corporate social responsibility in companies and...
TRANSCRIPT
Corporate Social Responsibility in Companies and the
Civil Sphere -with Special Focus on Denmark and
Hungary
Master Thesis
Author: Kata Dimény, (284647) MSc. International Business
Advisor: Jens Kaalhauge Nielsen
Aarhus School of Business
University of Aarhus
Department of Management
Aarhus, Denmark, 2009.
Abstract
In my thesis, I would like reveal on topics which are related to company-civil
sector relations and corporate social responsibility. I will let insight into the notion and
current debate of civil society and civil capital. I will give examples through different
researchers’ opinion, about the different determinations, models and concepts. Emerging
importance of civil society should be considered as possibility for individuals to meet
their social needs through civil society organisations. The state and the civil society
cannot exist without each other. None of them is better, that the other. Civil society has
intermediate role between households and the state.
After civil societies I will talk about
non-governmental/non-profit-orientated/civil/third sectorial/self-help organisations. I
will show that these terms are synonyms of each other in many cases; just the approach
is different, from where we see them in different situations.
In the next part, I will show the historical and organisational development of
Danish and Hungarian civil spheres. The difference is recognisable not just in the past,
but also in the present.
After then I am going to examine company-civil organisation relationships with
special focus on corporate social responsibility (CSR). According to my research, CSR
is a managerial asset which has many direct and indirect favourable advantages on the
company and of course on the environment and other stakeholders. I will show some
critics of CSR also and the role of CSR during crisis.
In the last session I am providing data about my own research, I implemented
among Danish and Hungarian companies and civil society organisations. The
questionnaire-based research will certify my hypothesis, namely that Danish company-
civil society organisation relationships are more developed and well-operating, than
Hungarian company-civil society organisations’ relations.
2
Table of content
Abstract.........................................................................................................2
List of tables..................................................................................................6
Part One
Introduction...................................................................................................7
Purpose of the Paper......................................................................................8
Problem Formulation.....................................................................................8
Structure of the Paper....................................................................................9
Part Two
NGOs as core components of Civil Society................................................10
Concept of Civil Society......................................................................10
NGOs’ role in Civil Society.................................................................14
Part Three
Definitions for Non-profit-oriented Organizations.....................................18
Economic Approach: The Non-business sphere.................................18
Scientific approach: Non-profit-orientated organizations –history and
what does the term mean and refer to.................................................19
Non-governmental Organisations (NGOs).........................................20
Organizational Approach: Non-governmental Organisations............21
Non-profit or Non-governmental? What is the difference?................26
Overview about the Danish and Hungarian Non-profit sphere..........26
The history and development of the Danish non-profit sphere. .26
The Danish Foundation Sector...................................................28
Danish NGOs.............................................................................28
3
The history and development of the Hungarian non-profit sphere
.....................................................................................................................30
Part Four
Relationship between Non-profit-orientated Organizations and Companies
.....................................................................................................................32
Public Affairs......................................................................................32
Issue Management..............................................................................32
Sponsorship and Donation..................................................................32
Part Five
Corporate Social Responsibility..................................................................35
The use of CSR for the different units of the company......................35
Public Relations (PR)...................................................................35
Marketing.....................................................................................37
Relationship between Identity Salience and CSR on
Consumer behaviour............................................................37
Human Resources........................................................................39
Advantages of CSR generally......................................................40
The Effect of Financial Crisis on CSR...............................................41
Critics of the CSR as the Best Way for Companies and Firms to Be
Socially Responsible...........................................................................42
Part Six
Own research about Danish and Hungarian Company-NPO/NGO relations
.....................................................................................................................44
Danish companies’ answers’ review...................................................44
Hungarian companies’ answers review..............................................45
Danish civil organisations’ answers review........................................46
Hungarian civil organisations’ answers review..................................46
4
Conclusion of the research..........................................................................47
Part Seven
Conclusion...................................................................................................48
Bibliography................................................................................................50
Appendix.....................................................................................................55
1. Questionnaire for Companies...........................................................56
2. Questionnaire for the Civil Sphere...................................................58
3. 2008 Corruption reception Index......................................................60
5
List of tables
Table 1.: Organisations in Civil Society.....................................................15
Figure 1.: Five Criteria of the Non-profit Sector.........................................19
Figure 2.: Funding Flows............................................................................23
Figure 3.: Advantages of CSR.....................................................................34
Figure 4.: Conceptual Framework...............................................................37
6
Part One
Introduction
The Nobel economist Milton Friedman provides us an interesting insight he had
about the “schizophrenic” tendencies of business leaders: “When is comes to their own
business, CEOs look long time ahead, thinking of what the business id going to be like
five to the years from now. But when they get into the public sphere and start going into
the problems of politics, they tend to be very short-sighted.”1
The above mentioned tendency did not stop to be exist totally, but fortunately more and
more members of the business sphere are recognising the emergent issue of global
warming, ethical-operating through they focus their concentration on corporate social
responsibility as a managerial asset in the hand of enlightened CEOs.
The company’s long-term objectives can be aimed just if managers consider the fact that
their company is the part of the environment and not a dominant unity, above it.
CSR is an asset, which helps to harmonise the company’s charity initiatives, offering,
sponsoring, the employees’ voluntary actions. All these things should be organised into
one single system, in order to be really effective for the company and for the supported
issue as well. In case of inordinate, not harmonized actions, each good-intention-guided,
socially awareness gestures can be lost. For high efficiency, a transparent and clear
CSR-strategy is needed and the communication of all these activities towards
stakeholders.
1 Friedman 2006
7
Purpose of the paper
I decided to write about the topic or CSR in my thesis, not just because CSR and
NGO-company relations are emerging and relevant topics nowadays, party because of
the revival of civil society and partly because some researchers consider CSR as a
possible solution for companies to survive the period of financial crisis and not just
survive, but get out of it as winners. I also choose the topic because I have personal
interest in Public Relations and Corporate Social Responsibility activities. Soon I would
like start working in these directions, as a member of the PR department of company, or
corporate communication link between e.g. Hungary and Denmark, in a Danish
subsidiary in Hungary or the other way. I believe I have the ability to coordinate and
manage issues, related to PR and communication. Of course after school years in a
workplace people are still learning. I know my obstacles, but I know how to beat them. I
know that by writing this paper I will get a big step closer to may aim, and to understand
this field of business.
Problem Formulation
My hypothesis is:Danish company-civil society organisation relationships are more developed and well-
operating, than Hungarian company-civil society organisation’s relations, and they bring
more value both into the society and for the company.
8
Structure of the paper
I aimed to follow a structure of an academic paper, which both theoretical,
methodological, and practical parts of discourses. For the civil society discussion I
found great scientifically deep essay-bouquets in the book Civil Society and
International Development. After this theoretical part, I changed the intonation of my
paper and I turned the line discussion into more stable organisational, economic and
institutional approach of those association, I mentioned in the civil society part as well
as later, in other parts. I worked from books, journal articles, reports and web pages.
Sometimes I found myself in deep water, and I stuck for sometime, and I gave time to
myself to recognise and solve my problem, e.g. by the examination of NGOs more
close.
Besides many American scientists’ work and a Spanish researcher’s article (in
English) I read Hungarian political researchers’, economists’ and sociologists’ work on
the topic CSR. I found a really nice book, called CSR, which approach the topic from a
new view and it can be considered as a handbook for companies how to be socially
responsible.
The final part of my thesis includes my research I implemented among Danish and
Hungarian companies and civil society organisations.
I built up my thesis according to this structure consciously, in order to follow
some kind of difficulty-line from the theories until the research part and to give the joy
of wide range of structural variety to the readers.
9
Part Two
NGOs as core components of Civil Society2 Concept of Civil Society
There are lots of different theories and models about civil society, and about what
the term exactly covers. The boundaries are blurred and different experts of this topic
express different logical links, where we can set the line, what civil society means
exactly and what its functions, components and importance are. According to the OECD
Development Assistance Committee (DAC), “Civil society is central to discussions of
democratisation, the rule of law, human rights. While familiar in substance to aid
operators for a long time, the notion of ‘civil society’ has acquired a new dimension in
the context of governance and democratisation.”3 DAC and other sources talk about the
revival of civil society, more than invention. They claim, that for a healthy, well-
working state-private sector relationship and for development-participation-governance
linkage, a strong civil society is needed, where women play an important role, and with
the co-operation of civil society and the private sector, necessary reforms are
implementable in the political and economic system.
The theoretical debate around civil society is significant and complex. Some of
the researchers still have not accepted it, like Adam Seligman, who says, that in the
revival of civil society the concept means different things to people with different
perceptions, attitude, culture, lifestyle and in the end there is nothing else, just a big
ambiguity and confusion. Andrew Arató and Jean L. Cohen, political researchers claim
that the concept of civil society is useful both theoretically and practically. Their
problem is with the transformation of the way how modern societies perceive
themselves, and they also think, that the constant changing of political culture is the
reason of the re-emergence of civil society’s current discourse.
To give examples to the lack of consensus about the meaning of the term civil
society, now I cite some political and social researches about their concepts. According
2 Bernard et al. 19983 Bernard et al. 1998, p. 11.
10
to Giovanni Agnelli, “Civil Society is the key element, the meeting of autonomous
subjects of the State and its institutions, united not only by values and cultures, but also
by the desire to act conjointly and to assume the specific responsibilities in projects of
general interest”4. In his opinion civil society includes all voluntary associations,
cultural and research institutions, local community organisations and representative
bodies of business sector and private enterprises. And here comes the confusion:
namely, the private sector is not obviously always part of the civil sector, because it can
lead to chaos about the role of civil society in trade and economic cooperation issues.
In my view two of the most reasonable definitions belong to Fredrik Uggla and Alex
Hadenius, who define civil society as “a public space between the state and individual
citizens where the latter can develop autonomous, organised and collective activities of
the most varied nature”, and to Cohen and Arató, who claims, civil society locates
between the state and the economy, and such important spheres build it up as family,
voluntary associations, social movements and public communication. They exclude
political and economic society, because these include management, conquest of power
and production. The reason why it is so difficult to indentify the term is that civil society
nowadays faces the challenge to harmonise traditions and modernisation at the same
time, and functions as
mediator,
countervailing power
vehicle for citizens’ participation
promoter of social equality and cohesion
to contribute to community
promoter of socialisation and learning
stimulatory of plurality
creator of social capacity
And now we have to mention, what civil society should not be:
old corporate system
moralist, romantic concept of communitarianism
nationalists’ and fundamentalists’ instrument to bring new demarcation lines and
cleavages in our society
system, which is not able to articulate the needs of those, who need it
4 Bernard et al. 1998, pp. 12-13.
11
just a new concept
I think it is also interesting and important to mention that women play a more and
more important role in civil society, many of the activists and leaders are women from
urban renewal associations, which support poor, disabled or underprivileged children.
The number of women is rising also in the field of politics and private or international
organisations. It is because women have lateral thinking about everything, which was
ruled before men, who were following mannish ways of managing programmes and
people.
Civil society is also a key element, how to transmit tension between the social and the
individual, between the public and the private, and between private interests and public
ethics. There are three prerequisites, which create the right environment for civil society
by stable political order:
a constitutional democratic regime, which is liberal in nature: Basic
constitutional liberty covers equal liberty of conscience, separation of state and
church, and rejections of serfdom and slavery once and for all. But not all civil
society formations in constitutional democracy contribute to the regime. But
civil society can never replace the state, not the state civil society. Liberal
constitutional democracy’s shared political values must be defended by the state.
In order to create good life, which normally include lifestyle, religion, cultural
preferences and conception of good; civil society should encourage the shared
political values’ education. Education is inevitable for building the needed
preconditions for social cohesiveness, also across multi-cultural diversity. People
should know e.g. the existence of liberty of conscience.
specific socio-economic factors: The economic development level of the society
determines the organisational, cultural and social prerequisites of sustainable
democracy. Effectively operating democracies are always understood as socio-
economic, modern democracies with a market.
specific socio-cultural factors: For the viability of civil society, co-operation
must be present. Elements of the civil society -the civil capital- has to be in
possession of trust, which lubricates co-operation. “People who co-operate are
people who trust.
12
And there are two main questions about civil society, modern societies are confronted
with:
1. “How can we conceive a stable political order, based on principles and values
that can be shared by all members of society and that create social unity?”
2. “How can we constitute a sense of community among social actors who are
conceived of as autonomous individuals, acknowledging pluralism as well as the
fact that men as women are motivated by two divergent and contradictory
principles: those of altruism and egoist?”5
To understand these questions better researchers assign a civil society as an
environment, which is between the state and households, or with other words private
sector and government; and which gives possibilities of social self-organisation and
concerted actions. To the civil domain traditional civic institutions belong, like schools,
foundations, churches, voluntary organisations and public-interest organisations. As to
the activities around these institutions, we should mention mosques or synagogues,
attending church, doing community service, being a member of a club or contributing to
a charity. Civil society is based on and accentuated always in some kind of pluralism: it
is the ground of differences, where civil society can exist only with a substantial degree
of tolerance. In the multi-cultural civil society there are two models, who and how much
immigrants should assimilate to the new state and culture they encounter. The first is the
assimilationist model, when integration requires complete adjustment to the norms and
adaptation of the new culture and values. Assimilation is seen as an important part for
political stability. The other model is the pluralist model. It assumes a pluralistic and
more tolerant policy, and allows immigrants to maintain different aspects of their
national, ethnic heritage, such as dress, food or religion. Civil society’s of Denmark
exists totally multi-culturally and adopts the pluralistic model with immigrants. It is the
same in Hungary, but with less tolerance from the private sphere, because it is still not
common to have immigrants as a big percentage of the population.
NGOs’ role in civil societyNGOs are seen as much more reliable and efficient sources for foreign aid,
because of the growing mistrust in inefficient developmental state, and the unequal
market. NGOs are built up by social capital, which is a collective entity, the ‘cement’ 5 Bernard et al 1998, p. 28.
13
that makes individual persons part of a group, and create trust among them. In civil
society, if social trust exists, spontaneous sociability and collaboration prevail.
Economies with this treasure function better, because co-operation is easier and the cost
of transaction is lower. Besides revising political performance, social capital can also
improve economic performance. But not all types of civil society are useful and nice.
The next qualities of civil organisations must be taken into account:
autonomy
organisational upgrading
inclusion
inter-segmental affiliation
internal democratic structure
horizontal affiliation
This is the list of ideal conditions; if which, having reached a substantial degree, it
is most possible that civil society will be able to stimulate political democracy. But we
have to mention also that a history of a country or an area also influences the stimulating
impact of civil society: with an open and plural political past civil society can flourish
and operate democratically, while in those areas where predominant institutional
structure had been existing for decades/centuries, strong constraint was placed on the
democratically functioning civil sphere’s evolution. The state can also contribute to the
flourishing civil society, even with not direct support to associations. E.g. it can propose
supervision and regulation in order to avoid corruption and inadequate practices within
independent organisations. Universalistic ethic-lead legal system and bureaucracy
provide fair conditions for civil society, but unfortunately most of the states in the world
are not like this. If we examine corruption in the two countries I compare in my thesis,
according to the survey of Transparency International among 2008 (see appendix 3),
Denmark is on the first, Hungary is on the forty-seventh place from the examined 180
countries, if we start the list with the least corrupt country.6
One way of strengthening civil society is to focus on independent organisations,
but this is not the only way. Instead of direct help, providing ‘infrastructural help’ would
create more favourable conditions to horizontal, popular organisation and co-operation.
E.g. the delivery of goods is considered as short-term help, but to get the state to make
6 Transparency International 2008
14
free itself from society and to strengthen its role as the independent activities’ facilitator
organisations can gain advantages. Support for civil society should not be limited to
operating with some independent organisations, but it should also consider their
organisations’ problems and prospects in a dominant institutional environment.
An important institution of civil society is the media. Pluralist media is able to
provide civil society through a channel to express grievances and demands. It can
diffuse information about good experiences and it can grant an important area for civil
society’s organisations, from which the NGOs’ and networks’ role is getting more and
more important.
Obviously NGOs are effective and efficient institutions, and they have favourable
effects on economic and social development, and nowadays they have an increasingly
big ability to stimulate democratic change and stability. Relations between the state and
NGOs are not necessarily antagonistic any more. Nowadays co-operation and mutual
recognition describe their relationship. Generally, arguments for “more state” or “more
market” are no longer obviously seen as ideological support of one of these two global
camps (socialism or capitalism). Arguments include now a positive third approach, the
strengthening of civil society. NGOs and governments cannot exist without each other;
neither of them is better or more useful, than the other, they can build equally good
governance and good life. Governments’ policies cannot be implemented successfully
without the civil society’s support and at the same time NGOs can meet their aim only if
they are able to influence governments to accept their proposals and ideas. To be an
influential factor, NGOs have to prove their proposals’ social relevance, or some kind of
interconnection between their goals and social interest. If NGOs are not able to do so,
they will be always seen as pressure groups, who try to force the government to consider
their private interests.
15
On the following table, we can see the organisations in civil society, according to
their characteristics and function, and NGOs’ place in civil society:
Organisations in Civil Society Defined by Characteristics and
by function
Organisations in civil society defined by what they do
Service delivery organisations
CSOs: policy-oriented organisations
Advocacy (promote system reform)
Policy impact (advance own agendas)
Organisations in civil society defined by what they are
NGOs: professionally run organisations
Family planning agency, international relief agency
Human rights group, public policy think tank
GROs: accountable membership organisations
Water users’ associations, forestry users’ group
Mayors’ associations, environmental group
Farmers’ association, chamber of commerce
CSO = civil society organisationGRO = grassroots organisationNGO = non-governmental organisation
Table 1.: Organisations in Civil Society7
As the table shows, under the term civil society’s organisations we understand
non-governmental, non-profit, third-sectorial organisations. It is important to support
and undertake development of local institutions, which work independently in their area.
Bilateral agencies started to support Northern NGOs in the mid-1960s, and the
enthusiasm to support NGOs continued to grow during the 1980s, because the voluntary
organisations focused on development issues, and they had the advantages such as
informality, flexibility, commitment and participatory style. But then at the end of 1980s
OECD, Asian Development Bank and World Bank reports disproved that NGOs have
special ability to work effectively with the poor. In this part NGOs include membership 7 Bernard et al 1998, p. 66.
16
groups, community-based organisations, self-help groups, grassroots organisations and
neighbourhood associations, and also here civil society includes NGOs, NPOs, informal
organisations and self help groups.
“NGOs are professional, non-profit, non-membership intermediary organisations
which are independent of the state and which undertake a range of activities in order to
further development objectives.
Grassroots organisations are membership organisations which are also
independent of the state. The risks, costs and benefits are shared among the members,
and the leadership and/or management are accountable to the membership. Most are
non-profit organisations, but some operate as co-operative commercial enterprises.”8
NGOs play a specific role among the state and civil society organisations, because
they wish to be supporters of civil society’s all kinds of existence and to bring civil
society and the state together in order to re-align their relationship, and they do it to get
an outcome from the re-alignment, which is the most similar to their own objectives for
development. In lots of countries, NGOs have a hard time to force the state to be more
inclusive of different groups and more accountable. NGOs are more active in those
countries, which have some emergency issues, or where people are under a hostile
authoritarian regime. In an emergency they provide relief, while in the second case
NGOs are ‘safe heavens’ for citizens, who otherwise would join political organisations.
Some civil society organisations have close or even direct relations with the
market. A strong, well-operating market sector supports organisations of civil society by
broadening the number of institutions, which are involved in civil society issues and by
providing further sources of funds. Market organisations and civil society have common
interests in assuring that government functions truly and with reasonable effectiveness.
8 Bernard et al 1998, p. 83.
17
Part Three
Definitions for Non-profit-oriented OrganizationsEconomic Approach: The Non-business sphere9
If we talk about the economy, and its actors, everyone thinks at first about
business enterprises. But as to consider the size, social weight and the number of
economic actors, the non-business and non-governmental sectors play at least as
important role as the business sector to satisfy social needs.
It is obvious that the government’s role is important for the stable, permanent
development, but the science, politicians and the public were always interested in and
argued about, how big role should the government play in the non-business sector.
In the old times, before the II. World War, in the period of the economic crisis, and
during the recovery, the government had much more significant role not just in the
business life, but also to reduce social inequities. However later on it became clear, that
the labour-division between the business and non-business sector, and the degree of the
government’s role should be reconsidered.
The profit-orientated and the non-profit orientates sphere differ from each other in many
points. They have different aims, organisational structure, stakeholders. The question is
that which organisations and why we categorize to the non-business sector.
If we look at the aim of the organisation’s activity, we can differentiate three sectors:
I. sector: business sphere, where all the profit-orientated enterprises are
II. sector: public sector, which contains all the organisations, which act in the field
of civil services
III. sector: civil sphere, the self-organised units of the civil society, basically not
budget-financed organisations
The II. sector together with the III. sector create the non-business sector, but in
this case the public suppliers and churches can not be classed and it is not compatible
with the internationally accepted departmental classification system.
9 Dinya et al. 2004 pp. 21-31.
18
We can consider the classification above as a starting point, but it is more
practical to examine the organizations not just according to their activities’ aim, but also
according to how the society uses the final result of their activities. In this case we can
differentiate four kinds of sectors:
I. Companies (Business sector): those organisations, who act in order to realize
profit and the goods, which they produce, will belong to the private goods’
sphere i.e. consumers will pay for them the market price.
II. Public Organizations (budget sector): those actors of the economy, who
satisfy collective needs with their services. Their aim is not to realize profit, but
to satisfy the given needs. It is a public and political decision that which services
can be classed into this sphere, because the government finance these services
from the budget, consequently Public Organizations supply public functions.
III. Public Operations (public operations sector): special actors of the economy,
because they supply collective needs with their activities, but these activities are
just party financed from the budget, because these goods are affordable goods.
Their aim is the profitable operating and possibly profit realizing.
IV. Civil Organizations (non-profit sector): those organizations, which supply
individual interests, but these interests are financed not by the consumers, but by
other actors of the society. Accordingly their activity is not for profit-realizing,
but it is for the public and the produced goods belong to the public goods.
The Public Organizations, Public Operations and the Civil Organisations
altogether frame the non-business sector. This approach gives more accurate picture
about which organizations and why they belong to the non-business sector.
Scientific approach: Non-profit-orientated organizations –history and what
does the term mean and refer to?10
The word, non-profit is spread in the West-European and American scientific
language in the 1980s. At the different nations, there are many different appellations and
contents of this sector, according to the countries’ own conditions, organizations and
legal statuses.
10 Bartal 2005 pp. 41-42.
19
The civil, voluntary, non-governmental, third sector terms are the synonyms of
the same notion, because they are the different explanational variances or the same
notion, according to what is important for the notion-user. In some extends the non-
profit sector is narrower, but in other extends it is wider category than the definition of
the civil society but in the recent years this difference slurs between these two terms as
well.
The international non-profit literature defines in five points the criteria of
belonging to the non-profit sector:
Figure 1.: Five Criteria of the Non-profit Sector11
The non-profit organizations also public benefit organizations, because of their
aims and principles of activity.
According to Bartal (2005) we can define the non-profit organizations by legal,
scientific, statistical and social-economic statistical definitions, but in my thesis I deal
with economic and scientific definitions.
Non-governmental Organisations (NGOs)
The non-governmental Organisations are individual’s organisations, which
structures’ are out of the structure of governmental frames. NGOs can be formed against
11 Bartal 2005, pp. 41-42.
CRITERIAS
HARD CONDITIONS
SOFT CONDITIONS
SELF-GOVERNING
VOLUNTARITY
INDEPENDENCE FROM THE GOVERNMENT
PROFIT-NEUTRALITY
INSTITUTIONALIZATION
20
the government’s rule of law or to deal with issues, what the government does not want
or can not deal with.
The main characteristics of NGOs are:
They do not have power function of public issues and they are independent from
the government
They are formed by private or mixed initiation
They can pool members with different citizenships
They are formed through self-organising, voluntarily
They operate mainly on humanitarian, social, cultural, development,
environmental, and human rights fields
Usually non-profit orientated
For some of their activities, they can get governmental support
Organizational Approach: Non-governmental Organisations12
The word “non-governmental organisation” came into existence in 1945, when the
United Nations (UN) wanted to make differentiation in the participation rights between
international private organizations and intergovernmental specialized agencies. In the
first draft, when the UN was formed, there was no agreement about co-operation with
private bodies. In 1945 at the San Francisco conference different groups and
associations wanted to change this situation and they asked for rectify the issue. As a
result, the UN strengthened and formalised the relation with the private organizations
and enhanced it’s own role in social and economic issues and last but not least they
heightened the status of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) to the UN’s
principal organ. To make some matters clear, they introduced new terminologies to
cover the relationship between the ECOSOC and the two types of international
organizations. Under Article 70 „The Economic and Social Council may make
arrangements for representatives of the specialized agencies to participate, without vote,
in its deliberations and in those of the commissions established by it, and for its
representatives to participate in the deliberations of the specialized agencies.”13 And
under Article 71 “The Economic and Social Council may make suitable arrangements
for consultation with non-governmental organizations which are concerned with matters
12 Willetts, P. 200213 Charter of the United Nations, Chapter X: The Economic and Social Council, Article 70
21
within its competence. Such arrangements may be made with international organizations
and, where appropriate, with national organizations after consultation with the Member
of the United Nations concerned.”14 Although the word NGO became a UN jargon, it
also went into the public usage, mainly from the 1970s. Now all type of private bodies
can use the name NGO, which independent from the direct governmental control, not be
formed as a political party, non-profit-making, non-criminal and wish to challenge the
government either by a narrow focus on human rights or as a political party. Sometimes
the borders are blurred because it is possible that some NGOs can be identified with
political parties, some NGOs may realize profit from commercial or other activities and
few NGOs can be related with violent political protest. There is no generally assumed
definition for NGOs and it is also the question of the different connotations in given
circumstances but the UN tried to create a list -called Major Groups- of the nine main
categories of NGOs according to the interest, what is taken up by the single groups.
Major Groups listed in Agenda 21:
Global action for women towards sustainable and equitable development
Children and youth in sustainable development
Recognising and strengthening the role of indigenous people and their
communities
Strengthening the role of non-governmental organizations: partners for
sustainable development
Local authorities’ initiatives in support of Agenda 21
Strengthening the role of workers and their trade unions
Strengthening the role of business and industry
Scientific and technological community
Strengthening the role of farmers
It is very obvious that these nine groups are incoherently chosen and exclude lots
of topics, which are as important as the listed ones and they have been left out without
14 Charter of the United Nations, Chapter X: The Economic and Social Council, Article 71
22
any scientific reason. To account for this arbitrary grouping is that during the
negotiations at United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED)
in June 1992, in Rio de Janeiro, the decisions were influenced by the lobbying NGOs,
who were there at the conference, and also by Maurice Strong’s personal concerns. It is
not fair to pick out women but not men, young people but not elder people, indigenous
communities but not other minorities, unions but not more professional associations,
industry and business but not commerce, natural scientists but not other scientists an
finally farmers but not fishermen. So finally everyone declared the 9 Major Groups
inadequate, and this categorisation has been only used by the UN Commission and
Sustainable Development (CSD) and in other programs what have been organized by
UNCED.
Observers established one other kind of classification of NGOs, according to their
activities. According to them there are operational and campaigning NGOs. Operational
NGOs achieve small-scale change directly through projects, they have to mobilize
resources, material support, financial donations, volunteer labour to run their programs.
Campaigning NGOs act approximately in the same way as operational NGO, but their
action for fund rising is not that important. They rather focus on to attract favourable
publicity by their major events. Actually for both type of NGOs fund-rising is important
just with different measure, but they both need volunteers and supporters, cultivate the
media and organize special events.
23
On the next figure we can see directions of the funding flows, from where the
NGOs obtain donations.
Figure 2.: Funding flows15
There are differences between NGOs not just according to the interest, taken up
the organization and how much they will to find funding, but also according to the
structure, how the organization is built up. There are two main types of NGOs in this
case. When individual, local people work in groups, the groups co-ordinate in provinces
and they have a headquarters in the capital of the country, we talk about national NGOs.
When these national NGOs combine with each other, we talk about international NGOs
(INGOs), but it has to be noted, that the term, NGO is always NGO, even if it refers to a
local, national or global body. The number of networks between international NGOs
started to increase when the communication between them became easier. The first help
in better communication was in the 1960s , when air travel became relatively cheap and
the direct transnational telephone was established. Then in 1970s satellite was
introduced to the media, so events were shared all around the world by television.
Coming of the web and e-mail decreased costs of running as much as individuals could
15 Green et al. 1997
24
afford to conduct complex, prompt communication with each other. The dramatically
increased number of networks did not need formal structure any more. For the end of
the 20th century many national NGOs became international NGOs. But the number of
NGOs in one country depends on not only the level of communication infrastructure,
but also on the democratic political culture’s presence or absence, the size of the
country, religious and cultural diversity, its ethnic, level of its economy. That is why
there are lots of NGOs in third-world countries like Indian and Bangladesh, and
relatively low number of NGOs in Finland or in Iceland.
As we see NGOs are so diverse from each other and so complex, that it is not
possible to support or to be against to all of them in the same time. “They may claim to
be the voice of the people and to have greater legitimacy than governments, but this can
only be a plausible claim under authoritarian governments.” When for example
companies decide that they start to support an NGO, they choice not only according to
their private opinion but they also consider the public opinion, because they would like
to attract the public interest to protect their own reputation, brand or income. Companies
who support environmental charitable activities, the might account on benefit from
green consumers or they would like to reduce their energy consumption and cut costs.
NGOs are taken up by companies more intensively since 1999, when Kofi Annan, the
UN Secretary-General called upon the companies to enhance their social responsibility
by participating a Global Compact together with the UN.
After I took a look at the relationship between NGOs and companies, I would like
to tell a bit more about the NG part of NGOs. Actually it is always very difficult for an
NGO to be totally independent from the government. Sometimes individual
governments establish NGOs that support their politics and by these NGOs they try to
influence other NGOs. These politically established NGOs called government-
organized NGOs (GONGO). And in the other hand some NGOs find really difficult to
act without the acknowledgement of the government and other political parties, however
they act independently. They would like to know that their activity is recognised by
these political actors. There is a huge prejudice, namely that government funding drives
to government control. For example development and humanitarian NGOs needs extra
sources to run their operational projects, so most of them accept official funds. They
even would like to get guaranteed budget from the government for their general
operating, but the government usually only support projects’ costs. But I have to
25
mention that it happens that NGOs may seem to be independent, during designing their
programs, and then in order to make the program more likely that government contracts
or grants will be forthcoming. In this case we can talk about government influence.
As a summation NGOs are not just uncontroversial, well-meaning, non-political
group, but there are no differences between NGOs’ role in domestic or in global politics.
However because of the diversity of values, they advocate, NGOs can oppose each other
and putting pressure on companies and governments.
Non-profit or Non-governmental? What is the difference?
We can say that all the NGOs are basically non-profit-orientated organizations,
but not all the non-profit-orientated organizations can be classified as an NGO. There is
a slight difference between them, in their activity and legal determination. Mainly
NGOs deal with some issues, what the government does not want or can not deal with,
and the non-profit-orientated organizations, which are not NGOs, can also concentrate
on issues, which are in the focus of the government as well, and these organizations
accept easily governmental help and support, while NGOs are trying to be independent
from the government as much as they can.
In my thesis, I concentrate on the relationship between companies and non-profit-
orientated organizations, so with all kind of NGOs, foundations and associations, which
main activity is not to realize profit and which are existing and working on their aims, if
they get support either from the government or from for-profit organizations.
Overview about the Danish and Hungarian Non-profit sphere
The history and development of the Danish non-profit sphere
In Denmark organising was forbidden until 1849, just the king could give
permission to set up organisations. Philanthropic and self-help organisations, such as
orphanages and guilds were founded by the king and merchants. In the 1848-1849
revolt, the liberalist trend claimed freedom of organisation and speech, and they also
granted these freedoms in the constitution. In the 1870’es Christian-philanthropic
organisations gained huge importance in charity work and they give more relief for poor
26
people, that the municipal poor office could in that time. Later on a new group of
grassroots organisations gained power:
local community organisations
tenants’ associations
new women’s organisations
students’ organisations
disease-related organisations
Between 1960 and 1970, lots of already existing organisations developed
emergency help activities and support activities, using both professionals and volunteers
in the field and in fundraising as well. These organisations rely very much on
government money for their activity. And this is the reason, why it is often said, that
Denmark is the ‘society of association’, and a great percentage of the population takes
part in voluntary work, and members of associations, organisations.
In Denmark lot of welfare functions and organisations are supported by the government:
Sickness Insurance (Association): in the beginning voluntary organisation, then
compulsory membership for Danish citizens, today its functions are integrated into the
municipal administration, because of practical reasons
Unemployment Insurance: in the beginning Unemployment Insurance
Association was part of the Trade Unions, and then the association earned rights to state
contribution, because of the Law of Unemployment Insurance and Job Provision.
Religious Associations: help homeless people, alcohol and drug addicts. Most of
these associations are supported by municipal authorities.
Care for children, elderly and handicapped: For children day-care in the
beginning Peoples’ Kindergartens’ Association, since 1888 under public control, from
1918 it is allowed to yield economic support. Also the care for elderly and handicapped
is delivered by municipalities.
Education: Many organisations influenced the Danish education system. Some
sectors, like Free Schools, and People’s High Schools are owned by associations,
financed by students’ fees and governmental sources. Of course there are municipal and
27
county delivered educational sectors, e.g. People’s School and grammar and high
schools.
Housing: Housing Associations are user-owned, non-profit-orientated
organisations, mainly financed by rent.
International and refugee aid: from 40-50 years Danish governmental
development aid has been granted through NGOs.
In Denmark few voluntary organisations are big, with lots of salaried personnel,
and many volunteers and they have large economic turnover. However most of the
organisations are small, mainly without salaried personnel, largely with volunteers, and
with limited economic resources. The volunteers are their resources. The number of no-
profit-orientated organisations, which do well without public support is really small.
Non-profit organisations apply and get governmental and private funding as well. And
after they got it, they obliged to give accounting how they used the granted money.
There are two aspect of funding and function of non-profit organisations, which might
give relatively new challenges. One is since 1970’es the appearance of EU sources of
funding. Organisations have to apply for it and arrange their programmes according to
get the most favourable possibilities of receive EU funding. Another challenge is to
meet the requirement of partnership, which is so emphasised by the state and the EU as
well. However newly and old established NPOs arrange activities together and in
partnership with other kind of organisations, without such partnershipping.16
The Danish Foundation Sector
There are about 14,000 private foundations in Denmark, including corporate
foundations as well. However this number is rather big, Danish literature of foundation
theory is relatively meagre. The first data about Danish foundations are from 1780, and
that time 2500 this kind of organisation existed. Their number was growing most
dynamically between 1850-1900 and 1960-1980, until it reached 14,000 for today. In
Denmark it is a tendency, that most of the foundations’ statutes emphasise the
importance of promoting and supporting Denmark, Danish culture, heritage and people
and surprisingly they have limited interest in international and European issues.
16 Jonasen 2002
28
If we see the future of these organisations, most probably the influence of the
public sector will continue to decrease and more important role will be incumbent on
Danish foundations, and their donations will play crucial role for society more directly.
But on the other hand Danish foundations are losing autonomy within the state, because
it will be more difficult to separate their work from the state’s work. There are two main
type of foundations in Denmark. One is corporate foundations, with controlling position
in commercial ventures, from which they get most of their grant-making capacity. The
other type of foundations is those, whose statutes set a limit to their objectives to grant-
making for charitable purposes. The second type takes 90% of the all foundations;
however corporate foundations are the most relevant economically. To set up
foundation, Danes do not need governmental approval, and non-commercial foundations
receive legal personality at establishment and within quarter year, after establishment
the organisation gas to be registered at the tax authorities. Foundations are normally
treated as joint-stock companies for tax purposes, and they pay tax on the income
derives from economic activities. Received donations and gifts are considered as other
income, and those which purpose to build up foundation are not taxed. There are other
ways as well, how foundations can get tax deductions, e.g. they can deduct money, what
have been given out on donations for public benefit purpose. Public benefit purpose
means that a number of people can benefit for it. Corporations and individuals can also
get tax deduction, if they support foundations, but no more, than 15% from their taxable
income.17
Tax deduction can be another instinctive for Danish companies –besides the other,
non-material benefits- to support non-profit orientated organisations, because donations,
they spend on a Danish foundation, is good not just for their reputation and for their
sustainable development but nevertheless the amount is deductable until 15%of taxable
income.
Danish NGOs
In 2007 6.7 % of the total Danish development assistance (DKK 932.4 million)
was spent on bilateral NGO assistance. According to the Strategy for Danish
Development Assistance, Partnership 2000, NGOs in Denmark have to concentrate on
creating time and space to trace the Civil Society Strategy’s recommendations. The
17 European Foundation Centre 2007
29
Danish government made a decision in 2005 and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs signed
frame agreements with the six major Danish NGOs, that these NGOs have to contribute
to their own financing with 5% in 2006 and with 10% till 2007, because revenues from
private funds are raising in Denmark. This decision was an incentive for NGOs to try to
attract new actors and sources in development assistance. Another reason of this
decision was strengthening the major NGOs and popular foundations and to encourage
them to be more accountable towards private contributors and their own members.
About smaller NGOs, the government did not have plans to introduce own-financing for
small NGOs. In the same time the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affair gave special status
for Danish NGOs as competent and important partners in implementation of Danish
humanitarian assistance, to what the government gave DKK 407.1 million through
Danish NGOs. This means 2.9% of total development assistance and 36% of the total
Danish humanitarian assistance.18
The history and development of the Hungarian non-profit sphere
European non-profit sector, it is needed to say the Hungarian society’s and
economy’s way of development didn’t differ from the European development till the
XVI. century.
In the middle ages, Hungary already owned those kinds of organizations, who
dealt with charity issues, as the church, private persons and the secular arm. They all
spent money on helping to poor, sick people and orphans. Other significant phenomenon
was the mutual assistance and help among the members of the guilds. From the XVI.
century the development stopped, because the economic development and the division
of labour were started to focus into the western part of Europe, and also because the
Hungary became under the Turkish subjection and then under the Habsburg regime. The
Hungarian non-profit sector resuscitated again in the XVIII. century, during the rule of
Maria Teresa and Joseph II., when the national sense became strong again. In this period
there were lots of foundations and associations in the country. During the reform-age
different associations, reader-clubs, casinos, literary clubs were set up. Near the
associations of the aristocracy, the workers’ and farmers’ unions gathered ground as
well. After the war of independence was beaten down (1849), these associations were
18 Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark 2008
30
censured for half a century, but for the end of the XIX. century new associations
founded, and they became the scene of the cultural and public efforts, and they were still
working between the two world wars. But then after the world war II. most of the
associations lost their members and they left of or they were abolished. The rest public
associations came under total party- and state control. From the middle 80s the crisis of
the state-socialism encouraged the associations, and then in 1987, the modification of
the Civil Code meant a huge break-through for the non-profit-orientated organizations’
legitimacy. It was again possible, after 30 years, to set up foundations. The next step
was the approval of the law II. of 1989, which created the legal guarantee of the
associational freedom.19
19 Bartal 2005 pp. 162-166.
31
Part Four
Relationship between Non-profit-orientated Organizations
and Companies
Public Affairs
The for-profit organizations recognised for long time ago, that it is their interest as
well, to establish good relationship, with different stake-holder groups in their
environment, like with the civil sphere. By this the aim of the company is to protect own
social and economic interests, and to validate them and set their principles.20
Issue management
The companies’ Issue Management keeps the relation between the companies and
their stake holders. The issue is the difference between the company’s activity and the
stake holders’ expectations, which difference can be eliminated by Issue Management,
which beside solves the problem, comes from this difference; also creates value and
advantage for the company. The Issue Management involves all the relations with the
civil sphere as well, and these relations are also part of the Public Affairs.21
Sponsorship and DonationFirst of all, we have to make difference between the terms sponsorship and
donation. The donation means a special kind of support, assistance, which is essentially
unilateral relation between company and beneficiary. Financial or material support,
which is not directly part of the supporter company’s commercial aims. Charity offers or
patronizations are not aimed to gain profit and supporter does not expect return from
supported, however sponsorship helps to create and keep good reputation of the
company among other organizations, public and other stake holders. The sponsorship is
a bilateral relationship, sponsor expects return from the sponsored. 22
20 Nyárády et al. 2004b p. 183.21 Nyárádi et al. 2004b, pp. 221-225.22Fazekas et al. 1994, pp. 14-28.
32
The main reason of granting is to help needy and sick people. The grant can be
financial, or other material or immaterial contribution. We have to mention that case as
well, when the company supports a foundation, because of economic, taxation aspects.
In the old times the management of the company supported in the field or its own
interest. Later on it was popular to support different arts, for example by buying
paintings and sculptures. Nowadays the fanciest thing is to support the third countries by
ensuring their citizens permanent possibility for work through work to support
themselves. Companies and private persons realized, that a material support does not
solve the problem of these people, just for short time, and also it is a moral question: the
work gives hopes and self-respect for workers. Other popular fields of support are
helping sick people, children and animals, and all those, who cannot help on themselves
fully.
Purposeful donation is a useful tool of development of corporate culture, and
image. It makes more favourable the corporate image and helps building advantageous
relations. Deliberate customers are more and more influenced about what kind of role a
company takes in order to solve society problems. For supporter companies the firm’s
good reputation plays an important part, which is part of the CSR and done by Public
Relations managers and assistants, who transmit it towards the environment and stake
holders. The well-organized donation or partnership with the third-sector organizations
are also good assets of Inside Public Relations activity, because they raises the
employees’ pride and loyalty. So we can say that sponsorship and donation are part of
public relations. During these activities supporter gives support in form of material or
immaterial help to one other organization or to organising of a program. This is an
invest into an activity, and the return is direct or indirect business success.
In Denmark and in Hungary as well, companies can write of the amount of the
donations, which have been given to public benefit organisations. That is why, for
companies donation can be more profitable, than sponsorship, and also because most of
the foundations and other non-profit-oriented organisations do mention the name of their
supporters in interviews and reports, and advertise the supporters’ logo and name on
their advertisements, even if they got the support in form of donation, not as a sponsor-
grant.
33
Part Five
Corporate Social Responsibility
The Corporate Social Responsibility means an unbidden commitment towards the
development of the common weal: through the business practise, involving the
company’s resources. If a company is social- and/or environmental-concerned, it seeks
after success in the present in a special way, how it does not destroy the future’s
possibility: it considers the social, environmental and business aspects inseparable from
each other. 23
More and more company recognises that its own interest to be socially
responsible. This process as other civilisational achievements, reaches the developed
countries earlier, than the developing ones. If we talk about Europe, this means that the
western countries’ companies started to be socially responsible earlier, than the eastern
ones, so from the two countries’ companies, I compare in my thesis, Danish companies
has older traditions in the field of corporate social responsibility than Hungarian
companies.
The responsibility starts, when every organization realises mutually all the effects
of its own decisions and actions. The mutuality ensures the sustainability of the process.
Not just cooperating with the external environment is important for the sustainability,
but the company has to pass the message of its own responsibility towards its employees
to its employees. By this there is a big chance, that the employees become active and
involved partners into the decisions and their consequences. Indirectly and in a long
term, CSR can contribute for profit-realising, however its primary aim is to maximise
advantages for the whole society.24
There are many reasons for the companies to operate socially responsible. For the
potential customers, investors, market analysers and business partners, participation in
social issues affects always positively, and it also looks good in the annual report and in
the news. Besides this, CSR arouses good feelings in the employees, customers,
investors, among the members of the management, and hereby it is good for the brand,
financial statement and for the community as well.
23 Ligeti 2007, p. 18.24 Liget 2007, p. 57.
34
The use of CSR for the different units of the company25
If a company socially responsible, it means, that all it’s units are also operating
responsibly. In order to sustain harmony between the CSR-strategies of the units, it is
better to develop a single CSR strategy which is company’s operating strategy as well.
3. figure: Advantages of CSR
Public Relations (PR)
To define what are the advantages of a good CSR strategy for the PR department,
at first I give a definition, what I was though about Public Relations: PR means a
managing approach. For the management it determines the relationship between the
company and its inside and outside environment. PR involves all kind of communication
25 Ligeti 2007, pp. 55-90.
LABOUR MOTIVATION
EFFICACY
RECRUITMENT
MERKETING
INVESTOR RELATIONS
HIPS
QUALITY
INNOVATION
CEO’S REPUTATION
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
CSR
REPUTATION
35
activities of the organisation. It aims a mutually favourable communicational
relationship between company and stakeholders.
It is relatively obvious, that a well-planned CSR strategy influences stakeholders,
consumers, investors etc. In these days, when there are so many similar products on the
market, e.g. customers care about much more things, than before. They consider the
danger what consumption of a product can occur, and they also care about what kind of
social effects belong to the production. There are more and more companies, who base
their images on responsibility.
PR advantages of CSR:
Consumers and investors’ trust is increasing
Good example for others
Motivate competitors for responsibility
Inside communication is developing
Possibility to start communication with some stakeholders
According to Ligeti donation, sponsorship and case promotion are the form of
CSR, which has different PR effect. E.g. corporate philanthropy means that the
company supports a concrete issue by money. This is the most traditional form of social
involvement, but it is a really ac hoc method. When people talk about corporate social
involvement, they usually think it is the sponsorship itself. The sponsorship is part of
public charity: the company gives direst support in the form of money and/or immaterial
things. There are such fields of life, like sport and culture, which need company support,
otherwise they cannot stay on foot, or just get to very few people. But we have to
mention again in this part as well, that the sponsorship is not just charity, it is business
when the company buys advertisement-place. The third type of CSR with PR-value,
when the company provides material or immaterial support or voluntary work for an
issue, and by this they increase consciousness or the society’s welfare.
It is not enough to act responsibility, in order to inform stakeholders, it is also
important to communicate duly the responsibility, what the company feels for society.
As part of inside PR activity, management has to share openly, without any fear, and
truthfully the company’s social actions with the employees. By this the company spare
36
time and energy during developing and implementing projects, and it makes more
simple boss-employee and unit-unit relations.
Marketing
According to a research of Cone Incorporation and Roper Archive in 1993-94,
84% of consumers have better opinion about that brand, which s/he can link to some
kind of social involvement, and 74% of them think that s/he would prefer to buy socially
responsible product. 66% of customers would change brand, if s/he could support an
issue and 62% prefers retailers, just to support their issue.
Marketing advantages of CSR:
Brand’s position is strengthening
Corporate image is changing for the better
Relationship between Identity Salience and CSR on Consumer behaviour26
In this part, I would like to review an article I found interesting and relevant about
how consumers reward firms, if they support social programmes, and third sectorial
organisations. Consumer loyalty and positive company evolution can be encouraged by
the company’s well-communicated CSR strategies and programmes. The
communication of these issues is relevant, because it is not enough to be silently socially
responsible. CSR reports, issue-promotions (even on the company’s product), and the
whole corporate image have to spear that the company cares about social issues,
environmental-friendly production or supporting of the third world’s AIDS orphans.
CSR initiatives occur stronger loyalty because customers develop a more favourable
firm evaluation and also because they identify more strongly with the firm. CSR has
emerged in the recent decade also because of its influence on customer behaviour when
customers demand more out of companies that simply low-priced and quality products.
They also expect companies to demonstrate congruence with social values, and through
this to contribute to the community and sustainability. In the same time Beckmann
(2001) points out that consumers still buy product and services for personal reasons
more, that for social ones. To figure out what is the truth Marin made further researches
26 Marin et al. 2009
37
and he set up eight hypothesises about the relation between consumer behaviour and
loyalty and the recognition of the company’s CSR programmes:
Figure 4.: Conceptual Framework27
H1: The greater the CSR association perceived by the consumer, the more positive the
evaluation of the company.
H2: The greater the CSR associations perceived by the consumer, the greater the
company’s identity attractiveness for the consumer
H3: The more positive the evaluation of the company, the greater the company’s
identity attractiveness for the consumer.
H4: The more positive the evaluation of the company, the more likely consumers are to
be loyal to the company’s existing products.
H5: The greater the CSR associations perceived by the consumer, the greater the
consumer-company identification.27 Marin et al. 2009, p. 66.
38
H6: The greater the company identity attractiveness perceived by the consumer, the
greater the consumer-company identification.
H7: The greater the consumer-company identification, the more likely consumers are to
be loyal to the company’s existing products.
H8a: Identity salience moderates the relationship between CSR associations and C-C
identification, such that this relationship is stronger when identity salience is high versus
it is low.
H8b: Identity salience moderates the relationship between identity attractiveness and C-
C identification. This relationship is stronger when identity salience is high versus when
it is low.
H8c: Identity salience moderates the relationship between C-C identification and
loyalty, such that this relationship is stronger when identity salience is high versus when
it is low.
The questionnaire sample was given to 400 randomly selected clients of a
regional bank. They were all current clients of the bank and the main persons in their
family, who are responsible for money. The result is that on the three variables of the
hypotheses, namely company evaluation, identity attractiveness and company-costumer
identification, the company has direct and really positive effect by CSR initiatives.
Human Resource
It is possible, that CSR affects on the company’s employees the most. It is really
nice feeling to see the employees’ enthusiasm and feel their trust and belief in the
company. Employees are work at the company for salary, but not just because of that.
They are also searching for social relations, respect, appreciation, self-realisation and
self-respect. CSR can be an asset also to provide all these needs for the employees.
Socially responsible companies have better abilities to attract, motivate and keep the
best employees. CSR is also a good asset of group-building. Instead of sending
employees rafting for example it is cheaper, better and also efficient to send them to
collect garbage in the near forests, or to build playground.
Advantages of CSR generally
39
According to the American organization, called Business for Social Responsibility
– which organization helps for companies, how to use CSR in the course of their
function- CSR has many favourable effects:
The companies’ selling and market share increase
The position of the brand strengthens
The organizational image strengthens
The organization’s ability to recruit, motivate and keep labour increases
Running costs decrease
The organization becomes more attractive for the investors and for the financial
analysers
The company’s charity, offering, sponsoring, the employees’ voluntary actions
should be organised into one single system, in order to be really effective for the
company and for the supported issue as well. In case of inordinate, not harmonized
actions, every good-intention-guided, socially awareness gestures can be lost. For high
efficiency, a transparent and clear CSR-strategy is needed. In the course of this, the
generally used strategy-making process can be used as well:
Collecting information
Planning
Implementing
Monitoring
Correcting
A company needs CSR-strategy planning really, when there are too many collateral
CSR-programs in-house. The CSR-strategy’s development unites two coherent cycles.
1. big cycle, which involves the survey of the current situation, the strategy-
planning and the program-creating.
40
2. small cycle, which contains the part of the strategic plan’s development. The
small cycle is a concentric process, and it lasts, until the company gets to a
strategic plan, which is good for everyone.28
The company’s whole strategy should be placed on the funds of responsibility.
The long-term thinking of the management and the strategy-making ensure the
sustainability of the company’s business success. For the sustainability the global
sustainability is also needed, which can be achieved just if every single company
contributes to the environmental and social sustainability. So the condition of the long-
term business success’ sustainability is the sustainability of the environment and the
society, and for this the companies’ responsibility is inevitable.29
The non-profit organizations are very suitable as a CSR-partner. By their help, the
company can reach easier and more effective those groups, to who the company would
like to help, or that issue, what they would like to support. Co-operation of for-profit
and non-profit organizations can create a mutually advantageous situation, and the
company can take part in all above mentioned favourable effects, which contribute to its
long-term business success.
The Effect of Financial Crisis on CSR
Ligeti claims that nowadays in Hungary, since the financial crises was announced,
his college’s -who works on the stimulation of CSR- business relations are tend to be
disappearing, which were flourishing in the recent year. Company leaders say that CSR
is the something for what companies really do not want to spend money on at the
depressive mood of the society. In Eastern Europe CSR is usually just something
additional, something extra, and it can end up where marketing and PR ended up 10
years ago: companies usually forget about these things in emergency, danger and
recession. They got rid of marketing at first, when they were lack of sources, and cut
expenses on market-research. This was a big mistake, because the marketability of the
product is more important, than just to produce a product, what stays at the shop because
of lack of interest and promotion. Now the same thing happens with CSR. Companies
who are socially responsible just in good time, now struggle from unrecognising of their
efforts, because their activity was not promoted by the media, when they e.g. painted the 28 Ligeti 2007, pp. 125-12729 Ligeti 2007, pp. 157-159.
41
fence of the local school. But those companies, who consider marketing, PR and CSR as
management issues, turn to CSR more definitely during the crisis. And these responsible
companies do not consider layoffs during crisis, because the management knows that the
crisis will end one day, and then the company will need qualified employees, who know
the company’s profile, culture and speciality, and the management does not want that,
for that time these employees would work for the competitors, because they were fired.30
Critics of the CSR as the Best Way for Companies and Firms to Be Socially
Responsible31
While most of the researchers point out that CSR is an inevitable and best choice
for companies to be socially responsible, these are some of them, who think CSR is a
false solution, and it aims just to elude regulations. Zsolt Boda, economist-political
researcher says that the pressure of growth interfaces companies to consider
environmental and social issues. The conscious customers’ civil initiations, stricter state
control and the ethic and responsibly operating firms can change the system’s logic.
Boda claims that by CSR multinational companies escape for fear of more regulations
on their activity. At mainstream CSR there is no capitalism-critic. It is more about that
companies care about some problems, and they try to show, that they are responsible
corporate citizens through contributing to environmental and social problems’ treatment.
And here is the main difference: the alternative capitalists or alternative firms try to
modify systematically their main activity. An alternative firm rejects the concept of
making the customer to consume by any means. So it seems that the modern economy’s
basic operation is wrong and the CSR is just surface treatment of problems. Companies,
who say that they are socially responsible, just care about smaller issues. They buy
incubators to hospitals, build playgrounds, which are important issues, but do not
change things substantially. A company which acts globally, cannot be alternative
capitalist, just ethical in best case, because it does not criticise the system, and it does
not have principles as to minimise environmental pollution, what they occur by transport
to long distances. Nowadays fair trade movement is popular again, but they also
transport product from far developing countries to developed ones. They transport
mostly coffee and thee. The principle of localisation should not go so far, that people
30 Ligeti 200931 Kincsei 2009
42
should not drink coffee and thee, because these products come from far countries. Fair
trade tries to operate as ideal both socially and environmentally, as it is possible. But
multinational joint ventures, which are listed on stock market, cannot even become ethic
easily. They exist in global capitalism with profit-, and growth-pressure and they just do
CSR-things. Those firms can be alternative capitalist, who produce premium products,
or they operate in a sector where locality can be a principle. Boda thinks that growth of
companies should be controlled, because to expect companies not to grow is impossible
today.
According to Milton Friedman recent passing of Nobel economist and statistician,
from Chicago School of Economics, it is totally absurd to expect a company to be
responsible, because corporation is an abstract economic and legal category. In other
words corporations are attendants of the system. If the society’s mentality was different,
the system would be different and corporations as well. People buy stock because they
want to get utmost money after a year, and not because they want the company to stop
growing and keep its incomes in a specific level in order to be very ethical.
There are other ethic problems around financial capitalism as well. If someone put
his money into a Pension Fund, the Pension Fund invests it into a corporation, which
implements its production in Indonesia, and who’s product will be bought by the same
person, who put his money into a Pension Fund, and during this he has no idea where
his money is, what is happening with it and what kind of effects it will cause, till then
civil organisations and ethical consumer movements did not asked these questions.
Boda says, that to solve the huge problem of global economy and capitalism the
society and the state should take steps together for a better liveable future. Green
taxation should be announced in those countries, where it does not exist yet (in most of
the countries). Green taxation means that companies and individuals would pay taxes
after consumption, environment-pollution and fortune.
43
Part Six
Own research about Danish and Hungarian Company-
NPO/NGO relations
As a part of my thesis I performed a questionnaire-based research among Danish
and Hungarian companies and civil society organisation, such as NGOs, foundations
and NPOS. The two types of questionnaires, (appendix 1 and 2) both for the business
sector and for the civil sector, were based on my own perceptions, studies and readings,
which I decided to be relevant for this research. To create a relevant questionnaire I
made previous studies about the two sectors’ approach to the topic, namely I read CSR
reports of Hungarian and Danish companies and surveyed the two countries civil sector.
In the first round I sent the questionnaires to 50-50 Danish companies and NGO, and for
the same amount of Hungarian companies and foundations. To the Hungarians ones I
sent the Hungarian translation of the original English questionnaire, as far as this is my
mother language, and they also understand the questionnaire better in their own
language. After a week I was a bit disappointed about the amount of filled-out
questionnaire from the Danish NGOs, until I realised the problem, that the term NGO in
my opinion regards to all kind of civil organisations, but according to the Danish
associations, I sent the questionnaires, it regards strictly to something totally different,
and they understood NGO as the word strictly refers to: non-governmental, self-
organised, non-profit making organisations. I realised my fault also because in the
Hungarian translation of the questionnaire I use the term organisation unconsciously and
in that case I received relevantly more questionnaire back. It was because according to
my conception, under the term NGO, in the questionnaires for the Danish NGOs, I
understood all king of civil society organisations and I sent it to all kind of associations
in the country. So I corrected my mistake and I resent the questionnaires and I dedicated
a comparatively bigger part in my thesis to the conceptual explanation of the civil
sphere.
Danish companies’ answers’ review
From 50 companies I received 23 filled out questionnaires. (46%) The criteria of
the company selection were that the company should be Danish, or a Danish subsidiary
44
of a multinational company, but the main point was to operate in Denmark. All of the
companies, who replied heard about CSR before and also actively apply it in their
everyday business. Most of them (87%) claimed that they sometimes support
foundations/other non-profit orientated organisations by money or by other donations.
And also more than half of them (52 %) said that they help to their employees’ social
situation by different non-material bonuses (childcare for employees’ children,
organising meetings, performances for employees’, in topics, in which they are involved
or/and they are interested in) Some of the companies also mention near this point that
they help to their employees to work in a nice and well-functioning workplace. In this
question some of companies said that the help to third world countries, like they built a
school in Angola and they donate money for it regularly. To the question ‘What do you
think, what the difference is between your CSR politics and other companies’ CSR
politics?’ most of the replicates said ‘I don’t know.’ or ‘none’, but there were some, who
mention that they support issues, which are relevant for them because of their profile.
They also mentioned generic topics such as human rights and more specific issues such
as responsible consumption of their products. Two food producer companies wrote
food-safety issues as well. And one company wrote to this last question, that ‘We mean
it!’. But generally the companies’ policies are different from others’ policies on the
areas that are specific to their own industry.
Hungarian companies’ answers’ review
From 50 questionnaires 17 responses arrived back. (34%) This group was the less
active for sending back the questionnaire, those, who finally did, seemed really helpful
and interested in the topic. They also all heard about CSR and all of the 17 companies
apply it. They generally feel that they have to contribute to sustainable development of
Hungary and the environment. They claim that they consider their stakeholders’ and
customers’ needs. To the question of ‘What do you think, what the difference is between
your CSR politics and other companies’ CSR politics?’ most of them did not answer,
but some of them said that it is depending on the field, where the company operates, but
if they compare themselves with competitors, there are lots of similarities about their
CSR activities. In the same time every company has company-specific areas of CSR.
They also mentioned that the difference is mostly recognisable in the available resources
for CSR activity.
45
Danish civil organisations’ answers’ review
Out of 50, 20 civil institutions, foundations, and other non-profit orientated
organisations responded. There were 3 organisations, who answered that they are
corporate-foundations, so they are not concentrating on fund-raising. This was one other
thing, I was not expecting. The criterion of the choice of the organisations was that they
have to be Danish organisations, which are non-profit-makings and non-governmentals.
50% of them said that they have constant relationship with companies, who support
their organization as a part of the company’s corporate social responsibility and most of
them said that this relationship is mostly like material support and non-material support
as well. But it was still a bit more, who put a cross near that ‘The company gives
material support.’, than to near ‘The company gives non-material support’. Usually
these organisations seek for partnership with companies and all of them think that
‘constant support and mutually favourable relationship with a company’ is the best way
to be related with the business sphere, even if not all of them have this kind of
relationship.
Hungarian civil organisations’ answers’ review
Out of 50 associations, NGOs, foundations and other kind of civil associations, 30
organisations sent back the questionnaire, 66% of them do not have constant
relationship with companies, who support their organization as a part of the company’s
corporate social responsibility, but all of them would like to have. Those, who have this
kind of relationship, receive both material and non-material support, but the number of
material supports is higher. There are some associations, who are searched by
companies, but most of them (90%) are searching for company relations by their own
initiations. 50% of the associations would like to receive support for their events,
because some of them say, they have less and less resources for organising events and
operation, and 100% of them would like to receive constant support from a company
and to have mutually favourable relation with it. Some associations also mention that
they do not have concrete strategy for attract company support. One foundation said that
it is difficult to find a company who is really sustainable-development-supporter and
besides this, ready to donate associations. There are few this kind of companies and it
46
needs lot of input to build a good relation with them. Two associations also pointed out,
that they used to have programmes, and strategies for finding relevant companies, who
would like to support their programmes, but fro today they became pessimists and gave
it up.
Conclusion of the research
As I claimed in my hypothesis, Danish company-civil organisation relationships
are more favourable, because of the Danish business sphere’s more responsible
operation. The reason is complex. We can mention different reasons as culture, the
companies’ different business culture, and priorities, the difference between the states.
Danish companies tend to be more responsible socially than Hungarian companies and
they more likely consider their CSR activity as part of their managerial decisions, while
Hungarian companies still consider CSR as something extra. According to a research
from 2006, just 35 Hungarian corporations made sustainability and/or CSR report.32
According to me, the key elements of the differences exist in the culture: both in the
countries’ and the companies’ culture and also in the consciousness of consumers.
Hungarian costumers are still more price-sensitive that Danish consumers, so CSR is
more out of their view, because of this.
I also would like to mention the fact, that the biggest Danish companies have own
foundations, which is less popular in Hungary.
32 Kincsei 2009
47
Part Seven
Conclusion
As a conclusion of my thesis I would like to mention the importance of civil society’s
existence. I think the core element, from what the society is able to recognise its own
needs, is to listen to voice of their citizens. A society with common norms and values
can create associations, which can influence the state in order to make better
environment for those, who cannot make it better for themselves.
NGOs are the main associations of this civil society, and their importance is also
strengthening through their role, that they mediate the messages of their members, and
stakeholders. The media has also relevant role in the civil society. They are seen as the
link among all sectors.
Danish and Hungarian civil spheres have different histories of course. In Denmark
everything, which was related to civil sphere, developed earlier and more consciously.
In Hungary the communism and other powers blocked the development of the civil
sphere, so this is one of the reasons, why the two countries still have differences in their
social system.
Beside history, culture is also an important factor. Under culture I mean not only the
habits and attitudes of the society, but also the culture of doing business. Corruption is a
huge obstacle of the civil society and its organisations. In corruption, nothing can exist,
which do not have connections, and considered that NGOs and non-profit-orientated
companies are not the richest associations; they don’t have power of money, which can
make connections in a corrupt society, so they are also not able to meet the criterion of
good company. According to me one of the biggest enemy of development and
sustainability is the corruption, because usually corrupt people aim short-term success
and forget about environment.
48
For long-term success and sustainability, companies use marketing, public relations and
corporate social responsibility practices. More and more companies recognise that they
cannot forget about social and environmental issues, human rights, labour issues and
responsible production. The tendency of recognition CRS is larger in Denmark, than in
Hungary. While leading multinational companies know, that during crisis, CSR is a
more important issue, some firms with smaller CSR-history think that CSR is
something, what we should apply just when everything else is fine around the company.
There are also researchers, who think, that CSR is just the asset of companies, avoid
state-regulations. They say that the problem is with the global capitalism, and alternative
corporations should be seen as examples of real responsibility and ethical operating.
In my research I was examining the reasons of the differences of Denmark’s and
Hungary’s different CSR practices. I found that, there are differences, which show, that
Denmark is truly the state of associations, and civil organisations. The co-operation
between state and the civil society brings favourable conditions for all those, who exist
in this world.
49
Bibliography
BooksBartal, A M 2005, Nonprofit Elméletek, Modellek, Trendek (Non-profit Theories,
Models, Trends), Századvég Kiadó, Budapest
Bernard, A & Helmich, H & Lehning, PB 1998, Civil Society and International
Development, North-South Centre of the Council of Europe, Development Centre of the
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, France
Dinya, L & Farkas, F & Hetesi, E & Veres, Z 2004, Non-business Marketing és
Menedzsment (Non-business Marketing and Management), KJK-KERSZÖV Jogi és
Üzleti Kiadó Kft., Budapest
Fazekas, I & Nagy, A 1994, Szponzorálás (Sponsorship), MIND Bt., Budapest
Green, A & Matthias, A 1997, Non-Governmental Organizations and Health in
Developing Countries, Macmillan Press Ltd., London
Ligeti, Gy 2007, CSR, Kurt Levin Alapítvány, Budapest
Morgenstienne, MC 2003, Denmark and National Liberation in Southern Africa, Stylus
Pub Llc.
Nyárádi, G & Szeles, P 2004a, Public Relations I., Perfekt Gazdasági Tanácsadó,
Oktató és Kiadó Rt., Budapest
Nyárádi, G & Szeles, P 2004b, Public Relations II., Perfekt Gazdasági Tanácsadó,
Oktató és Kiadó Rt., Budapest
Soanes, C & Stevenson A 2005, Oxford Dictionary of English, 2nd edn, Oxford
University Press, London
50
Szeles, P 2001, A Hírnév Ereje, Arculatelmélet (The Power of the Reputation, Image-theory), Alapítvány a Public Relations Fejlesztéséért, Budapest
Journal ArticlesAnonymus 2006, ’Business Is the Best NGO’ Chief Executive, no. 222, p. 64.
Burchell, J & Cook, J 2006, ’Assessing the impact of stakeholder dialogue: changing
relationships between NGOs and companies’, Journal of Public Affairs, vol. 6, no. 3-4,
pp. 210-227.
Doh, J & Guay, TR 2006, ‘Corporate Social Responsibiity, Public Policy, and NGO
Activism in Europe and the United States: An Institutional-Stakeholder Perspective’,
The Journal of Management Studies, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 47-73.
Edwards, M 2005, ‘Civil Society’, The Encyclopaedia of Informal Education, viewed
June 2009,
<www.infed.org/association/civil_society.htm>
Graafland, JJ & Eijffinger, SCW & SmidJohan, H 2004, ’Benchmarking of Corporate
Social Responsibility: Methodological Problems and Robustness’, Journal of Business
Ethics, vol. 53, no. 1-2, pp. 137-152.
Karsai, G 2008, ‘Még Nagyobb Halak’ (Even Bigger Fish), HVG Online, vol. 1, no. 1,
viewed January 2009,
<http://hvg.hu/hvgfriss/2008.01/200801HVGFriss115.aspx>
Karsai, G 2008, ‘Legnagyobb Magyar Cégek Listája’ (List of the biggest Hungaian
Companies), HVG Online, vol. 7, no. 30, viewed January 2009,
<http://hvg.hu/itthon/20080724_legnagyobb_cegek_toplistaja.aspx>
51
Kincsei, É 2009, ‘Abszurd dolog nem növekedni’ (It is absurd not to extend), Index.hu,
viewed June 2009,
<http://index.hu/gazdasag/magyar/2009/06/20/abszurd_dolog_nem_novekedni/?
rnd=411>
Ligeti Gy 2008, ‘Félelem és Felelősség’ (Fear and Responsibility), HVG Online, vol. 2,
no. 8, viewed January, 2009,
<http://hvg.hu/hvgfriss/2009.08/200908_Felelem_es_felelosseg.aspx>
Marin L & Ruiz S & Rubio A 2009, ‘The Role of Identity Salience in the Effects of
Corporate Social Responsibility on Consumer Behaviour’, Journal of Business Ethics,
vol. 84, no. 1, pp. 65-78.
May, SM & Andrew, C 2009, ‘Implementing CSR Through Partnerships:
Understanding the Selection, Design and Institutionalisation of Nonprofit-Business
Partnerships’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 85, pp. 413-429.
Newell, P 2005, ‘Citizenship, accountability and community: the limits of the CSR
agenda’, International Affairs (Royal Institute for International Affairs 1944-), vol. 81,
no. 3, pp. 541-557.
Mokyr, J 2005, ‘Mobility, Creativity, and Technological Development: David Hume,
Immanuel Kant and the Economic Development of Europe’, Proceedings of the session
on “Creativity and the Economy”, German Association of Philosophy, German
Association of Philosophy, Berlin
Nijhof, A & de Bruijn, T & Honders, H 2008, ‘Partnership for corporate social
responsibility’, Management Decisions, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 152-167
Oxford Research, The Copengaheg Post 2007, ‘Udenlandske videnarbejden i Danmark’
Oxford Research i samarbejde med The Copenhagen Post - Januar 2007, Oxford
Research, The Copengaheg Post, Copenhagen pp. 5-15.
52
Rahbek, PE 2006, ‘Making Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Operable: How
Companies Translate Stakeholder Dialogue into Practice’, Business and Society Review,
vol. 111, no. 2, pp. 137-163
Westlund, R 2008, ’Corporate Social Responsibility’, Institutional Investor-
International Edition, vol.33, no. 3, pp. 1-4.
White, AL 2009, ’Confessions of a CSR Champion’, Stranford Social Innovation
Review, col. 7, no. 1, p. 31
Wilburn, K 2009, ’A Model for Partnering with Not-for-Profits to Develop Socially
Responsible Businesses in a Global Environment’ Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 85,
no. 1, pp. 111-120.
Willetts, P 2002, ’What is a Non-governmental Organisation?’ UNESCO Encyclopaedia
of Life Support Systems, Section 1 Institutional and Infrastructure Resource Issues,
Article 1.44.3.7 Non-Governmental Organizations
ReportsEuropean Foundation Centre 2007, The Danish Foundation Sector, European
Foundation Centre, viewed 22 January 2009,
<http://www.efc.be/ftp/public/PIP/2007/CESymp/Danish-Foundation-Sector.doc >
Jonasen, V 2002, Non-profit organisations in the Danish welfare state system The
National Danish School of Social Work, Aarhus, viewed 13 February 2009,
< http://www.ceis.it/euroset/products/pdf/Danish_Welfare.PDF >
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark 2008, Danish NGOs, Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of Denmark, viewed 22 January 2009,
<http://www.um.dk/en/menu/DevelopmentPolicy/DanishNGOs/>
53
Transparency International 2008, Corruption Perception Index 2008, Transparency
International, viewed 18 June 2009,
< http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2008>
WebpageBusiness for Social Responsibility
< http://www.bsr.org/ >
CSR Europe, The European Business Network for CSR
< http://www.csreurope.org/ >
OthersCharter of the United Nations, Chapter X: The Economic and Social Council, Article
70-71
54
Appendix
55
1. Questionnaire(for companies)
1; Have you ever heard about the corporate social responsibility?yes □ no □
2; If yes, do you apply it at your company in any forms?yes □ no □
3; Please select from the under mentioned, in which extend does your company apply corporate social responsibility?
a; We usually support foundations/other non-profit-oriented organisations by money or by other donations.
b; We sometimes support foundations/other non-profit orientated organisations by money or by other donations.
c; There was a case, when we supported a foundation/other non-profit orientated organisation by money or by other donations.
d; We help to our employees’ social situation by different non-material bonuses (childcare for employees’ children, organizing meetings, performances for employees’, in topics, in which they are involved or/and they are interested in)
e; other:______________________________________________________________
f; In no extend we apply.
4. According to you, corporate social responsibility is important for your company?
a; Yes, it is very important for our company politics and our sustainable politics
b; Yes, it is a very important PR/marketing asset, which helps us to make good impression towards our environment
c; I don’t think that it is an important issue. CSR is a secondary question, if we have time and money, we deal with it.
d; I really do not think that it is an important issue. Unnecessary expense.
5. According to you, which way of the corporate social responsibility is worthy to follow and why?_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
56
6. Do you plan, that you will emphasize more your company’s corporate social responsibility? Take up new social issues or spend more money on corporate social responsibility or refresh the company’s existing actions?
yes □ no □
7. What do you think, what the difference is between your CSR politics and other companies’ CSR politics? _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Thank you for your valuable answers and for your help!
57
2. Questionnaire(for the civil sphere)
1. Do you have constant relationship with companies, who support your organization as a part of the company’s corporate social responsibility?
□ yes□ no
2. If yes, how this relationship is like?
a; The company gives material support.
b; The company gives non-material support, like:_____________________________
c; The company organizes happenings, events to support an issue, our organization involved.
d; other: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
3. Usually your organization searches for partnership with companies or the companies offer the possibility of a partnership?
□ we search for companies□ companies search for us
4. What is more usual?
□ single or multiple support (the company offers material or nonmaterial help just one time or few times in a certain period)□ constant support from the same company within the confines their CSR
5. Which kind of supported-supporter relationship do you prefer at your organization and why?
a; single/multiple support. Why?___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
b; support of our organization’s events
58
Why?___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
c; constant support and mutually favourable relationship with a company.Why?___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
6. Do you have any action program, practice or plan how your organization start to get into touch with companies in order to gain their attention and build a partnership with them?
□ yes□ no
If yes, please explain this practice: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Thank you for your valuable answers and your help!
59
3.2008 CORRUPTION PERCEPTIONS INDEX
country rank
country 2008 CPI score
surveys used
confidence range
1 Denmark 9,3 6 9.1 - 9.4
1 New Zealand 9,3 6 9.2 - 9.5
1 Sweden 9,3 6 9.2 - 9.4
4 Singapore 9,2 9 9.0 - 9.3
5 Finland 9,0 6 8.4 - 9.4
5 Switzerland 9,0 6 8.7 - 9.2
7 Iceland 8,9 5 8.1 - 9.4
7 Netherlands 8,9 6 8.5 - 9.1
9 Australia 8,7 8 8.2 - 9.1
9 Canada 8,7 6 8.4 - 9.1
11 Luxembourg 8,3 6 7.8 - 8.8
12 Austria 8,1 6 7.6 - 8.6
12 Hong Kong 8,1 8 7.5 - 8.6
14 Germany 7,9 6 7.5 - 8.2
14 Norway 7,9 6 7.5 - 8.3
16 Ireland 7,7 6 7.5 - 7.9
16 United Kingdom 7,7 6 7.2 - 8.1
18 Belgium 7,3 6 7.2 - 7.4
18 Japan 7,3 8 7.0 - 7.6
18 USA 7,3 8 6.7 - 7.7
21 Saint Lucia 7,1 3 6.6 - 7.3
22 Barbados 7,0 4 6.5 - 7.3
23 Chile 6,9 7 6.5 - 7.2
23 France 6,9 6 6.5 - 7.3
23 Uruguay 6,9 5 6.5 - 7.2
26 Slovenia 6,7 8 6.5 - 7.0
60
27 Estonia 6,6 8 6.2 - 6.9
28 Qatar 6,5 4 5.6 - 7.0
28 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
6,5 3 4.7 - 7.3
28 Spain 6,5 6 5.7 - 6.9
31 Cyprus 6,4 3 5.9 - 6.8
32 Portugal 6,1 6 5.6 - 6.7
33 Dominica 6,0 3 4.7 - 6.8
33 Israel 6,0 6 5.6 - 6.3
35 United Arab Emirates 5,9 5 4.8 - 6.8
36 Botswana 5,8 6 5.2 - 6.4
36 Malta 5,8 4 5.3 - 6.3
36 Puerto Rico 5,8 4 5.0 - 6.6
39 Taiwan 5,7 9 5.4 - 6.0
40 South Korea 5,6 9 5.1 - 6.3
41 Mauritius 5,5 5 4.9 - 6.4
41 Oman 5,5 5 4.5 - 6.4
43 Bahrain 5,4 5 4.3 - 5.9
43 Macau 5,4 4 3.9 - 6.2
45 Bhutan 5,2 5 4.5 - 5.9
45 Czech Republic 5,2 8 4.8 - 5.9
47 Cape Verde 5,1 3 3.4 - 5.6
47 Costa Rica 5,1 5 4.8 - 5.3
47 Hungary 5,1 8 4.8 - 5.4
47 Jordan 5,1 7 4.0 - 6.2
47 Malaysia 5,1 9 4.5 - 5.7
52 Latvia 5,0 6 4.8 - 5.2
52 Slovakia 5,0 8 4.5 - 5.3
54 South Africa 4,9 8 4.5 - 5.1
61
55 Italy 4,8 6 4.0 - 5.5
55 Seychelles 4,8 4 3.7 - 5.9
57 Greece 4,7 6 4.2 - 5.0
58 Lithuania 4,6 8 4.1 - 5.2
58 Poland 4,6 8 4.0 - 5.2
58 Turkey 4,6 7 4.1 - 5.1
61 Namibia 4,5 6 3.8 - 5.1
62 Croatia 4,4 8 4.0 - 4.8
62 Samoa 4,4 3 3.4 - 4.8
62 Tunisia 4,4 6 3.5 - 5.5
65 Cuba 4,3 4 3.6 - 4.8
65 Kuwait 4,3 5 3.3 - 5.2
67 El Salvador 3,9 5 3.2 - 4.5
67 Georgia 3,9 7 3.2 - 4.6
67 Ghana 3,9 6 3.4 - 4.5
70 Colombia 3,8 7 3.3 - 4.5
70 Romania 3,8 8 3.4 - 4.2
72 Bulgaria 3,6 8 3.0 - 4.3
72 China 3,6 9 3.1 - 4.3
72 Macedonia (Former Yugoslav Republic of) 3,6 6 2.9 - 4.3
72 Mexico 3,6 7 3.4 - 3.9
72 Peru 3,6 6 3.4 - 4.1
72 Suriname 3,6 4 3.3 - 4.0
72 Swaziland 3,6 4 2.9 - 4.3
72 Trinidad and Tobago 3,6 4 3.1 - 4.0
80 Brazil 3,5 7 3.2 - 4.0
80 Burkina Faso 3,5 7 2.9 - 4.2
80 Morocco 3,5 6 3.0 - 4.0
80 Saudi Arabia 3,5 5 3.0 - 3.9
62
80 Thailand 3,5 9 3.0 - 3.9
85 Albania 3,4 5 3.3 - 3.4
85 India 3,4 10 3.2 - 3.6
85 Madagascar 3,4 7 2.8 - 4.0
85 Montenegro 3,4 5 2-5 - 4.0
85 Panama 3,4 5 2.8 - 3.7
85 Senegal 3,4 7 2.9 - 4.0
85 Serbia 3,4 6 3.0 - 4.0
92 Algeria 3,2 6 2.9 - 3.4
92 Bosnia and Herzegovina 3,2 7 2.9 - 3.5
92 Lesotho 3,2 5 2.3 - 3.8
92 Sri Lanka 3,2 7 2.9 - 3.5
96 Benin 3,1 6 2.8 - 3.4
96 Gabon 3,1 4 2.8 - 3.3
96 Guatemala 3,1 5 2.3 - 4.0
96 Jamaica 3,1 5 2.8 - 3.3
96 Kiribati 3,1 3 2.5 - 3.4
96 Mali 3,1 6 2.8 - 3.3
102 Bolivia 3.0 6 2.8 - 3.2
102 Djibouti 3,0 4 2.2 - 3.3
102 Dominican Republic 3,0 5 2.7 - 3.2
102 Lebanon 3,0 4 2.2 - 3.6
102 Mongolia 3,0 7 2.6 - 3.3
102 Rwanda 3,0 5 2.7 - 3.2
102 Tanzania 3,0 7 2.5 - 3.3
109 Argentina 2,9 7 2.5 - 3.3
109 Armenia 2,9 7 2.6 - 3.1
109 Belize 2,9 3 1.8 - 3.7
109 Moldova 2,9 7 2.4 - 3.7
63
109 Solomon Islands 2,9 3 2.5 - 3.2
109 Vanuatu 2,9 3 2.5 - 3.2
115 Egypt 2,8 6 2.4 - 3.2
115 Malawi 2,8 6 2.4 - 3.1
115 Maldives 2,8 4 1.7 - 4.3
115 Mauritania 2,8 7 2.2 - 3.7
115 Niger 2,8 6 2.4 - 3.0
115 Zambia 2,8 7 2.5 - 3.0
121 Nepal 2,7 6 2.4 - 3.0
121 Nigeria 2,7 7 2.3 - 3.0
121 Sao Tome and Principe 2,7 3 2.1 - 3.1
121 Togo 2,7 6 1.9 - 3.7
121 Viet Nam 2,7 9 2.4 - 3.1
126 Eritrea 2,6 5 1.7 - 3.6
126 Ethiopia 2,6 7 2.2 - 2.9
126 Guyana 2,6 4 2.4 - 2.7
126 Honduras 2,6 6 2.3 - 2.9
126 Indonesia 2,6 10 2.3 - 2.9
126 Libya 2,6 5 2.2 - 3.0
126 Mozambique 2,6 7 2.4 - 2.9
126 Uganda 2,6 7 2.2 - 3.0
134 Comoros 2,5 3 1.9 - 3.0
134 Nicaragua 2,5 6 2.2 - 2.7
134 Pakistan 2,5 7 2.0 - 2.8
134 Ukraine 2,5 8 2.2 - 2.8
138 Liberia 2,4 4 1.8 - 2.8
138 Paraguay 2,4 5 2.0 - 2.7
138 Tonga 2,4 3 1.9 - 2.6
141 Cameroon 2,3 7 2.0 - 2.7
64
141 Iran 2,3 4 1.9 - 2.5
141 Philippines 2,3 9 2.1 - 2.5
141 Yemen 2,3 5 1.9 - 2.8
145 Kazakhstan 2,2 6 1.8 - 2.7
145 Timor-Leste 2,2 4 1.8 - 2.5
147 Bangladesh 2,1 7 1.7 - 2.4
147 Kenya 2,1 7 1.9 - 2.4
147 Russia 2,1 8 1.9 - 2.5
147 Syria 2,1 5 1.6 - 2.4
151 Belarus 2,0 5 1.6 - 2.5
151 Central African Republic 2,0 5 1.9 - 2.2
151 Côte d´Ivoire 2,0 6 1.7 - 2.5
151 Ecuador 2,0 5 1.8 - 2.2
151 Laos 2,0 6 1.6 - 2.3
151 Papua New Guinea 2,0 6 1.6 - 2.3
151 Taijikistan 2,0 8 1.7 - 2.3
158 Angola 1,9 6 1.5 - 2.2
158 Azerbaijan 1,9 8 1.7 - 2.1
158 Burundi 1,9 6 1.5 - 2.3
158 Congo, Republic 1,9 6 1.8 - 2.0
158 Gambia 1,9 5 1.5 - 2.4
158 Guinea-Bissau 1,9 3 1.8 - 2.0
158 Sierra Leone 1,9 5 1.8 - 2.0
158 Venezuela 1,9 7 1.8 - 2.0
166 Cambodia 1,8 7 1.7 - 1.9
166 Kyrgyzstan 1,8 7 1.7 - 1.9
166 Turkmenistan 1,8 5 1.5 - 2.2
166 Uzbekistan 1,8 8 1.5 - 2.2
166 Zimbabwe 1,8 7 1.5 - 2.1
65
171 Congo, Democratic Republic 1,7 6 1.6 - 1.9
171 Equatorial Guinea 1,7 4 1.5 - 1.8
173 Chad 1,6 6 1.5 - 1.7
173 Guinea 1,6 6 1.3 - 1.9
173 Sudan 1,6 6 1.5 - 1.7
176 Afghanistan 1,5 4 1.1 - 1.6
177 Haiti 1,4 4 1.1 - 1.7
178 Iraq 1,3 4 1.1 - 1.6
178 Myanmar 1,3 4 1.0 - 1.5
180 Somalia 1,0 4 0.5 - 1.4
66