THE EMERGENCE OF DIVERSE CSR MODELS IN ASIA

49

globalized business platform.

Comparing the CSR landscape of Asia with those of Europe and North America, one appreciates that there are some realities unique to Asia that are critical in influencing the continental approach to responsible and sustainable business models and governance. For example, Li et al. (2022) found that Asia is economically, culturally, and linguistically more diverse than Europe and North America. Compared to any other regions of the world, Asia arguably has the most dynamic mix of least developed, developing, and developed economies (Ahmad et al. (2021). It follows, therefore, that it is inaccurate to attempt to refer to a single model of Asian CSR because it has different definitions and outlooks across the region. Equally importantly, Amor-Esteban et al. (2019) note that Asia has undergone the most rapid economic growth in the last 50 years than any other region of the world. This is in sharp contrast with European and North American perspectives that, over the same 50-year period, placed more focus on maintaining high standards of living (Hoque et al., 2018). For policymakers and strategists in Asia, this complicates the task of balancing the need to raise living standards, improve corporate governance, and participate fully in the global sustainability drive. Lopez et al. (2022) reported that Asia has unique obstacles to implementing CSR and achieving its goals, especially in the developing countries. Unlike in North America and Europe, developing countries in Asia have relatively weaker institutions, standards, and appeals systems, which are essential to the effective conduct of CSR initiatives (Sadiq et al., 2021). However, Dorfleitner and Grebler (2022) also argue that among Asian countries that are appreciably taking up CSR, and especially Japan, there is a traditionally strong focus on environmental aspects.

rather, the situation is just not explicitly defined because it has not been study for as long and deeply as it has in the West (Okafor et al., 2021). This is especially true considering developed economies such as Japan and South Korea as well as others, to a lesser extent, such as India.

Similarly, the absence of democratic institutions and the legacy of state-owned corporations in a country like China appear to have precluded the implementation and support for growth of the concept of CSR. Therefore, although China may be viewed as an outlier in this respect, Popkova et al. (2021) argue that such may not be the situation in the long-term.

Local Chinese businesses continue to play a minor role, unlike their multinational corporation counterparts that play a notable change agent role. According to Halkos and Nomikos (2021), the multinational corporations are increasingly inspiring the local businesses to embrace CSR and, more importantly, senior government officials are also seen to raise awareness of the importance of CSR in corporate governance. Several NGOs in China, also referred to as “social organizations” in the country, that have good relationships with public authorities are developing CSR guidelines that encompass both economic and social dimensions (Sun et al., 2022). Rohmatika and Amilahaq (2021) point out that such guidelines range from standards of corporate governance to measures to deal with corruption, environmental justice, and to equal employment opportunities.

Just like its multiple languages, cultures, and religions, it is also difficult to define a single

“Asian CSR” model. As Balsalobre-Lorente et al. (2020) explained, corporate practices across Asia are as diverse as its natural environments and this has implications for corporate governance and the practicality of CSR choices. In India, for example, philanthropy and CSR are almost used interchangeably while, at the same time, civil society is also notably active.

According to Ulucak et al. (2020), this suggests a “stakeholder model” may eventually be entrenched in the CSR landscape just as it is in Europe and North America. Such a model and the overall approach to CSR in a country like India will be defined and influenced by the tension

51

between its cultural and spiritual values on one hand and energetic commercial development on the other. According to Usman et al. (2020), these forces are often in contradiction to the focus on simple material progress.

In a country like China, the unprecedented economic growth set off Western interest in CSR in the larger Asia although some commentators observe that it was more as a way of predicting the impacts China would have on the West (Chen et al., 2019). For instance, for the better part of the 21st century, Western society and international bodies such as the United Nations have focused on the concept of “harmonious society” in China and the Chinese government’s attempts to address the growing environmental concerns in the country. Amidst increasing economic disparity, there are concerns about corporate governance, issues of safety, and agitated stock speculation being downplayed, and this raises the likelihood that the role of business in Chinese society could come under greater pressure to act as agents of change.

Japan and South Korea in northeast Asia have undergone their own historical conflicts but they nonetheless share relative economic success. However, they also share concerns the potential political and economic impacts of China in the region. As a result, Japanese and South Korean perceptions of and approaches towards CSR are evolving in similar terms, with both economies expressing increased interest in global CSR. Organizations based in both Japan and South Korea are increasingly becoming more engaged in studying global supply chain practices although the Japanese automotive industry has, agreeably, made greater progress.

In response to criticism from the West, business managers in Asia argue that they have always practices CSR but probably never used the term as coined in North America and Europe.

In Japan and South Korea, for example, CSR reporting is increasingly covering wider issues related to the economy, society, and environment that before (Xiao & Park, 2021). However, critics also note that the reporting virtually bypasses issues that touch on the prevalence of social inequality and the maintenance of employment (Surya & Rokhim, 2021). In Japan, for instance, while the Gini coefficient is getting significantly higher, the social disparity remains notably

small relative to developed economies such as Australia and the US. According to a survey by Achmad and Yulianah (2022), top managers in Japan earn an annual pay of approximately 50 million yens, which is close to 10 times what the average worker gets. However, Karwowski and Raulinajtys-Grzybek (2021) also note that Japanese managers are more likely than their Western counterparts to accept considerable pay cuts, like they did in the recession of the 1990s, to embrace their social responsibility in times when the country is facing financial challenges.

As already noted earlier in this thesis attitudes relating to CSR in Asia typically have religious connotations and, according to Sadiq et al. (2021), this is still a prevalent notion in India and Thailand today. However, notable business powerhouses on the continent, such as the India Tata conglomerate and other top software businesses such as Infosys indulge not only in philanthropic activities but also high-stake activities such as health, community development, and human safety (Achmad & Yulianah, 2022). This can support the argument that Asian businesses have always practiced CSR but under a different name as coined in North America and Europe. According to Okafor et al. (2021), Asia is by large a patriarchal society in which business success is increasing being acknowledged for the role it plays in creating social obligations to give back to the community and support the wellbeing of employees beyond the legally documented contractual obligations.

Admittedly, CSR in Asia may not be in the same sense it is in Europe. However, as Indriastuti and Chariri (2021) point out, the creation of foundations is a confirmation that most CSR activities on the continent are externalized. However, this may also be problematic because of the limited commitment it allows to CSR in its wider context. For instance, Dorfleitner and Grebler (2022) explain that the limited commitment also limits focus on pertinent issues such as working conditions including worker safety, working hours, and minimum wage;

responsibility in the supply chain; board transparency; employee training and career progression; quality and safety of goods and services; and women and children in the workforce.

However, it cannot also be overlooked that some businesses, an example of which has been

53

given of the India Tata conglomerate, have built characteristics that surpass the traditional small-scale philanthropy activities. These, as pointed out by Khan et al. (2021), include getting into long-term partnerships with local communities for sustainable projects such as poverty alleviation, education scholarships, and building infrastructure. From that perspective, therefore, the emergence of diverse models of CSR in Asia is bringing forth practices that are close to what is practiced by businesses in the West.