This article addresses four hypotheses: (a) that corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Asia is not homogeneous but varies among countries, (b) that the variation is explained by stages of development, (c) that globalization enhances the adoption of CSR in Asia, and (d) that national business systems structure the profile of multinational corporations’ CSR. These hypotheses are investigated through analysis of Web site reporting of 50 companies in seven Asian countries: India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, South Korea, Singapore, and Thailand. The (...) article concludes that CSR does vary considerably among Asian countries but that this variation is not explained by development but by factors in the respective national business systems. It also concludes that multinational companies are more likely to adopt CSR than those operating solely in their home country but that the profile of their CSR tends to reflect the profile of the country of operation rather than the country of origin. (shrink)

Do environmental policy statements accurately represent corporate commitment to environmental sustainability? Because companies are not required by law to publish environmental policy statements or to verify that these statements are true using independent third parties, external stakeholders often wonder when a published commitment to a policy translates into actual policy implementation. The authors analyzed two independent databases to predict the circumstances under which large, leading-edge corporations in industry sectors will commit to and/or implement proactive corporate environmental policies and when it (...) is unlikely they will do so. The authors found that commitment to specific environmental policies does not vary greatly between industry sectors; however, policy implementation does. (shrink)

In this article, we hypothesize that the level of environmentally oriented noncompliance regulatory fines and penalties levied on companies and on their industry counterparts will be associated with the development of an environmental infrastructure and practices within these companies. We find that the presence of these regulatory actions is associated with the likelihood of companies reporting environmental policies and activities and with the presence of a separate board of directors’ committee that monitors company environmental concerns. Our findings suggest that environmental (...) regulatory pressure may serve as a driver of environmental action but is not its only determinant. (shrink)

Stories of firms that exceed local compliance requirements in their environmental performance appear routinely. However, we have limited theoretical explanations of what propels these firms to exceed compliance. Our theory suggests that global competitive and institutional pressures lead multinational firms to develop highlevel, environmental management systems (EMS) that make them more competitive. For economic and other reasons, select firms make the choice to rationalize their collective environmental performance to the highest common denominator rather than the lowest. Regulations around the world (...) differ widely and are a moving target in many settings. The need to comply with such myriad, shifting rules leads to firms creating EMS to help stay ahead of regulations worldwide. Using institutional and internationalization theories as our basis, we offer a propositional model concerning global competitive/institutional pressures and their effects on corporate environmental performance. We conclude the paper with a discussion of the implications of the model. (shrink)