There are many definitions for CSR; we are going to illustrate two of them. Visser and Wayne define the first one:
“CSR is an integrated, systemic approach to a business that builds, rather than erodes or destroys, the economic, social, human and natural capital.”
We can see that the definition emphasize not only economic but also social, human and natural capital.
European Commission does the second definition:
In this case, we see that definition emphasize only impact on society but the thing is that there cannot be an impact on economy or nature without an influence on society.
The first time we can see some attributes of CSR in a scientific literature In the Gospel of Wealth by Andrew Carnegie written in 1889, in which he asserted that all personal wealth beyond that required supplying the needs of one's family should be regarded as a trust fund to be administered for the benefit of the community.
There are three major components of CSR as Nazareth Seferian CSR and Philanthropy expert states:
1. Negative impact of business activities on surroundings → minimum
2. Mutually beneficial solutions to problems in surroundings that impact business activities
3. Positive impact of business activities on surroundings → maximum
The first component is mainly about companies impact arising from activates in its value chain. The value chain should be examined gradually to decrease or if it is possible to eliminate any negative impact on environment, society, and economy.
The second component is about outside in factors which are discussed by E. Porter and R. Kramer.
The third component is about power which has companies and as a sequence, they have responsibilities in a moral context.
Most companies, ordinary citizens are misclassifying Corporate Philanthropy as a CSR. So, to avoid this see the chart below which compares CSR and Corporate Philanthropy.
