英语论文网

cially responsible investing in 2001. It has also found that the majority of collaborators comment an inclination for working in socially responsible companies. Alongside, strong vendor standards and independent monitoring helps build company's reputation and the value of its brand, which are among its most valuable assets (Carroll, A. B., Shabana, K. M., 2010).

Environmental investments pay. Some firms that have negative social performance in the areas of environmental issues and product safety use charitable contributions as a means for building their legitimacy. Corporations are also reasoned to enhance their legitimacy and reputation through disclosure of information regarding their performance on different social and environmental issues (Kamens, D.H., 1985). Researches propose that policy-makers empower consumers by providing consumers with more information through mandatory reporting on social and environmental performance and the development of a comprehensive environmental awareness. As an example, Novo Group has registered some benefits because customer perceives the firm as an organization deeply involved in genetic modification and yet maintains highly interactive and constructive relationships with stakeholders and publishes a highly rated environmental and social report each year. Whereas, Monsanto's has a bad perception in European consumer markets as a result of perceived imposition of unlabelled, genetically modified food, ingredients and its opacity in environmental information (Carroll, A. B., Shabana, K. M., 2010). Comprehensive campaigns should be design within businesses in order to satisfy stakeholders' demands while, at the same time, allow the firm to pursue its operations. By engaging its stakeholders and satisfying their demands, the firm finds opportunities and solutions which enable it to pursue its profitability interest with the consent and support of its stakeholders.

国家之间的差异——Country Differences

Each country has developed environmental disclosure policies at different pace. In the US, environmental regulation was mainly developed on two periods. The first period lasted from easily 1970s to 1985. Firms faced with new regulations of high technical specificity. They did little more than comply with the regulations and often fought or present obstacles to them. Companies were generally unwilling to internalize environmental issues, a reluctance that was reflected in the delegation of environmental protection to local facilities, a widespread failure to create environmental performance-measurement systems, disclosure, and a refusal to view environmental issues as realities that needed to be incorporated into business strategy. During the mid to late 1980s, a shift in the regulatory context and the maturing of the environmental movement created an incentive for companies. With regulations focused more on ultimate environmental results and less on the mechanics of compliance, firms began to exercise greater discretion in their environmental response. During the second era, from mid 1980s to mid 1990s, the emergence of the win-win mind-set was a direct result of the extraordinary success companies achieved in reducing pollution. Many of the reduction programs made good financial sense, while few required truly fundamental changes in production processes or product designs. In order to demonstrate their commitment to environmental prog本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。