IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bal/journl/2256-074220239530.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Toolkit For Social Responsibility Of Business In The System Of Inclusive Corporate Management Of Sustainable Development Of Ukrainian Agricultural Companies

Author

Listed:
  • Sergii Stepanenko

    (Kharkiv National University of Radio Electronics, Ukraine)

  • Karina Nemashkalo

    (Simon Kuznets Kharkiv National University of Economics, Ukraine)

  • Liudmyla Salionovych

    (National Technical University "Kharkiv Politechnic Institute", Ukraine)

Abstract

The research subject is the social responsibility of agribusinesses in the context of current corporate governance practices. Methodology. The study uses the following methods of economic research: content analysis method (when processing scientific sources and reviewing thematic literature); abstract and logical method (when substantiating the defining principles and criteria of social responsibility of business entities in the agricultural sector); statistical observations and economical and statistical calculations (when analysing indicators of the achieved state of social responsibility of agricultural companies); abstract and logical method (when substantiating conclusions to the study). The research is aimed at finding tools to increase the social responsibility of agrarian business through the transformation of the corporate culture of agricultural management of Ukrainian companies. Conclusion. Ukraine has a strong agricultural potential. However, achieving national and global sustainable development goals, which are relevant shortly, requires a change in business values and strategic guidelines. Such values should be aimed at solving the problems of protecting the environment, preserving natural resources, improving the quality and safety of agri-food products, and improving the quality of life of the rural population. The solution to these problems is inextricably linked to voluntary, socially responsible agribusiness initiatives. The analysis carried out showed that there is a high level of agribusiness social responsibility in the management of the activities of large-scale agricultural enterprises in Ukraine, which is reflected in the voluntary non-financial reports. In small- and medium-sized agribusinesses, the perception of the need for social responsibility is limited and constrained by a lack of financial resources. The calculated indicators show a low level of social responsibility in the agricultural business of small- and medium-sized agricultural enterprises in Ukraine. The level of chemicalisation of agricultural production and ploughing of agricultural land is high. There are significant problems with the use of rural labour resources and the development of rural areas. The main problems were identified in the spectrum of irrational use of land and labour resources and the low quality of life of the population in rural areas of Ukraine. The processes of recognition of the values and benefits of socially responsible agribusiness in Ukraine are slow. As a tool for increasing the social responsibility of agribusinesses in Ukraine, a system of principles and criteria of socially responsible business is proposed for implementation in the corporate governance of Ukrainian agribusinesses.

Suggested Citation

  • Sergii Stepanenko & Karina Nemashkalo & Liudmyla Salionovych, 2023. "Toolkit For Social Responsibility Of Business In The System Of Inclusive Corporate Management Of Sustainable Development Of Ukrainian Agricultural Companies," Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, Publishing house "Baltija Publishing", vol. 9(5).
  • Handle: RePEc:bal:journl:2256-0742:2023:9:5:30
    DOI: 10.30525/2256-0742/2023-9-5-252-260
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.baltijapublishing.lv/index.php/issue/article/view/2282/2281
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://www.baltijapublishing.lv/index.php/issue/article/view/2282
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.30525/2256-0742/2023-9-5-252-260?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abagail McWilliams & Donald Siegel, 2000. "Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: correlation or misspecification?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(5), pages 603-609, May.
    2. Jane Mills & Hannah Chiswell & Peter Gaskell & Paul Courtney & Beth Brockett & George Cusworth & Matt Lobley, 2021. "Developing Farm-Level Social Indicators for Agri-Environment Schemes: A Focus on the Agents of Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-22, July.
    3. Antonio Martos-Pedrero & David Jiménez-Castillo & Francisco Joaquín Cortés-García, 2022. "Examining drivers and outcomes of corporate social responsibility in agri-food firms," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 68(3), pages 79-86.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Оlha Flyarkovska & Viktoria Melnychuk & Ryslan Dumenko, 2023. "A Comprehensive Approach To The Management Of Psychological Services In The Education System Of Ukraine: Economic Component," Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, Publishing house "Baltija Publishing", vol. 9(5).
    2. Kamini Gupta & Donal Crilly & Thomas Greckhamer, 2020. "Stakeholder engagement strategies, national institutions, and firm performance: A configurational perspective," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(10), pages 1869-1900, October.
    3. Xueyan Dong & Jingyu Gao & Sunny Li Sun & Kangtao Ye, 2021. "Doing extreme by doing good," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 291-315, March.
    4. John A. Parnell, 2017. "Cronyism from the Perspective of the Firm: A Cross-National Assessment of Nonmarket Strategy," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 32(Fall 2017), pages 47-74.
    5. Hua Tang, 2022. "The Effect of ESG Performance on Corporate Innovation in China: The Mediating Role of Financial Constraints and Agency Cost," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-21, March.
    6. Preeti Sharma & Priyanka Panday & R. C. Dangwal, 2020. "Determinants of environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) disclosure: a study of Indian companies," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 17(4), pages 208-217, December.
    7. Scholtens, Bert, 2008. "A note on the interaction between corporate social responsibility and financial performance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 46-55, December.
    8. Omaima A.G. Hassan & Peter Romilly, 2018. "Relations between corporate economic performance, environmental disclosure and greenhouse gas emissions: New insights," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(7), pages 893-909, November.
    9. Dirk Boehe & Luciano Barin Cruz, 2010. "Corporate Social Responsibility, Product Differentiation Strategy and Export Performance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 91(2), pages 325-346, February.
    10. Franck Brulhart & Sandrine Gherra & Bertrand V. Quelin, 2019. "Do Stakeholder Orientation and Environmental Proactivity Impact Firm Profitability?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 25-46, August.
    11. Won-Kyu Lim & Cheong-Kyu Park, 2022. "Mandating Gender Diversity and the Value Relevance of Sustainable Development Disclosure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-12, June.
    12. Hajar Mouatassim Lahmini & Abdelmajid Ibenrissoul, 2017. "Quel effet de la Responsabilité Sociétale de l'Entreprise sur la performance financière d'un opérateur minier/ Approche par l'Analyse Coûts-Bénéfices," Post-Print hal-01746022, HAL.
    13. Alan Gregory & Julie Whittaker, 2013. "Exploring the Valuation of Corporate Social Responsibility—A Comparison of Research Methods," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 116(1), pages 1-20, August.
    14. Belen Lopez & Alfonso Torres & Alberto Ruozzi & Jose Antonio Vicente, 2020. "Main Factors for Understanding High Impacts on CSR Dimensions in the Finance Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-17, March.
    15. Md. Rabiul Islam & Syed Zabid Hossain, 2019. "Conceptual mapping of shared value creation by the private commercial banks in Bangladesh," Asian Journal of Sustainability and Social Responsibility, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 1-20, December.
    16. Kalpana Tokas & Kartik Yadav, 2023. "Foreign Ownership and Corporate Social Responsibility: The Case of an Emerging Market," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 24(6), pages 1302-1325, December.
    17. Zhonghua Zhao & Fanchen Meng & Yin He & Zhouyang Gu, 2019. "The Influence of Corporate Social Responsibility on Competitive Advantage with Multiple Mediations from Social Capital and Dynamic Capabilities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, January.
    18. Mario Vaupel & David Bendig & Denise Fischer-Kreer & Malte Brettel, 2023. "The Role of Share Repurchases for Firms’ Social and Environmental Sustainability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(2), pages 401-428, March.
    19. Danny Cassimon & Peter-Jan Engelen & Luc Liedekerke, 2016. "When do Firms Invest in Corporate Social Responsibility? A Real Option Framework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 15-29, August.
    20. Stefan Lewandowski, 2017. "Corporate Carbon and Financial Performance: The Role of Emission Reductions," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(8), pages 1196-1211, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    agricultural business; inclusive agricultural management; Ukrainian agricultural companies; social responsibility; corporate culture; sustainable development;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q10 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - General
    • M14 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Corporate Culture; Diversity; Social Responsibility

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bal:journl:2256-0742:2023:9:5:30. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Anita Jankovska (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.