IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i12p5141-d375628.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Corporate Social Responsibility of Companies Producing PFOA Containing Waxes for Cross-Country Skiing

Author

Listed:
  • Pavla Svermova

    (Department of Business Administration and Management, Faculty of Economics, Technical University of Liberec, 46117 Liberec, Czech Republic)

  • Miroslav Cernik

    (Institute for Nanomaterials, Advanced Technology and Innovation, Technical University of Liberec, 46117 Liberec, Czech Republic)

Abstract

The chemical industry is a particularly sensitive sector that very often works with toxic, harmful and dangerous substances. This paper offers insight into the corporate socially responsible (CSR) behaviour of a specific segment of the chemical industry—the production of fluorinated ski waxes. Perfluorinated compounds, which excel in water and fat stability and repellency, are nowadays considered as harmful to human health and nature. During 2020, the basic compound, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), will be banned, and finding its replacement will be a difficult task. So far, there are no alternatives in terms of environmentally friendly compounds that can maintain the desired properties of extreme ski glide. Based on a questionnaire distributed to twenty wax producers worldwide, we have concluded that, although the attitudes of companies towards CSR certification was rather negative (87.5%), and companies had not developed or documented any CSR policy/strategy with specific goals, they found CSR activities/instruments beneficial and important. The survey highlighted the fact that companies were aware that their products are dangerous for the environment, and that environmental issues are important for all of the responders, despite them being mostly without certified systems. The size of a company had no significant effect on their attitude. Micro and small producers were involved in raising awareness of environmental policies and responsibilities to the same extent (maybe even more) as medium or large companies. We also found varying behaviours between companies involved in environmental programs and those who were not. The companies involved felt a strong attitude towards all three pillars of CSR, which are the environment, as well as social and economic aspects. Those companies not involved had a strong attitude towards their customers, but not towards their employees, suppliers or the wider community. They also had stronger feelings about the quality of their products and economic profit, but without a strong approach to the related environmental issues. The Norwegian approach and the commitment of the company Swix to CSR are two positive examples leading to a fluorine-free future.

Suggested Citation

  • Pavla Svermova & Miroslav Cernik, 2020. "Corporate Social Responsibility of Companies Producing PFOA Containing Waxes for Cross-Country Skiing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-17, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:12:p:5141-:d:375628
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/12/5141/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/12/5141/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Caroline D. Ditlev-Simonsen & Heidi Weltzien Hoivik & Øyvind Ihlen, 2015. "The Historical Development of Corporate Social Responsibility in Norway," CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance, in: Samuel O. Idowu & René Schmidpeter & Matthias S. Fifka (ed.), Corporate Social Responsibility in Europe, edition 127, pages 177-196, Springer.
    2. Stefano Duglio & Riccardo Beltramo, 2016. "Environmental Management and Sustainable Labels in the Ski Industry: A Critical Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-13, August.
    3. Karl Widerquist, 2018. "The Bottom Line," Exploring the Basic Income Guarantee, in: A Critical Analysis of Basic Income Experiments for Researchers, Policymakers, and Citizens, chapter 0, pages 93-98, Palgrave Macmillan.
    4. Alexandra ZBUCHEA & Florina PÎNZARU, 2017. "Tailoring CSR Strategy to Company Size?," Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, College of Management, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration, vol. 5(3), pages 415-437, September.
    5. Irina Lock & Peter Seele, 2015. "Analyzing Sector‐Specific CSR Reporting: Social and Environmental Disclosure to Investors in the Chemicals and Banking and Insurance Industry," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(2), pages 113-128, March.
    6. Delmas, Magali A. & Montes-Sancho, Maria J., 2011. "An Institutional Perspective on the Diffusion of International Management System Standards: The Case of the Environmental Management Standard ISO 14001," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 103-132, January.
    7. Hongmin An & Cunde Xiao & Minghu Ding, 2019. "The Spatial Pattern of Ski Areas and Its Driving Factors in China: A Strategy for Healthy Development of the Ski Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-22, June.
    8. Filippo Bazzanella, 2019. "Perceptions and Role of Tourist Destination Residents Compared to Other Event Stakeholders in a Small-Scale Sports Event. The Case of the FIS World Junior Alpine Ski Championships 2019 in Val di Fassa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-28, December.
    9. Agneta Sundström & Zahra Ahmadi & Kristina Mickelsson, 2019. "Implementing Social Sustainability for Innovative Industrial Work Environments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-16, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jing Ma & Zhaoyun Yin & Zhengbing Guo, 2021. "Meta-Evaluation for the Evaluation of Environmental Management: Standards and Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-18, February.
    2. Sylvelin Foldøy & Trude Furunes & Åse Helene Bakkevig Dagsland & Annie Haver, 2021. "Responsibility beyond the Board Room? A Systematic Review of Responsible Leadership: Operationalizations, Antecedents and Outcomes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-41, September.
    3. Jesús Barreal & Berta Ferrer-Rosell & Eduard Cristobal-Fransi & Gil Jannes, 2021. "Influence of Service Valuation and Package Cost on Market Segmentation: The Case of Online Demand for Spanish and Andorra Ski Resorts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-20, March.

    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. Ayana Yangutova & Suocheng Dong & Hao Cheng & Shuangjie Xu & Fujia Li & Zehong Li & Menghan Zhang & Jingwen Li & Tcogto Bazarzhapov & Tamir Boldanov, 2023. "Assessing the Competitiveness of the Ski Resources around Lake Baikal (Russia) and Measures for Their Further Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-21, July.
    2. Irina Lock & Theo Araujo, 2020. "Visualizing the triple bottom line: A large‐scale automated visual content analysis of European corporations' website and social media images," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(6), pages 2631-2641, November.
    3. Nurlan Orazalin & Mady Baydauletov, 2020. "Corporate social responsibility strategy and corporate environmental and social performance: The moderating role of board gender diversity," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 1664-1676, July.
    4. Maria Björklund & Helena Forslund, 2019. "Challenges Addressed by Swedish Third-Party Logistics Providers Conducting Sustainable Logistics Business Cases," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-15, May.
    5. Olawale Fatoki, 2019. "Sustainability orientation and sustainable entrepreneurial intentions of university students in South Africa," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 7(2), pages 990-999, December.
    6. Oliver Wagner & Thomas Adisorn & Lena Tholen & Dagmar Kiyar, 2020. "Surviving the Energy Transition: Development of a Proposal for Evaluating Sustainable Business Models for Incumbents in Germany’s Electricity Market," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-17, February.
    7. K. Thomas Liaw, 2020. "Survey of Green Bond Pricing and Investment Performance," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-12, August.
    8. Ali Uyar & Cemil Kuzey & Merve Kilic & Abdullah S. Karaman, 2021. "Board structure, financial performance, corporate social responsibility performance, CSR committee, and CEO duality: Disentangling the connection in healthcare," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(6), pages 1730-1748, November.
    9. Tang, Pok Man & Yam, Kai Chi & Koopman, Joel, 2020. "Feeling proud but guilty? Unpacking the paradoxical nature of unethical pro-organizational behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 68-86.
    10. Sarker, Moniruzzaman & Mohd-Any, Amrul Asraf & Kamarulzaman, Yusniza, 2021. "Validating a consumer-based service brand equity (CBSBE) model in the airline industry," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    11. María Luisa Pajuelo Moreno & Teresa Duarte-Atoche, 2019. "Relationship between Sustainable Disclosure and Performance—An Extension of Ullmann’s Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-33, August.
    12. Broner, Fernando & Martin, Alberto & Pandolfi, Lorenzo & Williams, Tomas, 2021. "Winners and losers from sovereign debt inflows," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    13. Tomina Saveanu & Daniel Badulescu & Sorana Saveanu & Maria-Madela Abrudan & Alina Badulescu, 2021. "The Role of Owner-Managers in Shaping CSR Activity of Romanian SMEs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-19, October.
    14. Nham Tuan Phong & Nguyen Tuyet-Mai & Tran Nam Hoai & Nguyen Hao Anh, 2020. "Knowledge sharing and innovation capability at both individual and organizational levels: An empirical study from Vietnam’s telecommunication companies," Management & Marketing, Sciendo, vol. 15(2), pages 275-301, June.
    15. Sunday C. Eze & Vera C. A. Chinedu-Eze & Hart O. Awa, 2021. "Key Success Factors (KSFs) Underlying the Adoption of Social Media Marketing Technology," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, April.
    16. Isabel‐Maria García‐Sánchez & Nazim Hussain & Sana Akbar Khan & Jennifer Martínez‐Ferrero, 2020. "Managerial entrenchment, corporate social responsibility, and earnings management," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 1818-1833, July.
    17. Simon R. Swaffield & Robert C. Corry & Paul Opdam & Wendy McWilliam & Jørgen Primdahl, 2019. "Connecting business with the agricultural landscape: business strategies for sustainable rural development," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(7), pages 1357-1369, November.
    18. Nurlan Orazalin, 2020. "Do board sustainability committees contribute to corporate environmental and social performance? The mediating role of corporate social responsibility strategy," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 140-153, January.
    19. Dang, Rey & Houanti, L'Hocine & Sahut, Jean-Michel & Simioni, Michel, 2021. "Do women on corporate boards influence corporate social performance? A control function approach," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    20. Ashraf Elsafty & Abdelaziz Tahon, 2021. "Exploring Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Organizational Performance, the Case of Turkish Islamic Banks," Business and Management Studies, Redfame publishing, vol. 7(1), pages 1-21, March.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:12:p:5141-:d:375628. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.