Two complimentary duties under corporate social responsibility

Abstract

Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to critically examine the concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Nigeria’s Delta region and draw a distinction between philanthropic CSR (positive affirmative CSR) and the more demanding duty not to harm the ecosystem (negative injunction CSR). It suggests that for CSR to contribute to sustainable development, oil multinational corporations (MNCs) need to perform the more demanding duties and not only philanthropy.Design/methodology/approach– The method applied is a critical evaluation of the nature and categories of CSR. It thoroughly reviews existing literature on CSR and uses them to identify and separate for analytical purposes, the different obligations arising from the concept.Findings– The paper highlights the inability of oil MNCs in Nigeria to differentiate between philanthropic CSR and the more demanding duty to care for the host communities and their environment. It suggests that this failure, arguably attributable to the “shareholder value” model of corporate governance, appears to lie at the heart of the unrest in the region.Practical– By performing only the positive CSR duties, while neglecting the negative injunction obligations, oil MNCs continue to attract hostility from the host communities who feel that their survival is at stake.Originality/value– The paper extends the knowledge of the CSR practices of MNCs in Nigeria, by clearly delineating the two CSR duties and by linking the failure of MNCs to perform the negative injunctions to the shareholder value model of corporate governance.