Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The association between corporate social-responsibility and financial performance: The paradox of social cost

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

It is generally assumed that common stock investors are exclusively interested in earning the highest level of future cash-flow for a given amount of risk. This view suggests that investors select a well-diversified portfolio of securities to achieve this goal. Accordingly, it is often assumed that investors are unwilling to pay a premium for corporate behavior which can be described as “socially-responsible”.

Recently, this view has been under increasing attack. According to the Social Investment Forum, at least 538 institutional investors now allocate funds using social screens or criteria. In addition, Alice Tepper Marlin, president of the New York-based Council on Economic Priorities has recently estimated that about $600 billion of invested funds are socially-screened (1992).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexander, G. J. and R. A. Buchholz: 1978, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility and Stock Market Performance’, Academy of Management Journal 21, 479–486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altman, E.: 1968, ‘Financial Ratios, Discriminant Analysis, and the Prediction of Corporate Bankruptcy’, Journal of Finance (Sept.), 589–609.

  • The American Heritage Dictionary: Second College Edition: 1985 (Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston).

  • Anderson, J. C. and A. W. Frankle: 1980, ‘Voluntary Social Reporting: An Iso-beta Portfolio Analysis’, The Accounting Review 55(3), 467–479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arlow, P. and M. Gannon: 1982. ‘Social Responsiveness, Corporate Structure, and Economic Performance’, Academy of Management Review 7, 235–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aupperle, K. E., A. B. Carroll and J. D. Hatfield: ‘An Empirical Examination of the Relationship Between Corporate Social Responsibility and Profitability’, Academy of Management Journal 28(2), 446–463.

  • Baldwin, S. A., J. W. Tower, L. Litvak, J. F. Karpen, with H. F. Jackson and B. McTigue: 1986, Pension Funds and Ethical Investment (Council on Economic Priorities, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Belkaoui, A.: 1976, ‘The Impact of the Disclosure of the Environmental Effects of Organizational Behavior on the Market’, Financial Management 5(4), 26–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowles, S. and H. Gintis: 1987, Democracy & Capitalism: Property, Community annd the Contraditions of Modern Social Thought (Basic Books).

  • Bowman, E. H. and M. A. Haire: 1975, ‘A Strategic Posture Toward Corporate Social Responsibility’, California Management Review 18(2), 49–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boycott Report: Developments and Trends Affecting the Arab Boycott and Arab Influence in the USA (New York: American Jewish Congress, Vol. 16, No. 8, October 1992).

  • Bragdon, J. H. and J. A. T. Marlin: 1972, ‘Is Pollution Profitable?’, Risk Management 19(4), 9–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruyn, Severyn T.: 1987, The Field of Social Investment (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, K. H. and R. W. Metcalf: 1984, ‘The Relationship Between Pollution Control Record and Financial Indicators Revisited’, The Accounting Review 55(1), 168–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chugh, L., M. Haneman and S. Mahapatra: 1978, ‘Impact of Pollution Control Regulations on the Market Risk of Securities in the U. S.’, Journal of Economic Studies 5(1), 64–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran, P. L. and R. A. Wood: 1984, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance’, Academy of Management Journal 27(1), 42–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coffey, B. S. and G. Fryxell: 1991, ‘Institutional Ownership of Stock and Dimensions of Corporate Social Performance: An Empirical Examination’, Journal of Business Ethics 10, 437–444.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornell, B. and A. C. Shapiro: 1987, ‘Corporate Stakeholders and Corporate Finance’, Financial Management 16, 5–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cotrill, M. T.: 1990, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility and the Marketplace’, Journal of Business Ethics 9, 723–729.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council on Economic Priorities and M. Alperson, A. Tepper Marlin, J. Schorsch and R. Will: 1991, The Better World Investment Guide (Prentice Hall Press, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P. F.: 1992, ‘The New Society of Organizations’, Harvard Business Review, Sept.–Oct. 95–104.

  • Drucker, P. F.: 1989, The New Realities: In Government and Politics/In Economics and Business/In Society and World View (Harper and Row, Publishers, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, M. J. and M. L. Pava: 1992, ‘Corporations and the Environment: Shareholders Demand Accountability’, USA Today Magazine 121(2570), 32–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogler, H. R. and R. Nutt: 1975, ‘A Note on Social Responsibility and Stock Valuation’, Academy of Management Journal 18(1), 155–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freedman, M. and B. Jaggi: 1986, ‘An Analysis of the Impact of Corporate Pollution disclosures Included in Annual Financial Statements on Investors' Decisions’, Advances in Public Interst Accounting 1, 193–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freedman, M. and B. Jaggi: 1982, ‘Pollution Disclosures, Pollution Performance and Economic Performance’, The International Journal of Management Science 10(2), 167–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, B. M. (ed.): 1978, New Challenges to the Role of Profit (Lexinton Books, Lexington, MA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M.: 1970, ‘A Friedman Doctrine — The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits’, The New York Times Magazine, Sept. 13, 32–33, and 123–125.

  • Friedman, M.: 1962, Capitalism and Freedom (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago).

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. and R. Friedman: 1980, Free to Choose (Avon Books, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilder, G.: 1984, The Spirit of Enterprise (Simon and Schuster, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., J. L. Knetsch and R. H. Thaler: 1986, ‘Fairness and Assumptions of Economics’, Journal of Business 59(4), 285–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kedia, B. L. and E. C. Kuntz: 1981, ‘The Context of Social Performance: An Empirical Study of Texas Banks’, in L. E. Preston (ed), Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy (Vol. 3) (Greenwich, JAI Press, CT), pp. 133–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kristol, I: 1978, Two Cheers For Capitalism (Basic Books, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorsch, J.: 1989, Pawns or Potentates: The Reality of America's Corporate Boards (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).

    Google Scholar 

  • Marlin, A. T.: 1992, ‘Shopping for a Better World’, Business and Society Review 20(81), 32–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, J., A. Sundgren and T. Schneeweis: 1988, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Financial Performance’, Academy of Management Journal. 31(4), 854–872.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moskowitz, M. R.: 1972, ‘Choosing Socially Responsible Stocks’, Business and Society Review 1, 71–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulligan, T.: 1986, ‘A Critique of Milton Friedman's Essay ‘The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits’’, Journal of Business Ethics 5, 265–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • New York Times (February 11, 1993).

  • Newton, L.: 1989, Ethics in America: A Source Reader (Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, NJ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak, M.: 1984, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism (American Enterprise Institute and Simon and Schuster, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Nozick, R.: 1981, Philosophical Explanations (The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Okun, A.: 1975, Equality and Efficiency: The Big Tradeoff (The Brookings Institution, Washington DC).

    Google Scholar 

  • Patten, D. M.: 1990, ‘The Market Reaction to Social Responsibility Disclosures: The Case of the Sullivan Principles Signings’, Accounting, Organizations and Society 15(6), 575–587.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parket, I. R. and H. Eilbirt,: 1975, ‘Social Responsibility: The Underlying Factors’, Business Horizons 18(4), 5–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, R. W.: 1992, ‘Determinants of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure: An Application of Stakeholder Theory’, Accounting, Organizations and Society 17(6), 595–612.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rockness, J., P. Schlachter and H. Rockness: 1986, ‘Hazardous Waste Disposal, Corporate Disclosure, and Financial Performance in the Chemical Industry’, Advances in Public Interest Accounting 1, 167–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rockness, J. and P. F. Williams: 1988, ‘A Descriptive Study of Social Responsibility Mutual Funds’, Accounting, Organizations and Society 13(4), 397–411.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanyal, R. N. and J. S. Neves: 1991, ‘The Valdez Principles: Implications for Corporate Social Responsibility’, Journal of Business Ethics 10, 883–890.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shane, P. and B. Spicer: 1983, ‘Market Response to Environmental Information Produced Outside the Firm’, The Accounting Review 58(3), 521–538.

    Google Scholar 

  • Social Investment Forum: 1991, Socially Responsible Mutual Funds (August, Minneapolis, MN).

  • Spicer, B. H.: 1978, ‘Investors, Corporate Social Performance and Information Disclosure: An Emprical Study’, Accounting Review 55, 94–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spicer, B. H.: 1978, ‘Market Risk, Accounting Data and Companies' Pollution Control Records’, Journal of Business, Finance and Accounting 5, 67–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spicer, B. H.: 1980, ‘The Relationship Between Pollution Control Record and Financial Indicators Revisited: Futher Comment’, The Accounting Review 55(1), 178–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stickney, C. P.: 1990, Financial Statement Analysis: A Strategic Perspective (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc., Orlando, FL).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sturdivant, F. D. and J. L. Ginter: 1977, ‘Corporate Social Responsiveness’, California Management Review 19(3), 30–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trotman, K. and G. Bradley: 1981, ‘Association Between Social Responsibility Disclosure and Characteristics of Companies’, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 355–362.

  • Ullmann, A. A.: 1985, ‘Data in Search of a Theory: A Critical Examination of the Relationships Among Social Performance, Social Disclosure, and Economic Performance of U. S. Firms’, Academy of Management Review 10(3), 540–557.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vance, S. C.: 1975, ‘Are Socially Responsible Corporations Good Investment Risks?’, Management Review 64(8), 18–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, C.: 1992, Corporate Encounters: Ethics, Law & Business Environment (The Dryden Press, Fort Worth TX).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Syms School of Business, Yeshiva University, 10033, New York, NY, USA

    Moses L. Pava & Joshua Krausz

Authors
  1. Moses L. Pava
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joshua Krausz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

MOSES L. PAVA is Associate Professor of Accounting and the Alvin Einbender Chair in Business Ethics at the Sy Syms School of Business, Yeshiva University. His research interests include financial reporting and business ethics. He has recently published articles in the Journal of Accountancy, Management Accounting, The Financial Executive, and Journal of Applied Business Research. His first book, The Shareholder's Use of Corporate Annual Reports, was published in 1993.

JOSHUA KRAUSZ is Gershon and Merle Stern Professor of Banking and Finance at the Sy Syms School of Business, Yeshiva University. His research interests are in the areas of financial analysis, ethics and social responsibility, financial accounting, options and derivatives, price behavior, capital budgeting and taxation. He has published in The Review of Economics and Statistics, The Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Accounting Horizons, Applied Economics, The Journal of Extractive Industries Accounting, and The Mid-Atlantic Journal of Business.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pava, M.L., Krausz, J. The association between corporate social-responsibility and financial performance: The paradox of social cost. J Bus Ethics 15, 321–357 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00382958

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00382958

Keywords

Search

Navigation