Businesses incorporate corporate social responsibility principles mainly through voluntary and mandatory approaches. Advocates of the voluntary approach believe that companies can use charitable initiatives as a management tool to meet social and environmental expectations and that mandating Corporate Social Responsibility (“CSR”) would not encourage companies to prioritize anything beyond profits. Opponents argue that without legal requirements to drive social responsibility, relying on companies to self-regulate would not effectively integrate social values into corporate behaviors. Instead, they suggest that legal regulation of CSR can offer a more effective strategy. This Article examines the limitations of these two approaches by analyzing Australia, which represents the model of voluntary CSR, and India, which serves as an example of mandatory CSR. Evaluating these two approaches in CSR regulation framework, this Article argues that CSR should not be defined exclusively by the differences between voluntary and mandatory approaches in CSR regulation, nor should the separation between the two be absolute.
top of page
bottom of page
댓글