Central European Business Review 2020, 9(3):74-108 | DOI: 10.18267/j.cebr.240

The EU Puzzling CSR Regime and the Confused Perception by Ambassadors of Luxury Fashion Businesses: A Case Study from Pařížská

Radka MacGregor Pelikánová1, Robert K. MacGregor2
1 International Business Department, Metropolitan University Prague, Prague, Czech Republic, radkamacgregor@yahoo.com
2 International Business Department, Metropolitan University Prague, Prague, Czech Republic, robertkmacgregor@yahoo.com

Despite a decades-long discussion about corporate social responsibility ("CSR"), there is little known about the evolution and meaning of the EU law on CSR and its perception by various stakeholders. The two objectives of this paper are: (i) assessing the evolution to the current EU law on CSR and (ii) making a case study about the perception of CSR by businesses from the luxury fashion industry supposed to be the leading CSR force, namely their ambassadors - CEOs and employees facing the clientele in Pařížská street in Prague. In order to address these two objectives, holistic and interdisciplinary research of economic, legislative and academic sources as well as a case study, entailing interviews and mystery shopping was performed. The exploration of the yielded data employed Meta-Analysis, content analysis, teleological interpretation, etc. The critical and comparative review of the evolution of the EU law on CSR shows piecemeal trends and a lack of permanent consent. This leads to the fragmentation and ambiguity, which is matched by the findings of the case study. The perception of the EU law on CSR is done differently by various CEOs of luxury fashion businesses, and there is an inconsistency between their attitudes and those of their employees facing the clientele. Such inconsistency undermines the effectiveness and efficiency of the CSR regime and needs to be corrected.
Implications for Central European audience: Although the sustainability projected in CSR is critical, the EU law has undergone a complex and fragmented evolution leading to a partially mandatory framework. The understanding and application of such a framework about CSR and its reporting is a challenge. A Central European case study of luxury fashion industry businesses shows piecemeal trends and a lack of consent, and this even among CEOs and frontline employees of the same business. The implication of such an inconsistency is a decrease in the effectiveness and efficiency of the CSR regime, a devaluation of the CSR awareness and the need for corrections.

Keywords: corporate social responsibility (CSR); EU law; luxury industry
JEL classification: K20, M14, Q01

Received: January 14, 2020; Revised: March 27, 2020; Accepted: March 31, 2020; Prepublished online: July 3, 2020; Published: July 10, 2020  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
MacGregor Pelikánová, R., & MacGregor, R.K. (2020). The EU Puzzling CSR Regime and the Confused Perception by Ambassadors of Luxury Fashion Businesses: A Case Study from Pařížská. Central European Business Review, 9(3), 74-108. doi: 10.18267/j.cebr.240
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Albu, N., Albu, C. N., Dumitru, M. & Dumitru, V. F. (2013). Plurality or convergence in sustainable reporting standards? Amfiteatru Economic - Business and Sustainable Development, 15(7): 729-742.
    2. Anand, S. & Sen, A. (2000). Human development and economic sustainability. World Development, 28(12): 2029-2049. Go to original source...
    3. Andrikopoulos, A., Samitas, A. & Bekiaris, M. (2014). Corporate social responsibility reporting in financial institutions: Evidence from Euronext. Research in International Business and Finance, 32, 27-35. Go to original source...
    4. Areeda, Ph. E. (1996). The Socratic method. Harvard Law Review, 109(5): 911-922.
    5. Bar-Tal, D. (1986). Altruistic motivation to help: Definition, utility and operationalization. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations, 13(1/2): 3-14.
    6. Balcerzak, A. P. (2015). Europe 2020 Strategy and Structural Diversity Between Old and New Member States. Application of Zero Unitarization Method for Dynamic Analysis in the Years 2004-2013. Economics and Sociology, 8(2), 190-210. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789X.2015/8-2/14 Go to original source...
    7. Balcerzak, A. P. (2016a). Fiscal Burden in the European Union Member States. Economic Annals - XXI, 161(9-10):4-6. Go to original source...
    8. Balcerzak, A. P. (2016b). Technological Potential of European Economy. Proposition of Measurement with Application of Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 12(3): 7-17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/18005845.2016/12-3/1. Go to original source...
    9. Bansal, P. & Song, H. C. (2017). Similar But Not the Same: Differentiating Corporate Sustainability from Corporate Responsibility. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 105-149. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2015.0095 Go to original source...
    10. Barnett, M. L. (2007). Stakeholder influence capacity and the variablity of financial return to corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3): 794-816. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.25275520 Go to original source...
    11. Bavoso, V. (2012). Explaining Financial Scandals: Corporate Governance, Structured Finance and the Enlightened Sovereign Control Paradigm. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Go to original source...
    12. Berman, S. L., Wicks, A. C., Kotha, S. & Jones, T. M. (1999). Does stakeholder orientation matter? The relationship between stakeholder management models and firm financial performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 42, 488-506. Go to original source...
    13. Bhati, A. S. (2005). Robust Spatial Analysis of Rare Crimes: An Information-Theoretic Approach. Sociological Methodology, 35, 239-302. Go to original source...
    14. Bhattacharya, C. B. & Sen, S. (2004). Doing better at doing good: When, why, and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. California Management Review, 47, 9-24. Go to original source...
    15. Billon, M., Marco, R., Lera-Lopez, F. (2017). Innovation and ICT use in the EU: an analysis of regional drivers. Empirical Economics, 53(3): 1083-1108. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-016-1153-x Go to original source...
    16. Bunn, I. D. (2004). Global Advocacy for Corporate Accountability: Transatlantic Perspectives from the NGO Community. American University International Law Review, 19(6):1265-1306.
    17. Burley, A. M. & Mattli, W. (1993). Europe Before the Court: A Political Theory of Legal Integration. International Organization, 47(1): 41-76. Go to original source...
    18. Chandler, D. (2017). Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation. Thousand Oaks, CA : SAGE Publications.
    19. Chirita, A. D. (2014). A legal-historical review of the EU competition rules. International and comparative law quarterly, 63(2): 281-316. Go to original source...
    20. Cvik, E. D. & MacGregor Pelikánová, R. (2016). A comparative study of the legal liability of executives in LLC in the Czech Republic & some of other EU member states, Scientific Papers of the University of Pardubice, Series D: Faculty of Economics and Administration, 23(36): 54-65.
    21. Cvik, E. D. & MacGregor Pelikánová, R. (2017). The Volatively Sujective Nature and Value of Stock - Czech Case Study, Ad Alta - Interdisciplinary Research, 7(2): 40-45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-016-0472-y Go to original source...
    22. Cvik, E. D. & MacGregor Pelikánová, R. (2019). The (Mis)compliance of objectives of new CAP - Legislative, Academic and General Public Perspectives. European Countryside, 11(1): 143-161. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/euco-2019-0009. Go to original source...
    23. Çolak, M. S. & Ege, A. (2013). An Assessment of EU 2020 Strategy: Too Far to Reach? Social Indicators Research, ,110(2): 659-680. Go to original source...
    24. Deloitte (2019). Global Powers of Luxury Goods 2019. Bridging the gap between the old and the new. Retrieved January 5, 2020, from https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/es/Documents/bienes-comsumo-distribucion-hosteleria/Deloitte-ES-consumer-industry-global-powers-luxury-goods-2019.pdf
    25. Diekhof, E. W., Wittmer, S. & Reimers, L. (2014). Does competition really bring out the worst? Plos One, 9(7). DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0098977. Go to original source...
    26. Dubois B. & Paternault, C. (1995). Observations: understanding the world of international luxury brands. Journal of Advertising Research, 35(4): 69-76.
    27. Dvouletý, O. (2017). What is the Relationship between Entrepreneurship and Unemployment in Visegrad Countries? Central European Business Review, 6(2):42-53. DOI: 10.18267/j.cebr.179 Go to original source...
    28. Erixon, F. (2010). The Europe 2020 strategy: time for Europe to think again. European view, 9(1):29-37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12290-010-0120-8 Go to original source...
    29. European Commission. (2010). Communication from the Commission EUROPE 2020. A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. ("Europe 2020 Strategy"). Retrieved June, 30, 2020 from https://ec.europa.eu/eu2020/pdf/COMPLET%20EN%20BARROSO%20%20%20007%20-%20Europe%202020%20-%20EN%20version.pdf
    30. El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., Kwok, C. C. & Mishra, D. R. (2011). Does corporate social responsibility affect the cost of capital? Journal of Banking & Finance, 35(9): 2388-2406. Go to original source...
    31. Favell, A. & Geddes, A. (1997). European Integration, Immigration and the Nation State: Institutionalising Transnational Political Action? San Domenico: European University Institute - EUI Working Papers RSC No. 99/32, 1999, 7. Retrieved January 5, 2020, from http://www.eui.eu/RSCAS/WP-Texts/99_32.pdf
    32. Fehr, E. & Fischbacher, U. (2016). Human altruism-proximate patterns and evolutionary origins. Analyse & Kritik, 27(1): 6-47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/auk-2005-0101 Go to original source...
    33. Floridi, L. (2016). Mature information societies - a matter of expectations, Philosophy and Technology, 29, 1-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-016-0214-6. Go to original source...
    34. Friedman, M. (2007). The Social Responsibility of business is to Increase its Profits. In: Zimmerli W.C., Holzinger M., Richter K. (eds) Corporate Ethics and Corporate Governance. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 173-178. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007 Go to original source...
    35. Galbreath, J. (2013). ESG in focus: The Australian evidence. Journal of Business Ethics, 118(3): 529-541. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1607-9. Go to original source...
    36. Gallardo-Vázquez, D., Valdez, L. & Castuera-Diáz, A.M. (2019). Corporate Social Responsibility as an Antecedent of innovation, Reputation, and Competitiveness Success: A Multiple Mediation Analysis. Sustainability, 11(20): 5614. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su11205614. Go to original source...
    37. Gillai, B., Rammohan, S. V. & Lee, H. L. (2014). Managing Supply Chain Sustainability and Intellectual Property: Are They More Similar than Different? Stanford Initiative for the Study of Supply Chain Responsibility, March 2014.
    38. Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 5 (10): 3-8. Go to original source...
    39. Goss, A. & Roberts, G. (2011). The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on the Cost of Bak Loans. Journal of Banking and Finance, 35(7): 1794-1810. Go to original source...
    40. Han, Y. J., Nunes, J. C. & Dreze, X. (2010). Signaling Status with Luxury Goods: The Role of Brand Prominence. Journal of Marketing, 74(4): 15-30. Go to original source...
    41. Haski-Leventhal, D. (2018). Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility. Los Angeles : SAGE Publication.
    42. Heckman, J. J.(2005a). The Scientific Model of Causality. Sociological Methodology, 35, 1-98. Go to original source...
    43. Heckamn, J. J. (2005b). Rejoinder: Response to Sobel. Sociological Methodology, 35, 135-162. Go to original source...
    44. Hochman, G., Shahar, A. & Ariely, D. (2015). Fairness requires deliberation. The primacy of economic over social considerations. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00747. Go to original source...
    45. Ikram, A., Li, Z.F. & Minor, D. (2019). CSR-contingent executive compensation contracts. Journal of Banking & Finance. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2019.105655. Go to original source...
    46. Jedrzejowska-Schiffauer, I., Schiffauer, P. & Thalassinos, E. (2019). EU Regulatory Measures Following the Crises: What Impact on Corporate Governance of Financial Institutions? European Research Studies Journal, 22(3), 432-456. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35808/ersj/1488. Go to original source...
    47. Jindřichovská, I. & Purcarea, I. (2011). CSR and Environmental Reporting in the Czech Republic and Romania: Country Comparison of Rules and Practices. Accounting and Management Information Systems, 10(2), 202-227.
    48. Kale, G. Ö. & Öztürk, G. (2016). The importance of sustainability in luxury brand management. Intermedia International e-Journal, 3(4): 106-126. Go to original source...
    49. Kašparová, K. (2018). The Czech CSR Reports: Topics and Quality of Their Processing. Acta academica karviniensis, XVIII(2): 5-15. Go to original source...
    50. Knapp, V. (1995). Teorie práva. [Theory of Law] 1st edition. Prague, CZ : C. H. Beck.
    51. Knapp, V. (2003). Vědecká propedeutika pro právníky [Scientific Propedeutics for Lawyers]. Bratislava, SR : Eurolex Bohemia.
    52. Knapp, V. & Gerloch, A. (2012). Právní propedeutika [Legal Propedeutics]. 2nd Edition. Plzeň, CZ : Vydavatelství a nakladatelství Aleš Čeněk.
    53. Konrath, S. H. (2011). Changes in dispositional empathy in American college students over time: A meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15(2): 180-198. DOI: 10.1177/1088868310377395 Go to original source...
    54. Krause, J. (2015). The Potential of Environmentally Friendly Business Strategy - Research from the Czech Republic. International Journal of Engineering Business Management, 7(6): 1-6. DOI: 10.5772/60064 Go to original source...
    55. Křečková Kroupová, Z. (2015). The Latest Trends in the Corporate Sustainability and its Implications for Czech Businesses. Central European Business Review, 4(2):12-20. Go to original source...
    56. Kuckartz, U. (2014). Qualitative Text Analysis - A Guide to Methods, Practice and Using Software. 1st Edition. Sage Publications Ltd. Go to original source...
    57. Lenaerts, K. & Guttiérez-Fons, J.A. (2013). To Say What the Law of the EU Is? Methods of Interpretation and the European Court of Justice. Academy of European Law, 9, 1-55.
    58. Li, F., Minor, D., Wang, J. & Yu, C. (2019). A learning curve of the market. Chasing alpha of socially responsible firms. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 109, 103772. Go to original source...
    59. Lianos, I. (2010). Shifting Narratives in the European Internal Market: Efficient Restrictions of Trade and the Nature of "Economic" Integration'. European Business Law Review, 21(5): 705-760. Go to original source...
    60. MacGregor, R. K. & MacGregor Pelikánová, R. (2019). Shareholder Engagement for Corporate Governance in the Light of the Harmonization and Transposition. International Journal of Economics and Business Administration, VII(4): 22-34. Go to original source...
    61. MacGregor Pelikánová, R. (2014). Selected current aspects and issues of European integration. Ostrava, CZ: Key Publishing.
    62. MacGregor Pelikánová, R. (2017a). European Myriad of Approaches to Parasitic Commercial Practices. Oeconomia Copernicana, 8(2), 167-180. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24136/oc.v8i2.11. Go to original source...
    63. MacGregor Pelikánová, R. (2017b). Supranational Europe 2020 Competitiveness - Questionable Effectiveness, Efficiency and Value Compliance. In Nálepková, V., Šťastná, J. Conference Proceedings - International Scientific Conference - Economic policy in the Global Environment. Havířov: Vysoká škola sociálně správní.
    64. MacGregor Pelikánová, R. (2017c). Constantine´s Christianity for the (Dis)integrated EU - Déjà vu of Constantine's Roman governance reflecting of the mistrial of Jesus for EU? Dialogo, 4(1): 81-98. Go to original source...
    65. MacGregor Pelikánová, R. (2018a). European drive for fair competition - nature and impact of the harmonized protection against unfair commerical practices. Ostrava: Key Publishing and Praha: MUP Press.
    66. MacGregor Pelikánová, R. (2018b). The nebulous effectiveness, efficiency and fairness of the European e-Justice Portal vis-à-vis Corporate Social Responsibility. Progress in Economic Sciences, 5, 127-141. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14595/PES/05/008. Go to original source...
    67. MacGregor Pelikánová, R. (2018c). Fostering Innovation - a Myth or Reality of the EU in 2018 In: Staníčková, M., Melecký, L., Kovářová, E., Dvoroková, K. (Eds.). Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on European Integration 2018, May 17-18, 2018, Ostrava, 965-973 of 1121.
    68. MacGregor Pelikánová, R. (2019a). Corporate Social Responsibility Information in Annual Reports in the EU - Czech Case Study. Sustainability, 11, 237. DOI:10.3390/su11010237. Go to original source...
    69. MacGregor Pelikánová, R. (2019b). Harmonization of the protection against misleading commercial practices: ongoing divergences in Central European countries. Oeconomia Copernicana, 10(2), 239-252. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24136/oc.2019.012. Go to original source...
    70. MacGregor Pelikánová, R. (2019c) R&D expenditure and innovation in the EU and selected member states. JEMI, 15(1):13-33. DOI: https://doi.org/doi.org/10.7341/20191511. Go to original source...
    71. MacGregor Pelikánová, R. (2019d). The Fair Analysis of the Case law of the Court of Justice of EU on the Unfair Commercial Practices. Acta Academica Karviniensia, (1): 47-58. Go to original source...
    72. MacGregor Pelikánová, R (2019e). Corporate Social Responsibility for Fair Commercial Practices and Intellectual Property: Real Potential? Toruń, PL : Institute of Economic Research and Polish Economic Society Branch. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24136/eep.mon.2019.1. Go to original source...
    73. MacGregor Pelikánová, R. & Beneš, M. (2017). Does the Full Harmonization of the Consumers´Protection Against Unfair Commercial Practices Via UCPD Fit in Europe 2020? Czech Yearbook of International Law - CYIL, 8, 223-231.
    74. MacGregor Pelikánová, R., Beneš, M. & MacGregor, R. (2016). European (mis)reconciliation of rules against misleading Commercial practices - the Last decade's crusade of the Commission and CJ EU. In Majerová, I., Kotlánová, E. (eds.). Proceedings of the 14th International Conference "Economic policy in the European Union Member Countries", 389-398 of 424.
    75. MacGregor Pelikánová, R., Císařová, J. & Beneš, M. (2017). The misleading perception of the purpose of the protection against misleading advertising by the EU law and its impact in the Czech Republic. The Lawyer Quarterly, 7(3): 145-161.
    76. MacGregor Pelikánová, R. & Cvik, E.D. (2019). Awareness and Perception of Modernized Electronic Public Procurement - Czech Case Study. Ad Alta - Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, 9(1): 34-40.
    77. MacGregor Pelikánová, R. & MacGregor, R. (2017). European e-Justice Portal - Reality of Electronic One-Stop-Shop for Publication of Financial Statements in the EU. In: Jindřichovská, Irena; Kubíčková, Dana. Conference: 5th International Scientific Conference on IFRS - Global Rules and Local Use. Anglo-American University.
    78. MacGregor Pelikánová, R. & MacGregor, R. (2018a). Corporate Social Responsibility e-Reporting as a tool for (Un)fair competition in the EU. In Löster, T.; Pavelka, T. (Eds.). Conference Proceedings. The 12th International Days of Statistics and Economics. University of Economics, Prague.
    79. MacGregor Pelikánová, R. & MacGregor, R. (2018b). Reality of e-Reporting of Annual Accooutns of SMEs in the EU - McDonald's, BurgerKing, KFC and Subway Case Study. In: Jindřichovská, I.; Kubíčková, D. 6th International Scientific Conference on IFRS - Global Rules and Local Use Location: Anglo-American University, Prague.
    80. MacGregor Pelikánová, R. & MacGregor, R. (2019). The Impact of the New EU Trademark Regime on Entrepreneurial Competitiveness. Forum Scientiae Oeconomia, 7(2): 59-70. DOI:10.23762/FSO_VOL7_NO2_4. Go to original source...
    81. Mallin, Ch. (2018). Corporate Governance. 6th Edition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Go to original source...
    82. Małecka, J., Łucka, T., Šebestová, J. & Šperka, R. (2017) Economic Activity and Social Determinants Versus Entrepreneurship in SMEs - Selected Aspects. Copernican Journal of Finance & Accounting, 6(3): 47-61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12775/CJFA.2017.016. Go to original source...
    83. Marino, I. & Licata, G.F. (2009). The Law of Integration: An Introduction. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 28 E SI/2009, 236-248.
    84. Marinova, D. & Raven, M. (2006). Indigenous Knowledge and Intellectual Property: A Sustainable Agenda. Journal of Economic Surveys, 20(4): 587-605. Go to original source...
    85. Matejka, J. (2013). Internet jako objekt práva - Hledání rovnováhy autonomie a soukromí [Internet as the Object of Law - In Search of a Balance between Autonomy and Privacy]. Prague, CZ : CZ.NIC.
    86. Matuszak, Ł. & Róźanska, E. (2017). CSR Disclosure in Polish-Listed Companies in the Light of Directive 2014/95/EU Requirements: Empirical Evidence. Sustainability, 9, 2304. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su9122304. Go to original source...
    87. McWilliams, A. & Siegel, D. (2000) Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal, 21(5): 603-609. Go to original source...
    88. Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D.L., Randers, J., Behrens, W.W. (1972). The limtis to growth; Universe Books: New York, USA.
    89. Morgan Stanley (2017). Millennials Drive Growth in Sustainable Investing. Morgan Stanley. Retrieved January 5, 2020 from https://www.morganstanley.com/ideas/sustainable-socially-responsible-investing-millennials-drive-growth.
    90. Němečková, I. (2013). The Roles of Salary in Employee Motivation and Retention in the Financial Sector of the Czech Republic in Relation to Herzberg´s Two Factor Theory of Work Motivation. Politická ekonomie, 61(3): 373-392. Go to original source...
    91. Okoli, Ch. & Pawlowski, S.D. (2004). The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications. Information & Management, 42(1): 15-29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2003.11.002 Go to original source...
    92. Olšanová, K., Gook, G. & Zlatić, M. (2018). Influence of Luxury Companies´ Corporate Social Responsibility Activities on Consumer Purchase Intention: Development of Theoretical Framework. Central European Business Review, 7(3): 1-25. Go to original source...
    93. Osei-Tutu, J. J. (2019). Socially Responsible Corporate IP. FIU Legal Studies Research Paper Series. Research Paper No. 19-01.
    94. Osterweil, W. (2012). The Sectret Shopper. The New Enquiry. Retrieved January 10, 2020 from https://thenewinquiry.com/the-secret-shopper/
    95. Pakšiová, R. (2016). Understanding of corporate social responsibility in large companies in Slovakia within the context of sustainable development. In Economic policy in the European union member countries. International scientific conference. Karviná: School of Business Administration in Karvina, SU in Opava, 2016, pp. 516-525.
    96. Pakšiová, R. (2017). Sustainability reporting in the Slovak republic. In Sustainability reporting in Central and Eastern European companies: international empirical insights. Cham: Springer, 143-154. Go to original source...
    97. Pakšiová, R. & Lovciová, K. (2019). Managerial Reporting by Food Production Companies in Slovakia in 2017. - Registrovaný v: Scopus. In Engineering Management in Production and Services. Kleosin : Bialystok University of Technology, 11(3): 71-85. Go to original source...
    98. Petera, P., Wagner, J., Pakšiová, R. & Krehnacová, A. (2019). Sustainability Information in Annual Reports of Companies Domiciled in the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic. In Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics. Kaunas : Kaunas University of Technology, 30(4): 483-495. Go to original source...
    99. Peterson, L. (1983). Influence of age, task competence, and responsibility focus on children´s altruism. Developmental Psychology, 19(1): 141. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.19.1.141. Go to original source...
    100. Piekarczyk, A. (2016). Contemporary organization and a perspective on integration and development. Oeconomia Copernicana, 7(3): 467-483. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12775/OeC.2016.027. Go to original source...
    101. Polcyn, J., Stępień, S. & Czyżewski, B. (2019). The Measurement of the Quality of the Environment and its Determinants in Poland and in the Regional Perspective. Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 2019, 21(2): 11-21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29302/oeconomica.2019.21.2.1 Go to original source...
    102. Porter, M. E. & Kramer, M.R. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 2011, 89(1/2):62-67. Go to original source...
    103. Preston, L. E. & O´Bannon, D.P. (1997). The corporate social-financial performance relationship. A typology and analysis. Business & Society, 36, 419-429. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/000765039703600406. Go to original source...
    104. Rodriguez-Fernandez, M. (2016). Social responsibility and financial performance. The role of good corporate governance. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 19, 137-151. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2015.08.001. Go to original source...
    105. Rowley, T. & Berman, S. (2000). A brand new brand of corporate social performance. Business & Society, 39(4): 397-418. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/000765030003900404. Go to original source...
    106. Scherer, G. & Palazzo, G. (2011). The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy. Journal of Management Studies, 48, 899-931. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00950.x Go to original source...
    107. Schmidt, F.L. & Hunter, J.E. (2014). Methods of Meta-Analysis - Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings. 3rd Edition, London, UK: SAGE. Go to original source...
    108. Schüz, M. (2012). Sustainable Corporate Responsibility - The Foundation of successful Business in the New Millennium. Central European Business Review, 1(2): 7-15. Go to original source...
    109. Sharfman, M. P. & Fernando, Ch. S. (2008). Environmental risk management and the cost of capital. Strategic Management Journal, 29, 569-592. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.678. Go to original source...
    110. Silverman, D. (2013). Doing Qualitative Research - A Practical Handbook. 4th Edition, London, UK: SAGE.
    111. Sroka, W. & Lörinczy, M. (2015). The perception of ethics in business: Analysis of research results. Procedia Economics and Finance, 34, 156-163. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)01614-7. Go to original source...
    112. Sroka, W. & Szántó, R. (2018) Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Ethics in Controversial Sectors: Analysis of Research Results. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation - JEMI, 14, 111-126. DOI https://doi.org/10.7341/20181435. Go to original source...
    113. Staníčková, M. & Melecký, L. (2014). FACTORS DETERMINING DRIVING FORCES OF COMPETITIVENESS IN EU COUNTRIES. 12th International Conference on Hradec Economic Days (HED 2014): Economic Development and Management of Regions. Hradec Kralove: University Hradec Kralove, 338-348.
    114. Strouhal, J., Gurvitš, N., Nikitina-Kalamäe, M. & Startseva, E. (2015). Finding the link between CSR reporting and corporate financial performance: evidence on Czech and Estonian listed companies. Central European Business Review, 4(3), 48-59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18267/j.cebr.132. Go to original source...
    115. Svoboda, P. (2011). The Lisbon Treaty - From a Legal and Therefore Politically Incorrect Perspective. The Lawyer Quarterly, 1(2): 138-141.
    116. Svobodová, M. (2016). On the Concept of Legislative Acts in the European Union Law. The Lawyer Quarterly, 4, 256-267. Go to original source...
    117. Šebestová, J., Krejčí, P. & Šiška, P. (2018). "Be or Not to Be": A Dilemma of Business Policy Support on a Regional Level. Central European Business Review, 7(1):3-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18267/j.cebr.192 Go to original source...
    118. Thalassinos, E. & Thalassinos, Y. (2018). Financial Crises and e-Commerce: How Are They Related. Retrieved January 5, 2020 from https://ssrn.com/abstract=3330169 and http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3330169 . DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3330169. Go to original source...
    119. Ting, I. W. K., Azizan, N.A.; Bhaskaran, R. K. & Sukumaran, S. K. (2019) Corporate Social Performance and Firm Performance: Comparative Study among Developed and Emerging Market Firms. Sustainability, 2019, 12, 26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12010026. Go to original source...
    120. Turečková, K. (2016). Sectoral specialization as a source of competitiveness: case study on ICT sector in V4+ countries. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on European Integration 2016. Ostrava: VŠB-TU Ostrava, pp. 1023-1029
    121. Turečková, K. & Nevima, J. The perils of drawing from European funds in public education. In: Public Administration 2016: Proceedings of the 11th International Scientific Conference. Pardubice: University of Pardubice, 2016, 273-283.
    122. Tvrdoň, M. (2016). Decomposition of Unemployment: The Case of the Visegrad Group Countries. E&M Ekonomie a Management, 19(1): 4-16. Go to original source...
    123. Tvrdoň, M., Tuleja, P. & Verner, T. (2012). Economic Performance and Labour Market in the Context of the Economic Crisis: Experience from the Visegrad Four Countries. E&M Ekonomie a Management, 15(3): 16-31.
    124. Vivant, M. (2016). Building a common culture IP? International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 47(3): 259-261. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-016-0472-y. Go to original source...
    125. Vokoun, M. (2017). Characteristic of the innovation activities of firms in Europe: a critical review of international differences. Review of Economic Perspectives - Národohospodářský obzor, 17(3): 239-262. DOI: 10.1515/revecp-2017-0013. Go to original source...
    126. Wanilin, A. (2006). The Lisbon Scorecard IV: Will Europe´s Economy Rise Again? London: Center for European Reform.
    127. World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford university Press, New York, USA.
    128. Yin, R. K. (2008). Study Research. Desing Methods. 4th Edition. Thousand Oaks : Sage.
    129. Zhao, Ch., Guo, Y., Yuan, J., Wu, M., Li, D., Zhou, Y. & Kang, J. (2018). ESG and Corporate Financial Performance: Empirical Evidence From China´s Listed Power Generation Companies. Sustainability, 10, 2607. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082607 Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY NC ND 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content