IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Legitimating Business Activities Using Corporate Social Responsibility: Is there a Need for CSR in Agribusiness?

  • Heyder, Matthias
  • Theuvsen, Ludwig
Registered author(s):

    result, enterprises in the agribusiness sector are increasingly exposed to the public eye (Jansen/ Vellema: 2004). The perception of consumers and other stakeholders - which are according to Freeman “any group or individual who can affect, or is affected by, the achievement of the organization’s objectives” - is of growing criticism and risk-consciousness and manifests itself in changed attitudes towards food production (Jäckel/Spiller: 2006; Haddock: 2005). The use of GMO in agriculture, e.g., is regarded to be morally reprehensible (Becker: 1999). The BSE-crisis and other food scares led to growing consumer uncertainty and resulted in decreased meat consumption and in the increasing percentage of outspoken vegetarians and low-meat consumers (von Alvensleben: 1997; Staack: 2005). Moreover, the influence capacity of stakeholders is growing (Gerlach: 2006). As a result these factors have reduced the legitimacy of traditional (e.g., animal production) as well as new production technologies (e.g. bioenergy) in the agribusiness. In the long term the success of enterprises in the agribusiness can be affected by legitimacy losses. Against this background, legitimacy is regarded as a resource that guarantees the long-term survival of an enterprise (Palazzo/Scherer: 2006). Primarily the market based view in general management literature and the macro-institutional approach in neo sociological-institutionalism are employed to understand business operations embedded in societal structures. In this context legitimacy means the conformation of an organization with social norms, values and expectations (Oliver: 1996).

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/49851
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by European Association of Agricultural Economists in its series 110th Seminar, February 18-22, 2008, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria with number 49851.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: Oct 2008
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:ags:eea110:49851
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.eaae.org
    Email:


    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Guido Palazzo & Andreas Scherer, 2006. "Corporate Legitimacy as Deliberation: A Communicative Framework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 66(1), pages 71-88, June.
    2. Fritz, Melanie & Fischer, Christian, 2007. "The Role of Trust in European Food Chains: Theory and Empirical Findings," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IAMA), vol. 10(02).
    3. Torres, Antonio, Jr. & Akridge, Jay T. & Gray, Allan W. & Boehlje, Michael & Widdows, Richard, 2007. "An Evaluation of Customer Relationship Management (CRM) Practices among Agribusiness Firms," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IAMA), vol. 10(01).
    4. Frentrup, Mechthild & Theuvsen, Ludwig, 2006. "Transparency in Supply Chains: Is Trust a Limiting Factor?," 99th Seminar, February 8-10, 2006, Bonn, Germany 7733, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:eea110:49851. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.