Business Leadership and Corporate Social Responsibility

Business Leadership and Corporate Social Responsibility: Comparison

Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Catherine Yang and Version 3 by Catherine Yang.

. The COVID-19 pandemic is without question posing a generation-defining challenge for public health and the global economy. Moreover, the pandemic has revived some old and introduced many new threats that today’s business leaders will have to face in the years to come. Despite the fact that the COVID-19 crisis was a humanitarian tragedy that continues to ravage millions of lives, it can also be viewed as an excellent opportunity to restart sustainable economic development as well as to help our business and economy to shift towards real business corporate social responsibility and ethical decision-making (thanks to the reduction in carbon emissions as a result of reduced economic activity and travel, increasing investments into healthcare and education, or finding the new ways for working and learning, such as remote work and online education).

business resilience
leadership
sustainability
corporate social responsibility
COVID-19

1. Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed systemic weaknesses in our global economy and societies (EEA 2020). Now, as the pandemic slowly transmuting into something that resembles the endemic, the transformation of the concept of sustainable business leadership, in particular, as far as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and corporate social responsibility (CSR) are concerned, is becoming an important topic in the post-COVID-19 period (Zhao 2021; Sadiq et al. 2022; Kaftan et al. 2023). This is due to many questions and issues that the pandemic generated and that need to be tackled and taken into consideration as our economy and society are further progressing into the globalized and digitalized 21st century (Oldekop et al. 2020; Blum and Neumärker 2021).

The COVID-19 pandemic has amplified the existing societal inequalities and brought them to the foreground of public awareness, which necessarily prompts companies to reconsider their future business strategies and efficacy, as well as the sustainability of their present business models (Verma et al. 2020; Tonne 2021; Strielkowski et al. 2022). However, the current pandemic also presents an opportunity to focus on re-building more inclusive systems, which enable societies, in general, to become more resilient to future shocks, be they of health, climate, natural disasters, or social upheaval (Spring et al. 2021). The world’s economy has the opportunity, or indeed, a responsibility, to create global resilience to future inevitable pandemics by using complementary forms of technological innovation (Hynes et al. 2020). Additionally, the world has the chance to use innovations and lessons learned from the pandemic to build healthier, more equitable societies, as well as build resilience in the global health infrastructure (Lal et al. 2021).

In general terms, the COVID-19 pandemic offers an excellent opportunity for businesses to move toward a more genuine, real-world type of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and contribute to solving pressing global social and environmental challenges (Chua et al. 2020; Carroll 2021). CSR, which can be defined as ecological and social sustainability, social responsibility, environmental sustainability, or ecological governance, is based on maintaining high standards and giving back to communities (Popescu and Banța 2019; Shabbir and Wisdom 2020; Qiu et al. 2021). The concept of CSR is of special importance for many stakeholders and countries (for example, the European Union (EU)) which interpret it as the voluntary responsibility of sustaining the impact of business organizations and institutions on the economic and social life with multiple implications (Lu et al. 2019a, 2019b; Contrafatto et al. 2020; Czaja-Cieszyńska et al. 2021; Bernhagen et al. 2022). It can be observed with clarity that CSR constitutes an important part of business leadership that is especially relevant in the post-COVID reconstruction of the world economies (Ashraf et al. 2022; Su et al. 2022).

When it comes to developing the relevant policy implications with regard to the CSR principles, the complex system of indicators aimed at achieving the desired targets, as well as policies required for the completion of this task, comes into place. Figure 1 depicts the methodological framework for effective CSR policies and strategies in business companies (see Figure 1 below).

Figure 1. Framework for effective CSR policies and strategies. Source: Own results.

Even though CSR is not a new concept, in quite a number of countries, too many business enterprises strive to understand its significance and implement its principles in their daily business operations (including the small and medium enterprises (SMEs)) that often constitute a backbone of the economy (for example, in the EU, SMEs constitute 99% of all businesses and employ around 100 million people (see European Commission 2023)) (Strielkowski et al. 2021a; Khamis and Wan Ismail 2022). This needs to be improved, especially in light of the lessons learned from the past two years marked by the COVID-19 pandemic and the global social and economic crisis it brought about. The main reason why SMEs struggle with CSR is the perception that it is only relevant for large corporations (Ahmad et al. 2021). Many SMEs believe that CSR is a luxury that they cannot afford, as they are more focused on short-term survival and profitability (Giousmpasoglou et al. 2021). However, this view is gradually changing as SMEs realize that CSR can be a source of competitive advantage and long-term sustainability.

2. Business Leadership and Corporate Social Responsibility in the Post-COVID Era

Small business enterprise sustainability represents managing and coordinating the demands and concerns related to environmental, social, and financial issues in order to achieve responsible, ethical, and sustained success in business (see Woo and Kang 2020; Islam and Wahab 2021; or Šebestová and Popescu 2022). Sustainability means doing business without adversely impacting the environment, communities, or the wider community (Danso et al. 2019; Andryeyeva et al. 2021). Business sustainability is the practice of running one’s small and medium company without adversely affecting the environment (Yang and Jiang 2020; Khurana et al. 2021). This business sustainability and accountability outlook requires businesses to produce both economic and social value while reconnecting their corporate objectives to stakeholders’ governance and ecological accountability (Mio et al. 2022). This values-based model aligns strategic corporate responsibility and environmental management with the stakeholders’ approach to achieving corporate sustainability over the longterm, both in terms of business economic outcomes as well as the societal outcomes from corporate responsibility. It is the integration of environmental pillars as well as profits that makes a case for companies to get on board with sustainability strategies (Barauskaite and Streimikiene 2021). With regard to the discussion above, it can be noted that tighter environmental regulations tend to promote sustainable development in business companies and lead to the better implementation of green finance. This can be best shown in the case of the key economy represented by China: it happens so that China is the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases, and its industries are responsible for a significant portion of the country’s pollution. However, in recent years, China has been making efforts to transition towards a more sustainable economy, including promoting green finance (represented by investments in renewable energy, energy efficiency, and other environmentally friendly projects) (Xu et al. 2022). Green finance could help to pollute Chinese companies improve their reputation and stakeholder relationships. By demonstrating a commitment to sustainability, these companies could improve their image and gain the support of consumers and investors who are increasingly conscious of environmental issues (Li et al. 2022; Shahzad et al. 2022; Zhao et al. 2022). Companies that incorporate sustainability in their business models and corporate governance may enjoy the ultimate competitive edge. Putting effort into creating a strong sustainability strategy can benefit both the company’s business and the environment over the long run (OECD 2017; He and Harris 2020). Recognizing the impacts of sustainability during the crisis, these companies all developed more proactive strategies for sustainability. While CSR is a one-way answer to this kind of pressure, companies have sought to enhance their competitive position by linking sustainability and corporate strategy (Valdez-Juárez et al. 2021; Settembre-Blundo et al. 2021). This is indicative of the way in which, in recent decades, the contemporary business approach has evolved and, along with that, an increased focus on CSR and corporate sustainability (OECD 2022). Instead of waiting for market changes that would create incentives to adopt sustainable practices, businesses are creating these changes that will allow new forms of corporate sustainability (Farooq et al. 2021). A growing number of organizations are embedding sustainability in their business strategies, realizing that they can make more money while contributing to sustainable economic development. Sustainability leaders have the courage to challenge conventional approaches and a willingness to disrupt their businesses and industries. In fact, many of them are asking why things cannot be done differently (Dasborough and Scandura 2022; Bauwens et al. 2022). They understand the broad spectrum of perspectives to guide decisions with all these stakeholders in mind, and, when possible, they actively engage these stakeholders to make decisions and share the benefits. Social and sustainable Innovations Involve the participation of many stakeholders and consider social and ecological impacts as well as economic impacts as desired outcomes for innovations (Khoshnava et al. 2019; Cillo et al. 2019). All of that gained special importance after the COVID-19 pandemic, which has demonstrated many weaknesses in our economic systems and provided many important lessons that need to be considered and taken into account for future economic growth (Perkins et al. 2021; Ben Hassen 2022). The sustainable perspective expands the range of costs or resources by considering outcomes for populations in relation to a triple bottom line of ecological, social, and economic costs or impacts. In the larger context, social, environmental, and economic needs are considered three pillars of sustainability (Ranjbari et al. 2021). Sustainability is also concerned with the social and economic aspects, with ecological concerns driving thinking. Environmental sustainability puts the focus on how businesses are capable of positive economic outcomes while not doing harm, short-term or long-term, to the environment. The principles of sustainable development relate to societal and economic improvements that preserve the environment and sustain fairness, and thus economics and society, as well as ecological systems, are mutually dependent (Velenturf and Purnell 2021; Adamowicz 2022). Economic sustainability is about keeping the capital stock intact. The objective of sustainable corporate strategies is to have a positive impact on at least one environment (Li et al. 2020). In addition, corporate sustainability in investments may be subsumed by the terms ESG, which stands for “Environment, Social, and Governance”, or by the acronym SRI, which stands for “Socially Responsible Investment”. Several investors today utilize Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) metrics to analyze the ethical Impacts and sustainability practices of an organization (Badía et al. 2020; Gangi et al. 2022). Key takeaways corporate sustainability is an increasing issue for investors who are looking for social benefit as well as financial return. With the rise of socially responsible funds and foundations, corporate sustainability could eventually give companies a competitive advantage on their balance sheet. These recent developments that gained special momentum after the two years of the COVID-19 pandemic suggest that an organization’s commitment to responsible behavior could constitute the transformation of the enterprise into a genuinely sustainable enterprise, one that increases value for the enterprise itself while adding value for society and the environment (Ou et al. 2021). Although the topic of corporate sustainability and accountability is still evolving, debates between academic commentators are slowly but surely raising awareness about responsible management practices, as well as the skills and expertise needed to achieve strategic outcomes that generate value for businesses, society, and the environment (Suriyankietkaew et al. 2022). Business owners and leaders with the right organizational skills possess the savvy to make strategic decisions about sustainability that are good for business, their employees as well as their customers. These business leaders need to learn how to celebrate sustainable leaders within their organizations and speak up about the value they are creating for their organizations and the wider community. Lowering the company’s costs, having a more innovative strategy, a better reputation, and having more new customers that appreciate sustainability are all things that can add up to the amount of money that any sustainable company makes (Zu 2019). The recent COVID-19 pandemic offered a broad array of meaningful opportunities to those who take a more reflective and insightful approach to sustainable development and CSR. The pandemic has opened great opportunities for business companies and organizations to be proactive in their CSR strategies and programs. In addition, CSR has always had a potential for the increased focus on considerations related to CSR by both governments and the market due to the exposure to large, widespread vulnerabilities within companies operating environments (Popescu 2019; Scherer and Voegtlin 2020). Inevitably, the COVID-19 pandemic has placed companies under pressure for their adherence to ethical corporate behavior and CSR. It can be observed how many companies have not only stood up against unethical business practices during COVID-19 but also have actively engaged in a variety of CSR activities, especially those which could provide immediate aid and help to fight against the virus (Zhang et al. 2022). The COVID-19 pandemic (which has not yet been declared to become endemic) has obviously challenged many existing priorities, and ex-ante, mandated research on CSR, key for the reconstruction of a more resilient company and stakeholder networks in the middle- to post-pandemic phase, has been mostly ignored. This potential conflict of priorities calls for examining the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic on CSR investments, as well as individual responses and behaviorist work (Mahmud et al. 2021). In general terms, COVID-19 has created a humanitarian crisis on the scale of global dimensions, disrupting hundreds of thousands of lives and not speaking about direct and indirect economic losses. While COVID-19 presents unique challenges from a health, safety and socio-economy standpoint, it also shows how our emergency programs are well-positioned to address significant challenges such as the coronavirus disaster. As the pandemic emerged and evolved across the world, multiple teams of experts worked together to examine our practices and controls, as well as evaluate the effects of updated guidance from the state and local authorities (Cleary et al. 2022). Overall, the overview of the current research on the topics such as business leadership, CSR, and transformational changes that need to take place in the post-pandemic era highlights the importance that business companies and organizations should place on CSR activities, both for employees and for the community, both during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, that could elicit identification among employees within an organization, ultimately leading to higher embedding within a workplace, ultimately helping businesses to survive in the COVID-19 pandemic. A firm’s commitment to CSR practices must not only reflect the internal stakeholders in employees but can reflect the external stakeholders in the natural environment, the next generation, NGO, or compliance with legal regulations, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic (Gorgenyi-Hegyes et al. 2021). Instead of focusing on mechanisms for accountability, as is the traditional focus In CSR laws, a regulatory approach could be Introduced to help companies develop plans and policies for managing risks related to the COVID-19 pandemic and for managing general uncertainty. A more optimistic perspective is that, over the longer term, the COVID-19 pandemic will speed up the post-pandemic CSR developments, as more firms and businesses will recognize that their survival and long-term development depends on striking the fine balance between profitability and achieving harmony between diverse stakeholders (Ngo 2022).

References

EEA. 2020. COVID-19: Lessons for Sustainability? Available online: https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/covid-19-lessons-for-sustainability (accessed on 15 January 2023).
Zhao, Jingchen. 2021. Reimagining corporate social responsibility in the era of COVID-19: Embedding resilience and promoting corporate social competence. Sustainability 13: 6548.
Sadiq, Muhammad, Sakkarin Nonthapot, Shafi Mohamad, Ooi Chee Keong, Syed Ehsanullah, and Nadeem Iqbal. 2022. Does green finance matter for sustainable entrepreneurship and environmental corporate social responsibility during COVID-19? China Finance Review International 12: 317–33.
Kaftan, Vitaly, Wadim Kandalov, Igor Molodtsov, Anna Sherstobitova, and Wadim Strielkowski. 2023. Socio-Economic Stability and Sustainable Development in the Post-COVID Era: Lessons for the Business and Economic Leaders. Sustainability 15: 2876.
Oldekop, Johan A., Rory Horner, David Hulme, Roshan Adhikari, Bina Agarwal, Matthew Alford, and Oliver Bakewell. 2020. COVID-19 and the case for global development. World Development 135: 105044.
Blum, Bianca, and Bernhard Neumärker. 2021. Lessons from globalization and the COVID-19 pandemic for economic, environmental and social policy. World 2: 308–33.
Verma, Geeta, Todd Campbell, Wayne Melville, and Byung-Yeol Park. 2020. Science teacher education in the times of the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Science Teacher Education 31: 483–90.
Tonne, Cathryn. 2021. Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic for accelerating sustainable development. Environmental Research 193: 110482.
Strielkowski, Wadim, Irina Firsova, Svetlana Azarova, and Irina Shatskaya. 2022. Novel Insights in the leadership in business and economics: A post-coronavirus update. Economies 10: 48.
Spring, Andrew, Erin Nelson, Irena Knezevic, Patricia Ballamingie, and Alison Blay-Palmer. 2021. Special Issue “Levering Sustainable Food Systems to Address Climate Change (Pandemics and Other Shocks and Hazards): Possible Transformations. Sustainability 13: 8206.
Hynes, William, Benjamin Trump, Patrick Love, and Igor Linkov. 2020. Bouncing forward: A resilience approach to dealing with COVID-19 and future systemic shocks. Environment Systems and Decisions 40: 174–84.
Lal, Arush, Ngozi A. Erondu, David L. Heymann, Githinji Gitahi, and Robert Yates. 2021. Fragmented health systems in COVID-19: Rectifying the misalignment between global health security and universal health coverage. The Lancet 397: 61–67.
Chua, Bee-Lia, Amr Al-Ansi, Myong Jae Lee, and Heesup Han. 2020. Tourists’ outbound travel behavior in the aftermath of the COVID-19: Role of corporate social responsibility, response effort, and health prevention. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 29: 879–906.
Carroll, Archie B. 2021. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) and the COVID-19 pandemic: Organizational and managerial implications. Journal of Strategy and Management 14: 315–30.
Popescu, Cristina Raluca Gh, and Viorel Costin Banța. 2019. Performance evaluation of the implementation of the 2013/34/EU directive in Romania on the basis of corporate social responsibility reports. Sustainability 11: 2531.
Shabbir, Malik Shahzad, and Okere Wisdom. 2020. The relationship between corporate social responsibility, environmental investments and financial performance: Evidence from manufacturing companies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 27: 39946–57.
Qiu, Shangzhi Charles, Jianing Jiang, Xinming Liu, Ming-Hsiang Chen, and Xina Yuan. 2021. Can corporate social responsibility protect firm value during the COVID-19 pandemic? International Journal of Hospitality Management 93: 102759.
Lu, Jintao, Licheng Ren, Jiayuan Qiao, Siqin Yao, Wadim Strielkowski, and Justas Streimikis. 2019a. Corporate social responsibility and corruption: Implications for the sustainable energy sector. Sustainability 11: 4128.
Lu, Jintao, Licheng Ren, Siqin Yao, Jiayuan Qiao, Wadim Strielkowski, and Justas Streimikis. 2019b. Comparative review of corporate social responsibility of energy utilities and sustainable energy development trends in the Baltic states. Energies 12: 3417.
Contrafatto, Massimo, John Ferguson, David Power, Lorna Stevenson, and David Collison. 2020. Understanding power-related strategies and initiatives: The case of the European Commission Green Paper on CSR. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 33: 559–87.
Czaja-Cieszyńska, Hanna, Dominika Kordela, and Beata Zyznarska-Dworczak. 2021. How to make corporate social disclosures comparable? Entrepreneurship and Sustainability 9: 268–88.
Bernhagen, Patrick, Kelly Kollman, and Natalka Patsiurko. 2022. Beyond lobbying: The political determinants of adopting corporate social responsibility frameworks in the European Union and the USA. Interest Groups & Advocacy 11: 373–98.
Ashraf, Zubaida, Gul Afshan, and Umar Farooq Sahibzada. 2022. Unpacking strategic corporate social responsibility in the time of crisis: A critical review. Journal of Global Responsibility 13: 127–56.
Su, Ruixin, Bojan Obrenovic, Jianguo Du, Danijela Godinic, and Akmal Khudaykulov. 2022. COVID-19 pandemic implications for corporate sustainability and society: A literature review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19: 1592.
European Commission. 2023. Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs. Available online: https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/smes_en (accessed on 14 March 2023).
Strielkowski, Wadim, Aida Guliyeva, Ulviyya Rzayeva, Elena Korneeva, and Anna Sherstobitova. 2021a. Mathematical modeling of intellectual capital and business efficiency of small and medium enterprises. Mathematics 9: 2305.
Khamis, Naglaa Ibrahim, and Wan Khairuzzaman Wan Ismail. 2022. The impact of corporate social responsibility on corporate image in the construction industry: A case of SMEs in Egypt. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 12: 128–46.
Ahmad, Naveed, Asif Mahmood, Heesup Han, Antonio Ariza-Montes, Alejandro Vega-Muñoz, Mohi ud Din, Ghazanfar Iqbal Khan, and Zia Ullah. 2021. Sustainability as a “new normal” for modern businesses: Are SMEs of Pakistan ready to adopt it? Sustainability 13: 1944.
Giousmpasoglou, Charalampos, Evangelia Marinakou, and Anastasios Zopiatis. 2021. Hospitality managers in turbulent times: The COVID-19 crisis. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 33: 1297–318.
Woo, Eun-Jung, and Eungoo Kang. 2020. Environmental issues as an indispensable aspect of sustainable leadership. Sustainability 12: 7014.
Islam, Ariful, and Sazali Abd Wahab. 2021. The intervention of strategic innovation practices in between regulations and sustainable business growth: A holistic perspective for Malaysian SMEs. World Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development 17: 396–421.
Šebestová, Jarmila Duháček, and Cristina Raluca Gh Popescu. 2022. Factors influencing investments into human resources to support company performance. Journal of Risk and Financial Management 15: 19.
Danso, Albert, Samuel Adomako, Joseph Amankwah-Amoah, Samuel Owusu-Agyei, and Renata Konadu. 2019. Environmental sustainability orientation, competitive strategy and financial performance. Business Strategy and the Environment 28: 885–95.
Andryeyeva, Natalya, Oksana Nikishyna, Borys Burkynskyi, Nina Khumarova, Oleksandr Laiko, and Hanna Tiutiunnyk. 2021. Methodology of analysis of the influence of the economic policy of the state on the environment. Insights into Regional Development 3: 198–212.
Yang, Su Jin, and Seyoon Jiang. 2020. How Does Corporate Sustainability Increase Financial Performance for Small-and Medium-Sized Fashion Companies: Roles of Organizational Values and Business Model Innovation. Sustainability 12: 10322.
Khurana, Sonal, Abid Haleem, Sunil Luthra, and Bisma Mannan. 2021. Evaluating critical factors to implement sustainable oriented innovation practices: An analysis of micro, small, and medium manufacturing enterprises. Journal of Cleaner Production 285: 125377.
Mio, Chiara, Antonio Costantini, and Silvia Panfilo. 2022. Performance measurement tools for sustainable business: A systematic literature review on the sustainability balanced scorecard use. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 29: 367–84.
Barauskaite, Gerda, and Dalia Streimikiene. 2021. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance of companies: The puzzle of concepts, definitions and assessment methods. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 28: 278–87.
Xu, Yong, Shanshan Li, Xiaoxiao Zhou, Umer Shahzad, and Xin Zhao. 2022. How environmental regulations affect the development of green finance: Recent evidence from polluting firms in China. Renewable Energy 189: 917–26.
Li, Yuanhui, Rongrong Chen, and Erwei Xiang. 2022. Corporate social responsibility, green financial system guidelines, and cost of debt financing: Evidence from pollution-intensive industries in China. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 29: 593–608.
Shahzad, Umer, Diogo Ferraz, Huu-Huan Nguyen, and Lianbiao Cui. 2022. Investigating the spill overs and connectedness between financial globalization, high-tech industries and environmental footprints: Fresh evidence in context of China. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 174: 121205.
Zhao, Xin, Yuping Shang, Xiaowei Ma, Pingfan Xia, and Umer Shahzad. 2022. Does carbon trading lead to green technology innovation: Recent evidence from Chinese companies in resource-based industries. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 1–18.
OECD. 2017. Measuring the Impacts of Business on Well-Being and Sustainability. Available online: https://www.oecd.org/statistics/Measuring-impacts-of-business-on-well-being.pdf (accessed on 15 March 2023).
He, Hongwei, and Lloyd Harris. 2020. The impact of Covid-19 pandemic on corporate social responsibility and marketing philosophy. Journal of Business Research 116: 176–82.
Valdez-Juárez, Luis Enrique, Dolores Gallardo-Vázquez, and Elva Alicia Ramos-Escobar. 2021. Entrepreneurial orientation and CSR: A dynamic capability in the corporate performance of Mexican SMEs. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues 8: 654–80.
Settembre-Blundo, Davide, Rocío González-Sánchez, Sonia Medina-Salgado, and Fernando E. García-Muiña. 2021. Flexibility and resilience in corporate decision making: A new sustainability-based risk management system in uncertain times. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management 22: 107–32.
OECD. 2022. Toward Sustainable Economic Development through Promoting and Enabling Responsible Business Conduct. Available online: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/f7813858-en/index.html?itemId=/content/component/f7813858-en (accessed on 15 March 2023).
Farooq, Khalid, Mohd Yusoff Yusliza, Ratri Wahyuningtyas, Adnan ul Haque, Zikri Muhammad, and Jumadil Saputra. 2021. Exploring challenges and solutions in performing employee ecological behaviour for a sustainable workplace. Sustainability 13: 9665.
Dasborough, Marie T., and Terri Scandura. 2022. Leading through the crisis: “Hands off” or “hands-on”? Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 29: 219–23.
Bauwens, Robin, Saša Batistič, Steven Kilroy, and Sanne Nijs. 2022. New kids on the block? A bibliometric analysis of emerging COVID-19-trends in leadership research. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 29: 224–32.
Khoshnava, Seyed Meysam, Raheleh Rostami, Rosli Mohamad Zin, Dalia Štreimikienė, Alireza Yousefpour, Wadim Strielkowski, and Abbas Mardani. 2019. Aligning the criteria of green economy (GE) and sustainable development goals (SDGs) to implement sustainable development. Sustainability 11: 4615.
Cillo, Valentina, Antonio Messeni Petruzzelli, Lorenzo Ardito, and Manlio Del Giudice. 2019. Understanding sustainable innovation: A systematic literature review. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 26: 1012–25.
Perkins, Krystal M., Nora Munguia, Michael Ellenbecker, Rafael Moure-Eraso, and Luis Velazquez. 2021. COVID-19 pandemic lessons to facilitate future engagement in the global climate crisis. Journal of Cleaner Production 290: 125178.
Ben Hassen, Tarek. 2022. A Transformative State in the Wake of COVID-19: What Is Needed to Enable Innovation, Entrepreneurship, and Education in Qatar. Sustainability 14: 7953.
Ranjbari, Meisam, Zahra Shams Esfandabadi, Maria Chiara Zanetti, Simone Domenico Scagnelli, Peer-Olaf Siebers, Mortaza Aghbashlo, Wanxi Peng, Francesco Quatraro, and Meisam Tabatabaei. 2021. Three pillars of sustainability in the wake of COVID-19: A systematic review and future research agenda for sustainable development. Journal of Cleaner Production 297: 126660.
Velenturf, Anne PM, and Phil Purnell. 2021. Principles for a sustainable circular economy. Sustainable Production and Consumption 27: 1437–57.
Adamowicz, Mieczysław. 2022. Green deal, green growth and green economy as a means of support for attaining the sustainable development goals. Sustainability 14: 5901.
Li, Zhenghui, Gaoke Liao, and Khaldoon Albitar. 2020. Does corporate environmental responsibility engagement affect firm value? The mediating role of corporate innovation. Business Strategy and the Environment 29: 1045–55.
Badía, Guillermo, Maria C. Cortez, and Luis Ferruz. 2020. Socially responsible investing worldwide: Do markets value corporate social responsibility? Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 27: 2751–64.
Gangi, Francesco, Nicola Varrone, Lucia Michela Daniele, and Maria Coscia. 2022. Mainstreaming socially responsible investment: Do environmental, social and governance ratings of investment funds converge? Journal of Cleaner Production 353: 131684.
Ou, Juanjuan, IpKin Anthony Wong, and GuoQiong Ivanka Huang. 2021. The coevolutionary process of restaurant CSR in the time of mega disruption. International Journal of Hospitality Management 92: 102684.
Suriyankietkaew, Suparak, Krittawit Krittayaruangroj, and Nacharee Iamsawan. 2022. Sustainable Leadership practices and competencies of SMEs for sustainability and resilience: A community-based social enterprise study. Sustainability 14: 5762.
Zu, Liangrong. 2019. Purpose-driven leadership for sustainable business: From the Perspective of Taoism. International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility 4: 1–31.
Popescu, Cristina Raluca Gh. 2019. Corporate social responsibility, corporate governance and business performance: Limits and challenges imposed by the implementation of directive 2013/34/EU in Romania. Sustainability 11: 5146.
Scherer, Andreas Georg, and Christian Voegtlin. 2020. Corporate governance for responsible innovation: Approaches to corporate governance and their implications for sustainable development. Academy of Management Perspectives 34: 182–208.
Zhang, Dongyong, Shuhui Lu, Stephen Morse, and Lingyi Liu. 2022. The impact of COVID-19 on business perspectives of sustainable development and corporate social responsibility in China. Environment, Development and Sustainability 1: 1–24.
Mahmud, Appel, Donghong Ding, and Md Morshadul Hasan. 2021. Corporate social responsibility: Business responses to coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. SAGE Open 11: 2158244020988710.
Cleary, Mary, Joyce Cunneen, Stephanie DeMaio, Lisa M. Rebeschi, and Debra Fisher. 2022. Reshaping the Future: An Innovative Academic-Practice Collaboration for COVID-19 Vaccinations and Testing. Nursing Administration Quarterly 46: 167–76.
Gorgenyi-Hegyes, Eva, Robert Jeyakumar Nathan, and Maria Fekete-Farkas. 2021. Workplace health promotion, employee wellbeing and loyalty during COVID-19 Pandemic-Large scale empirical evidence from Hungary. Economies 9: 55.
Ngo, Thanh Quang. 2022. How do environmental regulations affect carbon emission and energy efficiency patterns? A provincial-level analysis of Chinese energy-intensive industries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 29: 3446–62.