Responsibility and Sustainability Choices in the Animal Feed Industry: Evidence From an Italian Family SME

Literature Review

The concept of corporate social responsibility has steadily evolved since it was first introduced a century ago. Lee (2008) argues that the first instance of a CSR attitude appeared in 1917 in Henry Ford’s conception of business as a service. At that time, society was unprepared for such a conception of business. However, from then until the present date, the concept of CSR has undergone a process of progressive rationalization that has moved the discussion from the societal to the organizational level of analysis. Despite its prominence in the management discourse, there is still no agreed upon definition, and CSR remains a contested concept (Okoye, 2009). The debate is polarized between the position of Milton Friedman (1962), who perceived CSR as a burden on shareholders and companies, and the perspective of Edward Freeman (1984), who underscored the benefits of corporate responsibilities toward all stakeholders (Baden & Harwood, 2013).

Proponents of CSR claim that companies should be responsible toward a broad range of stakeholders for outcomes extending beyond purely economic and financial results (Matten & Crane, 2005). This total set of responsibilities has sometimes been referred to as the triple bottom line of people, planet and profits (Senge et al., 2007). Issues of CSR are also in the political agenda of the European Union (European Commission, 2017) and the United Nations Global Compact (2015), both active at promoting the culture of corporate citizenship and responsibility. Today CSR represents a growing market segment for mainstream strategy consulting and auditing firms (e.g. Deloitte, KPMG, McKinsey) all suggesting the importance of engaging stakeholders and creating shared value (Porter & Kramer, 2011).