Difference of CSR Practice for Chinese Automakers – Comparison with Japanese & Korean Automakers

IF 7.6 0 MANAGEMENT Management Revue Pub Date : 2020-06-25 DOI:10.5771/0935-9915-2020-3-372
Sug-Ing Chang, Byung-hun Choi, Kyung-mo Song
{"title":"Difference of CSR Practice for Chinese Automakers – Comparison with Japanese & Korean Automakers","authors":"Sug-Ing Chang, Byung-hun Choi, Kyung-mo Song","doi":"10.5771/0935-9915-2020-3-372","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has already become an important issue in Japan & Korea as well as in China. However, a relatively clear difference of CSR practice of China has existed due to it being government-led CSR practice. The Chinese government actively promotes its CSR standards, the CASS CSR 3.0 while emphasizing Chinese characteristics. This study traces the difference of CSR practice for Chinese firms by looking into twenty-four automakers’ CSR websites and reports in Japan, Korea and China. Firstly, this study analyzes CSR reports and website accessibility from a local language barrier perspective, and does Paired t-Test for comparing two national populations means of accessibility between two groups; Japanese-Korean automakers vs. Chinese automakers by using survey results. Secondly, the coverage rates of each automaker’s CSR report for GRI G4 are examined, and Two-Sample t-Tests are made to compare the two nationalities means of coverage rate between Japanese-Korean automakers and Chinese ones. As a result, the CSR practices of Chinese automakers differ greatly from CSR practices of Japanese-Korean ones. But it needs to be considered that if the major stakeholders of Chinese firms are local people or partners, the core of CSR activities would be oriented for local stakeholders.","PeriodicalId":47269,"journal":{"name":"Management Revue","volume":"115 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Management Revue","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5771/0935-9915-2020-3-372","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has already become an important issue in Japan & Korea as well as in China. However, a relatively clear difference of CSR practice of China has existed due to it being government-led CSR practice. The Chinese government actively promotes its CSR standards, the CASS CSR 3.0 while emphasizing Chinese characteristics. This study traces the difference of CSR practice for Chinese firms by looking into twenty-four automakers’ CSR websites and reports in Japan, Korea and China. Firstly, this study analyzes CSR reports and website accessibility from a local language barrier perspective, and does Paired t-Test for comparing two national populations means of accessibility between two groups; Japanese-Korean automakers vs. Chinese automakers by using survey results. Secondly, the coverage rates of each automaker’s CSR report for GRI G4 are examined, and Two-Sample t-Tests are made to compare the two nationalities means of coverage rate between Japanese-Korean automakers and Chinese ones. As a result, the CSR practices of Chinese automakers differ greatly from CSR practices of Japanese-Korean ones. But it needs to be considered that if the major stakeholders of Chinese firms are local people or partners, the core of CSR activities would be oriented for local stakeholders.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中国汽车企业社会责任实践的差异——与日韩汽车企业的比较
企业社会责任(CSR)在日本、韩国以及中国都已经成为一个重要的问题。然而,由于中国是政府主导的企业社会责任实践,因此在企业社会责任实践方面存在着比较明显的差异。中国政府在强调中国特色的同时,积极推行中国社会责任标准——中国社科院CSR 3.0。本研究通过对日本、韩国和中国的24家汽车制造商的企业社会责任网站和报告的研究,追溯了中国企业社会责任实践的差异。首先,本研究从当地语言障碍的角度对企业社会责任报告和网站可访问性进行了分析,并通过配对t检验比较了两国人群的可访问性手段;根据调查结果,日本-韩国汽车制造商和中国汽车制造商。其次,对GRI G4中各汽车制造商企业社会责任报告的覆盖率进行检验,并采用双样本t检验比较日韩汽车制造商和中国汽车制造商的两国覆盖率。因此,中国汽车制造商的社会责任实践与日韩汽车制造商的社会责任实践存在很大差异。但需要考虑的是,如果中国企业的主要利益相关者是当地人或合作伙伴,那么企业社会责任活动的核心将以当地利益相关者为导向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Management Revue
Management Revue MANAGEMENT-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
期刊介绍: Management Revue - Socio-Economic Studies is an interdisciplinary European journal that undergoes peer review. It publishes qualitative and quantitative work, along with purely theoretical papers, contributing to the study of management, organization, and industrial relations. The journal welcomes contributions from various disciplines, including business and public administration, organizational behavior, economics, sociology, and psychology. Regular features include reviews of books relevant to management and organization studies. Special issues provide a unique perspective on specific research fields. Organized by selected guest editors, each special issue includes at least two overview articles from leaders in the field, along with at least three new empirical papers and up to ten book reviews related to the topic. The journal aims to offer in-depth insights into selected research topics, presenting potentially controversial perspectives, new theoretical insights, valuable empirical analysis, and brief reviews of key publications. Its objective is to establish Management Revue - Socio-Economic Studies as a top-quality symposium journal for the international academic community.
期刊最新文献
The Moderating role of Organizational Tenure on the Relation between Job Crafting and Job Boredom: A Study on Accountants Women and Leading Positions in Germany: The Role of Promotion Programs for Women Diffusion Patterns in Small vs Large Capital Markets – the Case of Value-Based Management Mathematical Management – Operations Research in the United States and Western Europe, 1945 – 1990 Accountability is a Two-way Street: The Meaning of Accountability and Informal Accountability Practices in the Monastic Context
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1