. Beyond csr? Business, Poverty and Social Justice: An Introduction. Third World Quarterly 28: 669–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Ntiamoah, Evans Brako, Priscilla Oforiwaa Egyiri, and Michael Kwamega. 2014. Corporate Social Responsibility Awareness, Firm Commitment and Organizational Performance. Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies 2: 91–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Olateju, Dare John, Olakunle Abraham Olateju, Seyi Vincent Adeoye, and Idris Suleiman Ilyas. 2021. A Critical Review of the Application of the Legitimacy Theory to Corporate Social Responsibility. International Journal of Managerial Studies and Research 9: 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Orlitzky, Marc. 2009. Corporate Social Performance and Financial Performance: A Research Synthesis. In The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility, 1st ed. Edited by Andrew Crane, Dirk Matten, Abagail McWilliams, Jeremy Moon and Donald S. Siegel. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 113–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Orlitzky, Marc, Frank L. Schmidt, and Sara L. Rynes. 2003. Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis. Organization Studies 24: 403–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Pekovic, Sanja, and Sebastian Vogt. 2021. The Fit between Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Governance: The Impact on a Firm’s Financial Performance. Review of Managerial Science 15: 1095–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Pesqueux, Yvon, and Salma Damak-Ayadi. 2005. Stakeholder Theory in Perspective. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society 5: 5–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Pires, Vanessa, and Guilherme Trez. 2018. Corporate Reputation: A Discussion on Construct Definition and Measurement and Its Relation to Performance. Revista de Gestão 25: 47–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Porter, Michael E., and Mark R. Kramer. 2011. Creating Shared Value. Harvard Business Review 89: 62–77. [Google Scholar]
  53. Ravallion, Martin. 2014. Income Inequality in the Developing World. Science 344: 851–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Rolf, Skylar. 2023. Responding to a Societal Crisis: How Does Corporate Social Responsibility Engagement Influence Corporate Reputation? Journal of General Management. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Sandoval-Gomez, Raul Junior, Jesus Antonio Alvarez-Cedillo, Maria Teresa Sarabia-Alonso, Teodoro Alvarez-Sanchez, Rebeca Perez-Garcia, and Alexis Gonzalez-Vasquez. 2022. Implementation of business culture for Mexican SMEs versus globalization 4.0. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies 4: 34–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Santoso, Eko Budi, Basuki Basuki, and Isnalita Isnalita. 2024. Standardized corporate social responsibility disclosure, assurance, and real earnings management: Evidence from developing countries. Journal of Accounting and Investment 25: 48–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Schiopoiu Burlea, Adriana, and Ion Popa. 2013. Legitimacy Theory. In Encyclopedia of Corporate Social Responsibility. Edited by Samuel O. Idowu, Nicholas Capaldi, Liangrong Zu and Ananda Das Gupta. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 1579–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Schmidt, Andreas T., and Daan Juijn. 2024. Economic Inequality and the Long-Term Future. Politics, Philosophy & Economics 23: 67–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Schwartz, Mark S., and Archie B. Carroll. 2003. Corporate Social Responsibility: A Three-Domain Approach. Business Ethics Quarterly 13: 503–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Sequeira, Lavina, and Stanley J. Ward. 2023. Social Contract Theory. In Ethical Leadership. Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 16–79. Available online: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85189581814&partnerID=40&md5=cdf21b0a0ff507732a96c7f279e3862f (accessed on 8 August 2024).
  61. Shang, Meng, Zhengzhong Ma, Yanzhi Su, Fiza Shaheen, Haroon ur Rashid Khan, Lokman Mohd Tahir, Sasmoko, Muhammad Khalid Anser, and Khalid Zaman. 2022. Understanding the importance of sustainable ecological innovation in reducing carbon emissions: Investigating the green energy demand, financial development, natural resource management, industrialisation and urbanisation channels. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja 36: 2137823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Simangunsong, Humala, Baldry Pitre Stewart, and Debortoli Debortoli. 2023. The Impact of Economic Inequality on Social Disparities: A Quantitative Analysis. Jurnal Sosial, Sains, Terapan Dan Riset (Sosateris) 11: 159–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Stratling, Rebecca. 2007. The Legitimacy of Corporate Social Responsibility. Corporate Ownership and Control 4: 80–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Tweedie, Dale, and James Hazelton. 2019. Economic Inequality: Problems and Perspectives for Interdisciplinary Accounting Research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 32: 1982–2003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Vo, Hong, Tien Nguyen, and Hieu V. Phan. 2024. Building a sustainable future: The role of corporate social responsibility in climate policy uncertainty management. Finance Research Letters 60: 104831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Voitchovsky, Sarah. 2011. Inequality and Economic Growth. In The Oxford Handbook of Economic Inequality. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 549–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Volchek, Ruslan, Hanna Moskaliuk, Liudmyla Halan, and Elena Dancheva. 2024. Implementation of Corporate Social Responsibility in the Context of Integration with the Enterprise Management Information System. Naukovyi Visnyk Natsionalnoho Hirnychoho Universytetu 1: 154–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Wahlrab, Amentahru. 2023. Social Contract Theory. In Handbook of the Anthropocene. Edited by Nathanaël Wallenhorst and Christoph Wulf. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 1207–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Windsor, Duane. 2018. Dynamics for Integrative Social Contracts Theory: Norm Evolution and Individual Mobility. Journal of Business Ethics 149: 83–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Yuncu, Volkan, and Celil Koparal. 2017. Fundamental Paradigms for Corporate Reputation. Annals of the University Dunarea de Jos of Galati: Fascicle: I, Economics & Applied Informatics 23: 60–65. [Google Scholar]
  71. Zhang, Zhongqingyang, Zhongbao Zhou, Zhijian Zeng, and Yuxuan Zou. 2023. How does heterogeneous green technology innovation affect air quality and economic development in Chinese cities? Spatial and nonlinear perspective analysis. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge 8: 100419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Zsolnai, Laszlo. 2011. Corporate Legitimacy. SSRN Electronic Journal. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Jrfm 17 00546 g001
Figure 1. Three Fields Plot with data on keywords, country/region, and source of publications in the sample. (Source: prepared by the authors using Bibliometrix).
Figure 1. Three Fields Plot with data on keywords, country/region, and source of publications in the sample. (Source: prepared by the authors using Bibliometrix).
Jrfm 17 00546 g001
Jrfm 17 00546 g002
Figure 2. Measuring the impact of CSR initiatives in percentage. (Source: authors’ own research).
Figure 2. Measuring the impact of CSR initiatives in percentage. (Source: authors’ own research).
Jrfm 17 00546 g002
Jrfm 17 00546 g003
Figure 3. Indicators used for identifying the contribution of CSR initiatives to reducing economic inequality in percentage. (Source: authors’ own research).
Figure 3. Indicators used for identifying the contribution of CSR initiatives to reducing economic inequality in percentage. (Source: authors’ own research).
Jrfm 17 00546 g003
Jrfm 17 00546 g004
Figure 4. Methodological approaches for assessing the long-term impact of CSR initiatives on economic inequality in percentage. (Source: authors’ own research).
Figure 4. Methodological approaches for assessing the long-term impact of CSR initiatives on economic inequality in percentage. (Source: authors’ own research).
Jrfm 17 00546 g004
Jrfm 17 00546 g005
Figure 5. Thematic map of conceptual structure in statics. (Source: prepared by the authors using Bibliometrix).
Figure 5. Thematic map of conceptual structure in statics. (Source: prepared by the authors using Bibliometrix).
Jrfm 17 00546 g005
Jrfm 17 00546 g006
Figure 6. Synergy between CSR, economic growth, and inequality. (Source: authors’ own research).
Figure 6. Synergy between CSR, economic growth, and inequality. (Source: authors’ own research).
Jrfm 17 00546 g006
Table 1. Challenges for the implementation of CSR.
Table 1. Challenges for the implementation of CSR.
Potential BarriersSpecificity
Lack of commitment from senior managementSenior management engagement is key to the successful implementation of CSR strategies. Without the support and active involvement of senior management, initiatives may remain a low priority.
Limited resourcesSmall and medium-sized business organizations often have limited financial and human resources to invest in CSR.
Lack of transparency and measurement of resultsMeasuring the impact of CSR is a complex task that requires transparency and the availability of accurate data.
Conflict between economic and social goalsCompanies sometimes face a dilemma between the pursuit of profit and a commitment to social responsibility.
Table 2. Estimates of how to measure the impact of CSR initiatives versus company size.
Table 2. Estimates of how to measure the impact of CSR initiatives versus company size.
Indicator/Measuring the Impact of CSR InitiativesCategories of BusinessesTotal
SmallMediumLarge
Count%Count%Count%Count%
Monitoring changes in wages and working conditions928.12323.7211.13423.1
Assessing access to services and resources412.51818.6422.22617.7
Stakeholder surveys and interviews26.31717.5422.22315.6
Using social and economic indicators1134.32626.8633.34329.3
Others26.377.215.6106.8
Lack of a systematic method of measurement412.566.215.6117.5
Total32100.097100.018100.0147100.0
Table 3. Keywords and terms grouped by themes that compose the conceptual structure in statics.
Table 3. Keywords and terms grouped by themes that compose the conceptual structure in statics.
Themes Keywords
Basic themes
Sustainable development goalDeveloping world
Economic growthEconomic development
Corporate strategyGlobalization
Governance approachProfitability
Emerging/declining themes
Future prospectInvestments
EmploymentDigital finance
Human capitalDigital storage
Wages
Motor themes
Energy efficiencyIndustrial performance
EconometricsClimate change
Labor relationsEnvironmental economics
InnovationsInternational trade
Firm size
Niche themes
Environmental managementRisk assessment
Environmental sustainability
Table 4. Gap analysis results (findings).
Table 4. Gap analysis results (findings).
Guidelines of the Method ApplicationAcquired Results
Weaknesses in measurement methodologiesThe initial gap analysis shows that a significant percentage of organizations (6.8%) still do not have a systematic method for measuring the impact of CSR initiatives. This reveals a major gap that needs to be addressed to achieve greater transparency and accountability. Developing structured and effective measurement methodologies will allow organizations to more accurately assess the effectiveness of their initiatives and adjust their strategies in line with actual results.
Differences in tools usedGap analysis reveals differences in the use of assessment tools between small and large enterprises. Small companies prefer methods such as monitoring changes in wages and working conditions, while large business organizations tend to use more complex approaches such as social and economic indicators and qualitative research. This difference in approaches highlights the need to adapt the methodology depending on the size of the organization (categories of businesses), which can help to address identified gaps and achieve better results in addressing economic inequalities.
Extension of the indicators usedThe research shows that the use of social and economic indicators is among the most popular methods for impact assessment. However, only 27.2% of organizations are using this approach, creating a gap between the current application and the potential opportunity for more detailed evaluation by including additional indicators. Integrating new and diverse indicators can provide a more complex and justified view of the impact of CSR initiatives, thereby improving the understanding and management of social and economic outcomes.
Availability of non-standard methodsThe presence of a small percentage (2.7%) of organizations using non-standard measurement methods indicates the potential for innovation in the field of evaluating CSR initiatives. Although these methods are limited, they offer unique insights and opportunities to develop new approaches that can be adapted and applied on a broader basis.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Chipriyanov, M.; Chipriyanova, G.; Krasteva-Hristova, R.; Atanasov, A.; Luchkov, K. Researching the Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Economic Growth and Inequality: Methodological Aspects. J. Risk Financial Manag. 2024, 17, 546. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm17120546

AMA Style

Chipriyanov M, Chipriyanova G, Krasteva-Hristova R, Atanasov A, Luchkov K. Researching the Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Economic Growth and Inequality: Methodological Aspects. Journal of Risk and Financial Management. 2024; 17(12):546. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm17120546

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chipriyanov, Mihail, Galina Chipriyanova, Radosveta Krasteva-Hristova, Atanas Atanasov, and Kiril Luchkov. 2024. "Researching the Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Economic Growth and Inequality: Methodological Aspects" Journal of Risk and Financial Management 17, no. 12: 546. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm17120546

APA Style

Chipriyanov, M., Chipriyanova, G., Krasteva-Hristova, R., Atanasov, A., & Luchkov, K. (2024). Researching the Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Economic Growth and Inequality: Methodological Aspects. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 17(12), 546. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm17120546

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop
  NODES
Association 2
coding 2
Community 1
Frameworks 1
games 2
games 2
Idea 3
idea 3
innovation 19
Interesting 3
Intern 47
iOS 5
Javascript 2
languages 2
mac 35
Note 8
OOP 2
os 191
text 21
Training 2
twitter 1
visual 5
web 2