Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Corporate Social Performance Content of Innovation in the U.K.

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article investigates the influence of innovation on the relationship between corporate strategy and social issues. Specifically, we employ firm-level data for a large sample of U.K. companies drawn from a diverse range of industrial sectors to investigate, given innovation, the determinants of both the probability that the innovation brings reduced environmental impacts and/or improved health and safety, and the strength of this effect. In this connection, we find evidence of a dichotomy between product and process innovations, and roles for firm size, industrial sector, a foreign market presence, access to various information sources (e.g. universities and government research organisations) and the extent to which activities are constrained by regulation. Furthermore, we find a tendency for the influences of many of these factors to vary between older and newer firms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams M. and P. Hardwick (1998) An Analysis of Corporate Donations: United Kingdom Evidence. Journal of Management Studies, 35, 641–654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson A. R. (1998) Cultivating the Garden of Eden: Environmental Entrepreneuring. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 11(2), 135–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aragon-Correa J. A. (1998) Strategic Proactivity and Firm Approach to the Natural Environment. Academy of Management Journal, 41(5), 556–567

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arora S. and T. N. Cason (1998) Do Community Characteristics Influence Environmental Outcomes? Evidence from the Toxics Release Inventory. Southern Economic Journal, 65(4), 691–716

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch D. B. (2004) Sustaining Innovation and Growth: Public Policy Support for Entrepreneurship. Industry and Innovation, 11, 167–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch D. B., E. E. Lehmann and S. Warning (2004) University Spillovers: Does the Kind of Science Matter? Industry and Innovation, 11, 193–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer S. J. and S. Pavelin (2006) Corporate Reputation and Social Performance: The Importance of Fit. Journal of Management Studies, 43(3), 435–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer S. J., A. I. Millington and S. Pavelin (2006) Is Philanthropy Strategic? An Analysis of the Management of Charitable Giving in Large UK Companies. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15(3), 234–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll A. B. (2000) Ethical Challenges for Business in the New Millennium: Corporate Social Responsibility and Models of Management Morality. Business Ethics Quarterly, 10(1), 33–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, M. B., T. A. Bhamra and M. Lemon: 2006, ‹The Transfer and Application of Product Service Systems: from Academia to UK Manufacturing Firms’, Journal of Cleaner Production, forthcoming

  • Cormier D. and M. Magnan (1999) Corporate Environmental Disclosure Strategies: Determinants, Costs and Benefits. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance 14(4), 429–451

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson T. and L. E. Preston (1995) The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence and Implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egeln J., S. Gottschalk and C. Rammer (2004) Location Decisions of Spin-Offs from Public Research Institutions. Industry and Innovation, 11, 207–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun C. and M. Shanley (1990) What’s in a Name? Reputation Building and Corporate Strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 233–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman R. E. (1984) Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston, MA: Pitman

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillman A. J. and G. D. Keim (2001) Shareholder Value, Stakeholder Management and Social Issues: What’s the Bottom Line? Strategic Management Journal, 22(2), 125–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Innes R. and J. J. Bial (2002) Inducing Innovation in the Environmental Technology of Oligopolistic Firms. Journal of Industrial Economics, 50(3), 265–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaak R. (2002) The Making of the Ecopreneur. Greener Management International, 38, 81–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe A. B., R. G. Newell and R. N. Stavins (2003) Technological Change and the Environment. in K.-G. Maler, J. R. Vincent (eds.), Handbook of Environmental Economics vol. 1. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science, pp. 461–516

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe A. B., R. G. Newell and R. N. Stavins (2005) A Tale of Two Market Failures: Technology and Environmental Policy. Ecological Economics, 54, 164–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe A. B. and K. Palmer (1997) Environmental Regulation and Innovation: A Panel Study. Review of Economics and Statistics, 79(4), 610–619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones T. M. (1995) Instrumental Stakeholder Theory: A Synthesis of Ethics and Economics. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 404–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klaassen G., A. Miketa, K. Larsen and T. Sundqvist (2005) The Impact of R&D on Innovation for Wind Energy in Denmark, Germany and the United Kingdom. Ecological Economics, 54, 227–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kostova T. and S. Zaheer (1999) Organizational Legitimacy Under Conditions of Complexity: The Case of the Multinational Enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 24(1), 64–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lablatt S. (1997) Corporate Response to Environmental Issues: Packaging. Growth and Change, 28, 67–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams A. and D. Siegel (2000) Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance: Correlation or Misspecification? Strategic Management Journal, 21, 603–609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell R. K., B. R. Agle and D. J. Wood (1997) Toward A Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moffat A. and A. Auer (2006) Corporate Environmental Innovation (CEI): A government initiative to support corporate sustainability leadership. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14, 589–600

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nas M. and P. Dekker (1996) Environmental Involvement in Four West European Countries: A Comparative Analysis of Attitudes and Actions. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Sciences, 9(4), 509–535

    Google Scholar 

  • Pastakia A. (1998) Grassroots Ecopreneurs: Change Agents for a Sustainable Society. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 11(2), 157–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillimore J. (2001) Schumpeter, Schumacher and the Greening of Technology. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 13(1), 23–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Requate T. (2005) Dynamic Incentives by Environmental Policy Instruments. Ecological Economics, 54, 175–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rugman A. M. and A. Verbeke (1998) Corporate Strategies and Environmental Regulations: An Organizing Framework. Strategic Management Journal, 19(4), 363–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russo M. V. and P. A. Fouts (1997) A Resource-Based Perspective on Corporate Environmental Performance and Profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 534–559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schafer D., A. Werwatz and V. Zimmerman (2004) The Determinants of Debt and (Private) Equity Financing: The Case of Young, Innovative Smes from Germany. Industry and Innovation, 11, 225–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmanlensee R. (1994) The Costs of Environmental Protection. In M. B. Kotowski (ed.), Balancing Economic Growth and Environmental Goals. Washington, DC: American Council for Capital Formation, Center for Policy Research, pp. 55–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz M.S. and A. B. Carroll (2003) Corporate Social Responsibility: A Three-Domain Approach. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(4), 503–530

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharfman M. P., T. M. Shaft and L. Tihanyi (2004) A Model of Global and Institutional Antecedents of High-Level Corporate Environmental Performance. Business and Society, 43(1), 6–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma S. (2000) Managerial Interpretations and Organizational Context as Predictors or Corporate Choice of Environmental Strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 681–697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegfried J. J., K. M. McElroy and D. Bientot-Fawkes (1983) The Management of Corporate Contributions. Research in Corporate Performance and Policy, 5, 87–102

    Google Scholar 

  • Soete B. and A. Stephan (2004) Introduction: Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Growth. Industry and Innovation, 11, 161–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vollebergh H. R. J. and C. Kemfert (2005) The Role of Technological Change for a Sustainable Development. Ecological Economics, 54, 133–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock S. A. and S. B. Graves (1997) The Corporate Social Performance-Financial Performance Link. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 303–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windsor D. (2006) Corporate Social Responsibility: Three Key Approaches. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 93–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood D. J. (1991) Corporate Social Performance Revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16(4), 691–718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young R. C. and J. D. Francis (1991) Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Small Manufacturing Firms. Social Science Quarterly, 72(1), 149–162

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, Business School, University of Reading, Reading, RG6 6AA, UK

    Stephen Pavelin & Lynda A. Porter

Authors
  1. Stephen Pavelin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lynda A. Porter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen Pavelin.

Additional information

Stephen Pavelin is a Reader in Economics at the University of Reading, UK. His current research agenda focuses upon the application of economic analysis to key issues relating to corporate social responsibility, such as the effect of corporate social performance on the reputation and financial performance of firms. Recent publications include articles in the Journal of Management Studies, the Journal of Business Research, the International Journal of Industrial Organisation, the Journal of Business Ethics, Financial Management, the Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, Business Ethics: A European Review and the European Management Journal.

Lynda A. Porter is a Lecturer in Economics at the University of Reading, UK. Her current research agenda focuses upon public policy issues in international economics, including FDI promotion and international competition in corporate tax rates, but also encompasses corporate social responsibility- largely focussing upon CSR issues that pertain particularly to international business. Her most recent publication appeared in the Journal of Business Research.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pavelin, S., Porter, L.A. The Corporate Social Performance Content of Innovation in the U.K.. J Bus Ethics 80, 711–725 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9464-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9464-7

JEL Classification

Keywords

Search

Navigation