Theorising Corporate Social Responsibility as an Essentially Contested Concept: Is a Definition Necessary?

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


    Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become indispensable in modern business discourse; yet identifying and defining what CSR means is open to contest. Although such contestation is not uncommon with concepts found in the social sciences, for CSR it presents some difficulty for theoretical and empirical analysis, especially with regards to verifying that diverse application of the concept is consistent or concomitant. On the other hand, it seems unfeasible that the diversity of issues addressed under the CSR umbrella would yield to a singular universal definition. Gallie, an eminent philosophical scholar, proposed the essentially contested concepts (ECC) theory in 1956 to address concepts that by their very nature engender perpetual disputes. He pointed out that there are certain concepts which by their very nature are inevitably contested and prescribed seven criteria for evaluating such concepts. This article examines these criteria to discover if CSR is an essentially contested concept and in that case, to construe if such a change in perception will resolve the definitional crisis. The analysis suggests that CSR is an ECC and this explains the potential for several conceptions of CSR, however, it does not totally obviate the need for a definition of its core or common reference point, if only to ensure that the contestants are dealing with an identical subject matter.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)613-627
    JournalJournal of Business Ethics
    Issue number4
    Publication statusPublished - 8 Jan 2009


    Dive into the research topics of 'Theorising Corporate Social Responsibility as an Essentially Contested Concept: Is a Definition Necessary?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this