Open Access Research Article
A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE ON CSR WITH COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN INDIA AND JAPAN
Published Paper
Article Details
A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE ON CSR WITH COMPARATIVE
ANALYSIS BETWEEN INDIA AND JAPAN
AUTHORED BY - KHUSHI RAJVANSHI
BA LLB (Hons),
Amity Law School,
2020-25
CO-AUTHOR - RAGHUVIR
KRISHNA
Abstract
In the present world, social
and environmental issues are becoming incredibly essential. Reporting on corporate social
responsibility has become more important as a result. How information concerning this should be
reported is a topic of increasing discussion. This study aims to examine the approaches taken by the governments and
businesses in Japan and India to this problem. Japan looks to be more forward-thinking on the subject
of CSR reporting than any of the other two nations, which do not
appear to have any form of mandated regulations.
Keywords- corporate
social responsibility, India, Japan, international perspective, system perspective
Introduction
"India's phenomenal economic growth has resulted in worsening social
and environmental issues, which have
social responsibility repercussions for
businesses in those countries." (2010),
p.299, Wong et al.
The above quotation alluded
to the seriousness of Japan and India's
dubious levels of corporate social responsibility (CSR). The fact
that the economies of India and Japan are expanding is well known, but little research
has been done on the detrimental impacts
of this growth on their CSR up to this time. As a result,
the goal of this paper is to determine whether
the aforementioned statement
is true as well as how India's CSR practices stack up against those of a more developed Asian country like
Japan. The largest and most developed economy in Asia is specifically Japan.
In addition, Japan has experienced sustained economic success, leading
one to believe that Japan has higher levels of CSR than India.
A thorough
assessment of the literature revealed that the degree of CSR has already been
the subject of a significant amount
of research, including comparisons between the US and EU. The various CSR levels in the various
Asian economies, however, are something that still needs
more research.
Companies are morally obligated to contribute back to society in addition
to their obligations to investors or stockholders since they rely on societal resources to operate
efficiently. 'Corporate social
responsibility' (CSR) is based on this
fundamental tenet. Another
name for it is
"enlightened self-interest."
CSR entails businesses being socially and environmentally conscious,
supporting fair trade, enhancing labor standards, giving back to the community, reducing
environmental harm, and boosting employee satisfaction.
Asia must satisfy the expanding demand for CSR since the financial
markets must adapt and remain
flexible to fulfill the expectations of investors. Companies and governments
all across the world are adapting
due to concerns that globalization is wreaking environmental havoc and fostering social unrest since investors
no longer only worry about financial performance. In other words, the demand for CSR reporting arises as exploitation and greed are being replaced
with compassion and sustainability.
The level of CSR across Asia's largest economies will therefore be
examined in this paper, along with the question
of whether it would be particularly useful
to compare them given their
wide range. Additionally, it is crucial to assess the extent to which CSR is practiced in booming nations
like India and Japan since, as the statement stated,
if they do not, their growth may not be sustainable. In light of this, the
specific research topic of this study is "How is India and Japan compare with regard to their level of CSR?"
This paper will first examine the idea of corporate social responsibility
(CSR) and how CSR can be quantified in Asia in order to respond
to the research question. Including
environmental, social, and
economic aspects in CSR reporting is essential. CSR reporting concentrates on a company's success on other issues, which is different
from a typical
annual report. For instance,
a CSR Report might
cover topics like child labor,
pollution, health and safety risks,
and human rights. In order to determine where India
and Japan stand in terms of their level of CSR, this study will analyze both countries next. This essay will discuss
the reasons for the current situation,
what can be done to make it better,
the effects it will have going forward, and whether an Asian approach
is appropriate.
Corporate social responsibility
First, it needs to
be
stated that the west
is where the idea of CSR originated. A CSR model was already developed more than thirty years
ago by Carol (1979), who suggests a model that will divide CSR into four basic components. Although this model has
undergone a few small revisions, it
is still largely regarded as capturing the spirit of CSR. First, there is an
economic component that requires businesses to function efficiently economically and to satisfy consumer wants. The legal component
demands businesses to align their economic objectives with the local legal framework. Third, enterprises must adhere
to society's moral standards as part of the ethical
component.
The final
element is a little more ambiguous, but it imposes obligations on businesses to
have a charitable and philanthropic
mindset. The paper is therefore aware that CSR is a Western idea. The
following explanation led to the decision to utilize a Western notion,
though. Asia is undergoing
globalization; thus, they are required to adhere to the general, universal
standard based on Western
ideas. Although there are different ways to deal with this,
the paper will stick with the widely accepted method. The
involvement of Asian public bodies and businesses in implementing CSR policies and reporting standards has also
increased over the past ten years. However, it should
be noted that standard monitoring
by third parties generally.
The main goal
of CSR reporting is to give domestic and international investors the data they need to make decisions. The demand for
this information is rising as a result of a trend that demonstrates a rise in social and environmental funding. As a
result, numerous businesses in the EU
and the US, including Shell, McDonald's, and the Body Shop, already willingly
offer such information. These particular businesses highlight their accomplishments on an environmental and social level in their
annual reports or in a separate standalone report that is available to the public. Other
businesses in sectors including manufacturing, forestry, and energy
are also employing similar
strategies to counteract any unfavorable press.
The major issue
with this, though,
is that there isn't much consistency and comparability in the standards of the existing
reports; they are more
like environmental spins than they are accurate
representations of the company's true status. Ass a result, it has
become essential that there be reporting
standards or criteria to adhere to, as the majority of the reports in use today
are nothing more than a clever
marketing plan that helps a particular business. According to Habermas,
the concept of free riding
is the motivation behind the implementation and usage of universally recognized standards.
Specifically, in order to prevent
free-riding, political institutions and civil society must establish legal frameworks and globally
recognized codes within which economic pressures are managed, preventing free-riding competitors from taking
advantage of the moral behavior of firms (via the implementation of these standards).
The current
state of affairs,
in which there are numerous
diverse and also conflicting standards
of responsibility, is a result of the rise in demand for a uniform
method of CSR measurement. Many
academics are logically concerned that the reports of the various regulatory
bodies cannot guarantee safety to the
same degree as a globally recognized standard. In light of this, this article will provide a summary of some of the most prevalent, globally accepted standards, along with some advice
and ideas.
The Institute
for Social and Ethical Accountability's (ISEA) AA1000S. The AA1000 Assurance standard was established in 2003 and quickly rose to prominence.
The objective of this standard's
development was to uphold the validity and caliber of an organization's public reporting on particular topics including
social, environmental, and economic performance (AA1000 Framework, 2010).
(GRI) Global
Reporting Initiative. The UN and the Coalition for Environmentally Responsive Economies (CERES), a Boston-based
business organization, created the GRI in 1997. This project encourages businesses to take environmental policies into account
and aims to standardize the reporting process
for sustainability. Since many firm reports are not examined,
this initiative's sole drawback is that
it is truly more about disclosure than performance (organizations implementing the
Guidelines, 2010).[1]
CSR Perspective in India
India's business sector is still developing. After India obtained
independence in 1947, industrialization essentially began, but it didn't
take off until 1950,
when the country became a republic and an industrial policy was established. Since there was a centrally planned economy based on the former USSR, the public sector was given a stronger role and served as the primary catalyst for the expansion of these
principles. As a result, the government started to enforce social altruistic values. Some public
sector businesses spent up to 5% of their income on CSR initiatives.
However, it soon became clear that the widely advocated policy of the
public sector as the primary driver
of economic growth was ineffective. After 1980, industrial strategy changed, and the privatization of the public sector
became the new tenet of economic expansion. The new WTO framework was another factor that made privatization
even more necessary. The Indian businesses were compelled to comply with all legal criteria when environmental regulations tightened up if they wanted to keep running their
current businesses. The Bhopal disaster
in 1984 caused a paradigm change in thinking about environmental and safety
issues. It demonstrated how
vulnerable Indian businesses are to environmental threats and how they behave differently from foreign corporations.
The Indian
government was forced
to alter its environmental policy
as a result. Although there were some environmental laws in place
in India as early as 1974, the environmental protection act that was passed by the parliament in 1996 marked the beginning of the Indian
government's serious attempt
to make improvements. The companies must abide by the new rules and regulations that are periodically framed by this new statute.
Hazardous waste rules from 1989,
the Public Liability Insurance Act from 1991, the Biomedical Waste Rules
from 1998, the Manufacture, Storage,
and Import of Hazardous Chemicals
Rules from 1999, the Ozone Depleting
Substances (Regulation and Control) Rules from 2000, the Municipal Solid Wastes (Management
and Handling) Rules from 2000, the Forest
(Conservation) Rules from 2003, and others
are some examples of significant new rules
and regulations (Sahay, 2004).
Numerous
Indian businesses believed that it was prudent to adhere to the ISO14001
standard in light of the expansion
of environmental legislation. As a result,
they are required
to construct an environmental management system and to
comply with all legal requirements. Over 1500
businesses in India, across a wide range of industries, have adopted the
ISO 14001 standard; their motivations
are similar to those of businesses in the West, as both seek to adhere to regulatory obligations and industry
standards (peglau, 2010). Social pressure,
financial
markets, and customer demand,
according to Sahlay
(2004), were given less importance in the effort to satisfy these requirements. In
spite of this, there are some businesses that strive for environmental excellence, such as Jubilant
Life Services Ltd. and ITC Limited.
These two businesses, however, make up just two of the total nine that reported via the GRI in
2010 while taking environmental measures
into account. (Organisations using the recommendations, 2010).
Overall, the
state of India's environment demonstrates that even the system in place is
unable to limit the amount of
industrial pollution. Similar to the developed world in the 1950s and 1960s, India's pollution level has already
reached intolerable heights. This is due to weak institutions that control
the policies and weak policies themselves. Community and civil protests
will occur if pollution levels rise at this rate, and eventually the Indian Supreme
Court will be forced to take action
in response to public
complaints about the environment.
Similar to
this, many overseas clients have requested additional CSR initiatives,
including the advancement of women into management and leadership roles and grassroots efforts to reduce
negative effects on the environment, human rights, and children's rights.
community
improvement, reducing poverty, assisting individuals through various self-help organizations, and executing numerous
education-related projects. Another such is the largest cement producer in India, Ultra-Tech Cement, which engages in
extensive social work in 407 villages with an emphasis
on infrastructure, the environment, education, sustainable livelihoods, and social welfare.
Countries that have made CSR a legal mandate.
The term "Mandatory CSR" refers
to a general legal obligation to act responsibly toward others. This legal obligation may be established either by corporate law or as a component
of directors' fiduciary obligations. Despite the fact
that CSR is optional and not required by law.
CSR
regulations in India
CSR has historically been viewed in India as a philanthropic endeavor,
but with the adoption of section 135
of the 2013 corporations Act, India became the first nation to enact statutory CSR requirements for specific
corporations. Nine subsections of Section 135 govern India's CSR regime.
Activities that can be undertaken
as a
part of CSR
Schedule VII of the 2013 Companies Act lists activities that can be done
as a part of CSR. These initiatives (as they were before the modification) supported
the advancement of education, gender equality, the
environment, famine relief, malnutrition, and many other causes. The notification, which was released by the Ministry of
Corporate Affairs on March 23, 2020, aims to include money spent on various COVID-19-related activities that are already covered
under Schedule VII of the Companies
Act of 2013.
Regarding incubators, there was another
notification. In accordance with an earlier regulation, funding under CSR was only available to
technology business incubators housed within
academic institutions, as defined by the Department of Science and
Technology. The newly received
notification concerned incubators. In accordance with an earlier regulation,
funding under CSR was only available
to technology business incubators housed within academic institutions, as defined
by the Department of Science
and Technology. The revised announcement made any incubators backed by
any state, federal, or international organization eligible to receive CSR funding.
Some highly
successful businesses in India carry out extensive CSR initiatives. For
instance, the tata group, a
multinational corporation based in India that makes vehicles, airplanes, and other things, strives
to make a major.[2]
What does CSR mean in Japan?
Global citizens have long expressed increasing concern that businesses
should take action to alleviate
the myriad social inequalities and "wrongs" that exist
in the world. Additionally, there
is a considerably higher need for compensation or a plan for future risk
mitigation to be supplied if a corporation directly contributes to wrongdoing.
Many people
believe that if firms are not actively addressing the issue of corporate social responsibility or having a beneficial
impact on the world, they may even be doing harm. Businesses are under increasingly more pressure to change their
systems and procedures as they expand globally and become more successful.
The term "CSR" now refers to a wide range of issues, from mental health
to human rights.
Who gains from a company's commercial
endeavors? And who stands to lose? Regardless of whether we're talking about giant organizations or independent small firms,
these are essential questions that we're all addressing.
Japan faced numerous pollution issues throughout the 1960s. As a result,
the urge for economic growth started to lose ground to
environmental consciousness, and businesses that produce pollution came under intense social pressure. In 1967, Japan
formally acknowledged that pollution
was a result of economic expansion, and fundamental regulations governing the degree of pollution were put in place. In
1971, laws and regulations were further reinforced, and an agency was created
to handle environmental issues. The Japanese
government established strict environmental regulations, encouraged the creation and adoption of new anti-
pollution technologies, and provided corporations with fiscal, taxation,
and financial support to encourage
the adoption of these cutting-edge technologies.
The Air Pollution
Control Act, passed in 1971, served as the foundation for emission standards. The allowable levels of SOX and NOX, for instance, in Japan
were less than one-third of the norms
in the US and Germany, indicating that these standards were generally
significantly tighter than those in
industrialized nations. Since the late 1960s, the government has provided funding to private businesses that,
among other things, have worked hard to develop heavy oil and waste smoke desulphurization technology to reduce pollution
and the adoption
of unleaded gasoline by the automotive sector. As a
result of these promising technological developments, expenditures in facilities and machinery for pollution control
grew quickly. Private
sector investments in anti-pollution measures peaked in 1975, when they reached
$1 trillion, or 17.7% of all capital
investments.
The Japanese government
supported these rising investments by lowering fixed
property taxes, providing special tax benefits,
and providing financial
support through the Japanese Development Bank. All of these actions led
to a 16.8% reduction in emissions in 1985 when
compared to the level of 1970, and an emission volume per unit of power
generated that was around one-eightth of the average
production of OECD nations (fukukawa, 1992). Additionally,
recycling efforts have been made active; in 2008, 51.3% of newspapers and 53.8% of bottles
were successfully recycled, which is a very
high average on a global
scale.
CSR in Japan
is currently very strong generally, but it's also very inconsistent; it's
excellent in some regions and
terrible in others. Japan has one of the best corporate cultures in the world because it places a high value on giving back to the community. Another key goal is the welfare of the company's stakeholders, which include its workers, the general public,
clients, suppliers, and shareholders. Larger companies in particular contribute significantly to the arts, education, and sports sectors of Japanese society. Additionally,
corruption is comparatively low in the operations of Japanese
businesses both domestically and internationally.
Japan engaged
in a number of environmental organizations, including the global environment facilities, the intergovernmental panel
on climate change, the United Nations environmental panel on climate change, the United Nations environmental programs,
and the population fund. Overall, Japan today leads among
high-density inhabited countries in terms of environmental sustainability since the environment has
garnered so much attention since the late 1960s. The large number of Japanese businesses with an ISO14001 certification reflects
this.
Some CSR-related areas, though, are less established in Japan. One of its
key flaws, for instance, is that
Japanese businesses frequently try to hide serious issues when they arise, including nuclear accidents or incidents of
food poisoning. This appears to be connected to efforts to shield the company from societal repercussions. The
publication of sustainability reports,
collaboration with non-governmental organizations, transparent corporate governance, boosting the employability of staff and chances for women, and
CSR norms for suppliers are among additional areas of weakness.[3]
The traditional view of CSR in Japanese
society
Giving to charities or total strangers has not historically been a prevalent habit in Japan.
Instead, in the past, funds
or aid have been delivered through existing networks and connections between
people, such as family- or employer-based connections.
In a society
where, in theory, people were cared for and supported by the circles they
existed in (such as their firms,
families, and local communities), the idea of businesses contributing significant sums of their profit to causes
and people that aren't linked with it was formerly strange.
Some proponents of Japan's traditional CSR philosophy may still contend
that businesses have always sought to benefit both parties.
And rather than attempting to assist someone you don't know, this may be more enduring and real.
Many people have believed that the government alone should be in
charge of concerns
relating to the environment,
social welfare, and human rights. Many people were happy to accept the government's handling of social advancement due to historically higher levels of faith in it.
The general
consensus is that governments can't (and probably
shouldn't) be given the responsibility of fixing certain
difficulties on their own as time has gone on and perhaps as a result of significant changes to traditional corporate and familial structures.
A modern Japanese perspective on CSR
Things are a lot more complicated today. All people's lives are believed
to be impacted by factors like poverty, social
injustice, physical and mental health,
and the environment, and it is thought that these issues can be
resolved through individual business and individual person actions
rather than just through the efforts of public administration.
This more closely resembles
the way CSR is seen in Europe,
where commercial payments
to a variety of philanthropic initiatives (not always related) are accepted as the standard.
There is currently
pressure on Japanese firms to adopt "good" behaviour and take responsibility for their acts outside
of their current value chains
and networks.
Meeting Global Standards
for Social Responsibility
Many have contended that when it comes to social, economic, and environmental issues, strong global businesses can have more influence
than any single government ever could (in both
positive and bad ways).
For instance,
one of the biggest automakers in the world, Toyota of Japan, employs over 360,000 people and cranks out roughly 10
million automobiles annually, enhancing the welfare of a large number of people while having
a considerable negative impact on the environment through the production and usage of its
goods.
The country (and businesses like Toyota) now face more worldwide scrutiny
as expansion continues, in addition to a shifting
perspective of what CSR is and how it should
be carried out locally.
These
organizations must be meticulous in documenting their actions and in how they
report on CSR-related issues if they
want to avoid public criticism. The Toyota Sustainability Data Book is available here and contains chapters on topics ranging from social contribution activities to respect for human rights.
Sony's main page on CSR and sustainability is a wonderful place to visit if you need inspiration for your company's CSR monitoring and reporting.
It also houses
their annual Sustainability Report, documents pertaining to their global
justice fund, important charitable endeavors, and their Green Management roadmap
aimed at achieving Net Zero by 2050, in addition to
an annual Corporate Report that summarizes the
advancement of various
initiatives for value creation.
Japan now complies with OECD guidelines for multinational enterprises,
and the majority of the country's
largest corporations have adopted more globally recognized CSR practices that are evaluated externally and promote
openness and the release of regular reports that detail a company's
efforts to address a
variety of social
issues.[4]
International Positioning of Japan’s CSR activities
One of the most well-known worldwide comparative studies that takes Japan
into account is the Welford survey
(Welford 2005). In 2002 and 2004, the author conducted questionnaire surveys of businesses in 15 North American, European, and Asian nations.
CSR activities were
divided into 20 categories in these studies. While Asian businesses were
found to have much lower
implementation rates across the most of the categories, Japan had a somewhat
higher percentage, particularly when
it came to the release of CSR reports. The study comes to the conclusion that Asian countries are
closely imitating Western CSR programs, with Japan leading the pack.
Using data from a World Economic
Forum questionnaire survey, Baughn,
Bodie, and McIntosh
(2007) compared CSR in North America, Western Europe, the Middle East,
Africa, Latin America, and Asia.
They claim that while Japan
trails behind levels in North America, Australia, and New Zealand in the area of societal
issues, it outperforms Western Europe. And it outperforms all other nations in terms of
environmental actions.
These two studies
point out that, compared to other Asian countries, Japan's
CSR is remarkably advanced.
Japan is frequently compared alongside Western industrial democracies rather
than Asia because it is thought
that its political and economic systems are more similar to those of the West. For instance, Gjlberg
(2009) uses an index that includes socially
responsible investment, participation in international CSR frameworks, publication of sustainability reports, and ISO14001 certification to
compare CSR practices in 15 EU countries, the United States, Canada, Switzerland, Norway, Australia, and Japan. Out
of the 21 nations, Japan came in at number 12, with North European
nations and Canada taking the top two spots.
Although
Spain, France, and Japan aren't seen as being particularly excited about CSR, according
to Gjlberg, they rank surprisingly in the middle of the list. While France and
Spain perform better in more open
frameworks that place an emphasis on processes rather than results,
Japan is ranked higher for international frameworks that demand measurable accomplishments.
Japan stands out among CSR projects for its proactive information
disclosure practices, such as the publication of sustainability reports (Williams and Aguilera 2008).
Tanimoto and Suzuki
(2005) examined the characteristics of the major
Japanese corporations taking
part in the Global Reporting Initiative, a widely accepted set of standards for information disclosure. They discovered that
the likelihood of a company taking part in GRI increased with the proportion of foreign shareholders and overseas
sales. Additionally, a comparison of CSR reports from Japanese and Western
businesses reveals that the former
gives more attention
to environmental issues
while the latter and corporate
governance receive less attention.
Such results
are in line with assertions that Japan tends to emphasize the environment and encourages CSR in response to pressure from the West.
In their analysis
of the correlation between
CSR-related information disclosure and stock prices
in Japan and the UK, Bowerman and Sharma (2016) discovered that the UK exhibits a stronger correlation between information disclosure and higher stock
prices than did Japan. The authors suggest that information disclosure in
Japan might be carried out with a wider variety of sstakeholders in mind, beyond only shareholders, to explain this. The relationship between the proportion of outside directors and
the disclosure of ESG factors for Japan and the US is examined by Tran
(2018). The number of outside directors, according to the author,
is favourably correlated with
information disclosure in Japan, but this relationship does not exist in the United States.
The study suggests that information disclosure in Japan may be influenced
by stakeholder social norms other than shareholder
rules, supporting Bowerman
and Sharma's findings.
According to the studies
mentioned here, Japanese
CSR is characterized by the use of Western pressure to spur development, an
emphasis on the environment, active information disclosure, an emphasis on a wide range of
stakeholders beyond shareholders, and corporate governance that supports such an approach.
The majority of studies, however, focus only on CSR performance and activities; they do not examine the motivations and history of these practices. I'll move on to look at the many aspects of CSR in Japan.[5]
Comparison of CSR regulations in India with that
of other countries:
CSR can be characterized as a process for evaluating an organization's
impact on society and, consequently, its duties. It is not merely a legal obligation. The process starts with an evaluation of each company's respective attributes, including:
1.
Customers
2.
Environment
3.
Suppliers
4.
Employees
5.
Communities
The extent of
how CSR monies are spent on employees will significantly change under the Companies (CSR Policy) Amendment Rules
2021. The 2014 regulations forbade businesses
from investing their CSR funds on projects that primarily benefit the
firm's staff members and their
families. Any benefit that firm workers might obtain through CSR expenditures
appears to be prohibited by the
amendment requirements.
It is evident
from an analysis of India's CSR regulations that the nation combines
traditional philanthropy with
strategic projects under this system. CSR in India works in areas with a shortage of resources, such restrooms and
schools. Under the CSR framework, community needs
play a significant role and are often given top priority in India. Contrarily,
wealthy or important nations
like Canada and Australia use CSR funds
mostly for cultural
institutions, and they favor adopting green corporate
practices. In these nations, CSR is tackled using the inherent business
abilities.[6]
Conclusion
CSR is nothing more than the idea of looking beyond profits. Even though
India is the only nation in the world
to have a statutory compliance requirement that is necessary for CSR spending,
there are still many obstacles
to overcome that can
only be overcome by cooperation between the government, businesses,
and civil society.
The same is true for other nations, where a suitable CSR framework is required
and implementation must be done properly.
Consumers
would undoubtedly be more inclined to use a company's product or service if it demonstrated a commitment to tackling
economic, environmental, and social challenges. Therefore, in addition to producing engaging and
thought-provoking commercials, businesses must
engage the cooperation and support of the media in raising awareness concerning
CSR and its impact.
In conclusion, while comparing Japan and India, it cannot be said that one nation is significantly
superior to the other two. After gaining independence, the Indian economy only began to expand, and in the early years,
the country's centrally planned economy was founded on ideals of social compassion, which resulted in a high level of CSR. The Bhopal Gas tragedy
in 1984, however, marked a paradigm shift in environmental and safety
issues as the situation gradually
deteriorated. The Indian government started making significant reforms in 1986, commencing with the adoption of the
environmental protection act. Companies felt under pressure to initially adhere to international quality standards
as a result of this new statute periodically enacting
new rules and regulations.
The state of
India's environment today is a reflection of this, as the existing controls on industrial pollution, which has reached
intolerable levels, are insufficient. Fortunately, Indian officials have understood that foreign
investors must enhance their CSR standards before making investments in India, and as a result, economic progress and the advancement of human and children's
rights are now more closely
correlated.
In conclusion,
the government of India mandates CSR spending, whereas the governments of the majority of other nations do not. -
This is one of the largest contrasts between India's approach and other countries' approaches to CSR. Social
well-being and corporate success are defined and seen as mutually
exclusive in India since CSR is viewed there as a way for firms to lessen the harm their operations
have brought to the local people. While the two are viewed as mutually advantageous in other nations like Brazil, Japan, the US, or the European Union.
Japan was one of the first nations to formally acknowledge that pollution is a result
of economic progress, and the environmental agency
was founded in 1971 to handle these environmental issues. As soon as possible, measures to minimize emissions were
put in place, including emission
limits, recycling initiatives, special tax incentives, a reduction in fixed property
taxes, and financial
assistance from the Japanese Development Bank. As a result, CSR in Japan is normally
highly high due to the country's substantial commitment to environmental preservation since the 1960s.
h#ps://www.techtarget.com/searchcio/defini?on/corporate-social-responsibility-CSR
[2]h#ps://indiacsr.in/post-pandemic-csr-in-india-lessons-opportuni?es/
h#ps://www.interna?onalconference.in/XXI_AIC/TS5D/MsPoojanBathla.pdf
[4] h#ps://www.humblebunny.com/csr-japan-how-japanese-companies-approach-corporate-social- responsibility/
h#ps://graphics.eiu.com/files/ad_pdfs/CSR_JP_English.pdf
[5] h#ps://blog.ipleaders.in/comparing-corporate-social-responsibility-in-india-and-other-countries/ h#ps://thecsrjournal.in/what-can-india-learn-from-japans-green-policies/ h#ps://www.gatewayhouse.in/csr-in-a-compara?ve-perspec?ve/
Article Information
A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE ON CSR WITH COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN INDIA AND JAPAN
Authors: KHUSHI RAJVANSHI, RAGHUVIR KRISHNA
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2023/08/30
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.