Università degli Studi di Modena e Reggio Emilia D
IPARTIMENTO DI STUDI LINGUISTICI E CULTURALICorso di Laurea Magistrale in
L
ANGUAGES FORC
OMMUNICATION INI
NTERNATIONALE
NTERPRISES ANDO
RGANIZATIONS“B the Change”: the Role of Corporate Communications in promoting CSR and Benefit Corporations
“B the Change”: il Ruolo della Comunicazione Aziendale nella Promozione della RSI e delle Benefit Corporation
Prova finale di:
Sara Jane Weeks Relatore:
Ulpiana Kocollari
Correlatore Marina Bondi
Anno Accademico 2016/2017
Abstract
Italiano
In un mondo in cui il capitalismo è visto come antagonista della sostenibilità, emerge una nuova forma di business che più di tutte sviluppa e applica a pieno il concetto di RSI: la Benefit Corporation.
Questa tesi ha l’obiettivo di dimostrare l’efficacia del modello Benefit nel risolvere i problemi socio-ambientali causati dall’economia capitalista, con particolare focus sull’influenza del linguaggio e della cultura nella sfera della comunicazione della RSI. Data la natura controversa della RSI, la comunicazione rappresenta un aspetto fondamentale grazie alla quale le aziende possono pubblicizzare i propri prodotti e costruire un’immagine, un’identità ed un set di valori con i quali il consumatore può identificarsi.
La scelta di analizzare le B Corp è dettata da due motivi: primo, tale movimento è globale e permette dunque un confronto linguistico-culturale tra più paesi. Secondo, le B Corp rappresentano la forma di business “for profit” più responsabile esistente oggi, in un’epoca in cui il consumatore è sempre più attento al fattore sostenibilità.
I materiali utilizzati provengono dalla letteratura sulla RSI, che fornisce le basi sulle quali viene poi effettuato lo studio di due aziende Benefit. Come supporto, si utilizzano anche tesi di laurea, riviste e siti internet.
I materiali introducono i metodi per l’analisi della struttura del report aziendale e della struttura e contenuto linguistico del sito internet dell’azienda Ben & Jerry. L’analisi si concretizza con l’utilizzo del software Antconc, per analizzare il corpus del report di tale azienda.
I risultati, in fine, mostrano come le pratiche RSI varino in base al contesto socio-culturale, con una visibile conseguenza sulla pianificazione della comunicazione aziendale. Tale concetto è da tenere a mente soprattutto per un movimento nuovo come quello delle Benefit Corporation, che opera in contesti socio-ambientali locali e internazionali, e necessita di una comunicazione efficiente per espandersi.
English
In a world where capitalism is seen as antagonist of sustainability, a new form of business emerges, able more than others to fully develop the concept of CSR: the Benefit Corporation.
This dissertation aims to demonstrate the efficiency of this new model in solving the socio- environmental problems caused by a capitalist economy, with particular focus on the influence of language and culture on corporate communications. Given the controversial nature of CSR, communications in this field are important to promote a product and create a company image, identity and a set of values to which customers can relate.
There are two reasons why B Corps were chosen for this analysis: firstly, this movement is global, allowing a cross-cultural and linguistic comparison. Secondly, this “for profit” form of business is the most sustainable one in an historical moment when consumers pay more attention to the sustainability factor.
The study is essentially based on CSR literature, providing the basis on which a case study on two B Corps will be carried out. Other dissertations, journals and websites are also used.
This literature introduces the methods of analysis, which focuses on the structure of the company report and the structure and content of Ben & Jerry’s company website. The analysis then proceeds with the tool Antconc, which analyzes the corpora of the report.
In the end, the results show how CSR practices vary depending on the cultural context, with a clear consequence on the planning of corporate communications. This concept must be borne in mind especially for new movements such as the B Corp one, which operates on a local and international scale and therefore relies on efficient communications to expand.
Español
En un mundo donde el capitalismo es visto como antagonista de la sustentabilidad, surge una nueva forma de negocio que desarrolla el concepto de RSE mejor que otras: la empresa de beneficio público.
Esta tesis tiene el objetivo de demostrar la eficiencia de este nuevo modelo para resolver los problemas socio-ambientales causados por el modelo económico capitalista, enfocándose en particular en la influencia del lenguaje y la cultura en temas de comunicación corporativa. Al ser la RSE un tema controversial, la comunicación representa un aspecto fundamental con el cual las empresas pueden promover sus productos y construir una imagen, una identidad y unos valores con los cuales el público se puede identificar.
Hay dos motivos por los cuales se analizan las empresas de beneficio público: primero, se trata de una tendencia global lo cual permite realizar comparaciones entre culturas y lenguas. Segundo, esta forma de negocio lucrativo representa actualmente la forma más responsable de hacer negocios en una época en donde el consumidor pone mucha más atención al concepto de sustentabilidad.
La mayoría de los materiales usados provienen de la literatura sobre la RSE y sirven como base para el caso de estudio de dos empresas de beneficio público. También se utilizan otras tesis, revistas especializadas y sitios web.
Los materiales introducen metodologías para analizar la estructura del informe de la empresa y la estructura y contenido lingüístico del sitio web de la empresa Ben & Jerry. El análisis incluye la utilización del software Antconc, para analizar el corpus del informe de esta empresa.
Al final, los resultados demuestran que las prácticas de la RSE varían dependiendo del contexto socio-cultural, con una consecuencia clara sobre la planificación de la comunicación empresarial.
Este concepto es fundamental sobre todo para fenómenos nuevos como las empresas de beneficio público que operan en el ámbito local e internacional y que por ello requieren de una comunicación eficiente para expandirse.
i Table of contents
List of figures ... iii
List of graphs ... iv
List of tables ... v
List of abbreviations ... vi
Introduction ... 1
1. CSR: Origins and Theories ... 8
1.1 Discovering the origins of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) ... 8
Late 1800s ... 10
The “awareness”, “issue” and “responsiveness” era (1950s-1979) ... 11
1990s ... 13
21st Century ... 14
1.2 CSR Theories and lines of thought ... 17
1.2.1 The Stakeholder Theory ... 17
1.2.2 Empirical evidence of the importance of the stakeholder theory ... 21
1.2.3 Conclusions ... 23
1.3 The triple bottom line approach ... 23
1.4 Creating Shared Value: Porter and Kramer’s view ... 27
Reconceiving products and markets ... 32
Redefining productivity in the value chain ... 32
2. CSR and Corporate Communications in the 21st Century ... 35
2.1 Introduction ... 35
2.2 Literature review ... 36
2.3 The importance of communicating CSR ... 38
2.4 What CSR aspects companies communicate ... 40
2.5 How companies communicate CSR ... 41
2.5.1: The Company Report ... 42
2.5.2: Social networks and websites ... 45
2.6 The role of culture in CSR communications ... 46
2.7 Analysis and methodology of the case study ... 48
2.8 The Structure of Ben & Jerry’s SEAR report ... 50
2.9 “How we do business”: a linguistic analysis ... 51
2.10 The role of culture and the structure of communications in the website ... 54
ii
2.10.1 The English version: Ben & Jerry’s Australia, Canada, Ireland, New
Zealand, United Kingdom and United States ... 55
2.10.2 The German version: Ben & Jerry’s Austria, Germany and Switzerland .. 57
2.10.3 The Spanish version: Ben & Jerry’s Mexico and Spain ... 59
2.11 Conclusions ... 62
3. Benefit Corporations: an innovative business model for the future of CSR. ... 64
3.1 The funding of B Corps: an international and local perspective. ... 66
3.2 How to become a B Corp ... 67
3.2.1 Meet Performance Requirement... 67
3.2.2 Meet Legal Requirement ... 68
3.2.3 Make it Official ... 68
3.3 The Italian case ... 68
4. Benefit Corporations: two case studies ... 70
4.1 Fratelli Carli: a company overview ... 70
4.1.1 Corporate communication strategies: the website ... 72
4.1.2 Becoming a Benefit Corporation: reasons ... 73
4.2 Ben & Jerry’s: a company overview ... 80
4.2.1 Becoming a Certified B Corp: reasons ... 83
4.3 The benefits of becoming a Benefit Corporation or certified B Corp ... 89
Conclusions ... 92
Bibliography ... 97
Sitography ... 103
iii List of figures
Fig.1: Do you believe that companies are working hard to look after the environment in your
country? ...5
Fig.2: Volkswagen stock price...5
Fig.3 Managing for Stakeholders...19
Fig.4: Triple Bottom Line...24
Fig.5: CSR-Pyramide nach Carroll (Carroll’s CSR pyramid)...25
Fig.6: The Connection between Competitive Advantage and Social Issues...31
Fig.7: ‘B Corps in the World’...65
Fig.8: “The Growth of Benefit Corporations Worldwide”...95
iv List of graphs
Graph 1: Fratelli Carli's revenues………..72
Graph 2: Fratelli Carli's wages and n. of employees……….76
Graph 3: Fratelli Carli B Impact Report 2014-2016………..81
Graph 4: Ben & Jerry's wages………83
Graph 5: Graph 5: Ben & Jerry's B Impact Report 2012-2014-2016………88
v List of tables
Table 1...52
Table 2...55
Table 3...57
Table 4...59
Table 5...59
Table 6...61
Table 7: Fratelli Carli SpA 2014 B Impact Report...78
Table 8: Fratelli Carli SpA 2016 B Impact Report...79
Table 9: Ben & Jerry’s 2012 B Impact Report...85
Table 10: Ben & Jerry’s 2014 B Impact Report...86
vi List of abbreviations
ADEA (Age Discrimination in Employment Act) AIFO (‘Italian Association Amici di Raul Follereau’) BALLE (Business Alliance for Local Living Economies BP (British Petroleum)
BSR (Business for Social Responsibility) CAA (Clean Air Act)
CEO (Chief Executive Officer) CI (Corporate Identity)
CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) CSV (Creating Shared Value)
CWA (Clean Water Act)
EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) FDI (Foreign Direct Investment)
FIFA (Federation International de Football Association) FIPASE (Advanced Pole Institute of Health Foundation) GHG (Green House Gas)
GMO (Genetically Modified Organisms) GRI (Global Reporting Initiative)
GSB (Give Something Back) HP (Hawlett Packard)
HRW (Human Rights Watch)
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) IRIS (Impact Reporting and Investment Standards) IRT (Image Restoration Theory/Image Repair Theory) ISO (International Organization for Standardization) LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender)
MCTI (Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation) MOSOP (Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People) NAAQS (National Ambient Air Quality Standards)
vii NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) NGO (Non-Governmental Organization)
North American Free Trade Agreement NAFTA
OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) PDI (Producer Development Initiative)
PR (Public Relations)
PROBE (Promoting Business Excellence) RBGH (Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone) RSI (Responsabilità Sociale d'Impresa)
RSE (Responsabilidad Social de Empresa)
SEAR Report (Social & Environmental Assessment Report) SMEs (Small Medium Enterprises)
SR (Social Responsibility) TBL (Triple Bottom Line)
U.S. /USA (United States/United States of America) UK (United Kingdom)
UN (United Nations)
UNGPS (Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights) USP (University of São Paulo)
VLS (Value-Led Sourcing)
WBCSD (World Business Council for Sustainable Development) WFTO (World Fair Trade Organization)
WTO (World Trade Organization) WWF (World Wildlife Fund) WWI (World War One)
1 Introduction
“When it is very cold, there are two ways to warm yourself. One is by putting on a fur coat, the other is by lighting a fire. What is the difference? The difference is that the fur coat warms only the person wearing it, while the fire warms anyone who comes close” (Girling, 2012 p. 93).
In the same way that a fire can warm up the people around it, business can benefit societies in many ways. Thanks to business, economic and technological developments, 21st century societies can better satisfy needs, produce and exchange products and services, create jobs and make people lead better lives. As a result, in fact, the quality of life of the world’s population keeps improving;
more goods are produced and ideas and innovative trends are exchanged in real time, especially thanks to the advancement of social media and communications. This whole production process has its roots capitalism, an economic system where the aim of business is to maximize profits, making the most out of time and resources available. In particular, we are evolving in a system called “shareholder1 capitalism”, hence, a form of capitalism which benefits only the ones who own shares of a business. Capitalism has therefore brought many advantages, among which also an increased trade between countries. However, the 21st century has also seen capitalism as the cause of issues such as climate change, human rights violation and unequal distribution of resources, all issues which have been in the news headlines, making the public opinion and governments around the world aware of the fact that the way in which resources have been and are being used and distributed in neither equal nor sustainable. The prime focus is set on multinational corporations, as well as local governments, which are accused of creating the problems and worsening them.
So far, these are the world’s three main issues which have been created and worsened by unethical and unsustainable business, as well as political conducts:
- Climate change
“Failure of adaptation measures by business and governments ranked fifth among the global risks with the highest impact” (Timms, 2016). Studies have shown that in the past
1 “A shareholder is any person, company or other institution that owns at least one share of a company’s stock. Because shareholders are a company's owners, they reap the benefits of the company's successes in the form of increased stock valuation. If the company does poorly, however, shareholders can lose money if the price of its stock declines”, available online at: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/shareholder.asp. [Accessed on Feb. 15, 2017].
2
25 years, just 90 companies have produced two thirds of man-made global warming emissions (Goldenberg, 2013), either breaking the rules regarding emission limits or operating in countries where corruption and lack of environmental regulations make it possible for them to operate undisturbed. In a situation where companies such as Chevron, Exxon, Shell and BP have mostly been responsible for climate change and where the energy sector is accountable for 75% of the world’s GHG emissions (Loria, 2015), it is clear that companies have to engage in different measures to contain this phenomena. The risks for the planet and humans are high; according to the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), the human activity is the largest responsible player for climate change.
Diminishing amounts of snow and ice, rising water levels, warming oceans and changes in the normal water cycle are extremely dangerous. Furthermore, “[A]nthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions have increased since the pre-industrial era driven largely by economic and population growth. From 2000 to 2010 emissions were the highest in history.
Historical emissions have driven atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide to levels that are unprecedented in at least the last 800,000 years, leading to an uptake of energy by the climate system.” (IPCC, 2014, p.44). For this reason, long- term mitigation programs are necessary to limit the human impact on climate change.
- Justice and human rights
Companies have many times operated unethically cross boarders in countries where the lack of human rights and corporate accountability has left them the possibility of operating business exploiting a country’s environment and workforce. As a result, child labor, exploitation of workers and human rights violation have been some consequences of unethical business, such as the example of Shell in Ogoniland (see chapter 1), the violation of workers’ rights in Kazakhstan (Human Rights Watch, 2016) and recently in Russia, involving in this last case the construction of the stadiums that will host the 2018 FIFA World Cup2 (ibid.). As reported by Amnesty International, “[W]hen communities’ attempt to get justice they are thwarted by ineffective legal systems, a lack of access to information,
2 Human Rights Watch (HRW) has denounced dangerous and poor working conditions or Russian workers employed in the construction of the stadiums that will host the 2018 FIFA World Championship. The organization has urged FIFA to increase transparency about these issues related to working conditions.
3
corruption and powerful state-corporate alliances. Worryingly, when the poor cannot secure justice, companies learn that they can exploit poverty without consequences.”
(Amnesty International, 2017).
- Inequality and wealth distribution
According to Oxfam3, the richest 1% owns more wealth than the rest of the planet (Oxfam, 2017).
“[N]ew estimates show that just eight men own the same wealth as the poorest half of the world. As growth benefits the richest, the rest of society –especially the poorest –suffers.
The very design of our economies and the principles of our economics have taken us to this extreme, unsustainable and unjust point.” (Oxfam, 2017, p.2).
The 2017 Oxfam report stresses the fact that big corporations are the cause of inequality in many world regions. Furthermore, inequality has been proven to be a major threat to sustainability, increasing crime and insecurity and stopping economic growth, as “[...] by hindering human capital accumulation income inequality undermines education opportunities for disadvantaged individuals, lowering social mobility and hampering skills development” (OECD, 2014, p.3).
To solve these issues, good and efficient policies are necessary, as well as a set of international rules and instruments to implement them. So far, the most complete set of goals were set by the United Nations and called UN Development Goals4, adopted in 2015 and which apply to all countries, regardless of their stage of development. These goals have to be achieved by 2030, however, economic changes are necessary as well.
In a world where these problems are increasing their negative impacts, it is legitimate to raise the following question: is capitalism really benefitting everyone?
3 Oxfam is an international confederation of charitable organizations operating in alleviation of global poverty.
4 The development goals are 17 and are the following: no poverty, zero hunger, good health and wellbeing, quality education, gender equality, clean water and sanitation, affordable and clean energy, decent work and economic growth, industry, innovation and infrastructure, reduced inequalities, sustainable cities and communities, responsible consumption and production, climate action, life below water, life and land, peace, justice and strong institutions, partnership for the goals. Available online at http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/. [Accessed on July 24, 2017].
4
“Businesses are the lifeblood of a market economy, and when they work to the benefit of everyone they are vital to building fair and prosperous societies. But when corporations increasingly work for the rich, the benefits of economic growth are denied to those who need them most. In pursuit of delivering high returns to those at the top, corporations are driven to squeeze their workers and producers ever harder – and to avoid paying taxes which would benefit everyone, and the poorest people in particular.” (OXFAM, 2017, p.3).
Almost 3 billion people between Africa and Asia are left out of the market economy, while the western market is now saturated (OXFAM, 2017). These unsustainable and unequal business conducts have not only had impact on people and the planet, but also on profits per se. In fact, consumers have become more aware of how products are produced, especially in the light some important scandals such as the Volkswagen emissions one in 20155 or the one involving Nike in 19966.
Unethical business has in fact negatively reflected on the companies’ image and most importantly on their profits. By taking as example the environmental aspect of a company’s business, according to a survey conducted by National Geographic and Greendex7, consumer behavior changes in accordance to companies’ performances on environmental and sustainable practices, as shown in the following graph (Timms, 2016):
5 This scandal, also known as “emissionsgate” or “dieselgate”, started in 2015 when the United States’ EPA - Environmental Protection Agency - accused the company of violating the Clean Air Act, after conducting tests on VW engines.
6 Nike was heavily accused of child labor practices, exploiting the work of minors in Pakistan. The scandal was made public with the issue from a newspaper of a picture portraying a young Pakistani boy sewing together a Nike football.
7 Greendex is an overall calculator of one’s environmental footprint, hence, the human impact of the environment measured in the quantity of water and land required to produce the goods that are consumed and the waste that can be generated.
5
Fig.1: Do you believe that companies are working hard to look after the environment in your country?
The results in the graph show an important tendency towards consumer skepticism and wide spread indecision towards companies and their actions when it comes to safeguarding the environment.
Lack of consumers’ trust in business can lead to important economic losses.
A clear example is brought by the Volkswagen case (ibid.):
Fig.2: Volkswagen stock price
6
After the lawsuit against Volkswagen was filed on 9 September 2015, the company’s stock price fell down rapidly from nearly $160 to $130 in less than a week, with a negative tendency onwards.
This resulted in $14.7 billion to compensate car owners (Bartlett, Naranjo, Plungis, 2017). In fact,
“consumers are willing to recommend companies based on their commitments to do good [...].
“It’s no longer enough to be responsible, [...] you have to prove it.” (Mc Nally, 2015).
As today governments have not been able to tackle these social and environmental issues, a new innovative vision has arisen, a vision which sees business as a problem solver.
“Companies have an enormous impact on people’s lives and the communities in which they operate. Sometimes the impact is positive - jobs are created, new technology improves lives and investment in the community translates into real benefits for those who live there.” (Amnesty International, 2017).
The need to transfer economic mechanisms where needed is therefore compelling, if we want to continue earning profits and at the same time solve the above mentioned environmental and social issues.
The topics of this dissertation are Benefit corporations, Certified B Corps and corporate communications, hence, the communication strategies adopted by businesses to promote their CSR initiatives, which, as we will see, are related to each specific country and culture.
This dissertation aims to demonstrate how this new form of business can indeed solve those social and environmental problems that the public sector and governments seem to struggle with. By adopting this new business model business acts as the solution to the problems it has created and by respecting strict social and environmental standards, promoting transparency and adapting business to a society or community’s needs, companies can generate wealth and profits. As a result, consumers will gain trust in these businesses and will be sure to be purchasing products which have been produced in an ethical and environmentally friendly way, resulting in higher profits for these businesses.
Given the recent nature of the B Corp movement, this dissertation also provides and insight on the importance of communications in expanding and promoting this new form of business.
This work is divided into four chapters. The first chapter will focus on CSR literature and the birth of capitalism, outlining the issues related to capitalism throughout practical examples and case studies. Particular focus will be set on three main CSR theories: Freeman’s “Stakeholder Theory”, the “TBL Approach” and Porter and Kramer’s “Shared Value” theory. As corporations and
7
businesses have to change their ways of making profit, they also have to engage in a new form of communications with an international, multicultural and multilingual public that has lost its trust in the economy as leading force for wellbeing and prosperity. Therefore, the second chapter will introduce the aspect of CSR communication, focusing on a case study of Ben & Jerry's. The study will provide an analysis of the structure of the company report and of the structure and content of Ben & Jerry’s company website, combining tools of genre analysis and corpus linguistics. The third chapter will be the core of the study, explaining the concept, history and way of becoming a Benefit Corporation or certified B Corp. The fourth and last chapter will focus on the case study of one Benefit corporation and one certified B Corp: Ben & Jerry’s, previously seen in chapter two, and Fratelli Carli. The analysis of the companies’ B Impact Report will demonstrate the efficiency of this business model in terms of profits and sustainability.
8 1. CSR: Origins and Theories
1.1 Discovering the origins of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
The concept of CSR has its roots in the mid-1800s with the industrial revolution in Great Britain, although the modern concept of corporation as we know it today was introduced in the 1950s. For this reason, it is more accurate to start defining the early concept of SR (Social Responsibility), as explained by Archie B. Carroll in chapter two of his article “A History of Corporate Social Responsibility. Concepts and Practices” (Carroll, 2008). In his work, Carroll explains the evolution from SR to CSR and divides the history of CSR into different decades, in particular from prior to the 1950s up to the twenty-first century, where he emphasizes the concept of globalization, showing how business models have adapted to changes in society throughout history.
As already anticipated, the concept of Social Responsibility started with the second industrial revolution when the production system spiked thanks to the establishment of large factories in cities and thanks to a new production process called “production chain”, which made the production of a higher number of outputs faster and more effective, saving time and cutting production costs. This period was characterized by technological innovations, such as new machines, chemical manufacturing, iron production processes and water and steam power, which all contributed to the rise of the factory system. This transition to new manufacturing processes brought significant changes in the English and European society, to then extend at a global scale.
Society, in fact, shifted from simple peasantry to a consumer one, with a disposal of a much greater quantity of goods produced at larger scale. However, this revolution, considered by many historians as one of the most influential and important ones in human history, had controversial consequences. If on one side it benefitted the economy, giving birth to the early form of capitalism and improving many aspects of life, thanks to an enhancement of production, goods and services and technological innovations (e.g. the invention of vaccines and the expansion of rail and telegraph lines), on the other side it worsened the standards of living. Despite the overall extraordinary increase of the world population, which reached two billion people in the early 20th century, life expectancy decreased to an average of 35-40 years and from the role of women and children to the environment, almost every aspect of daily life was influenced. The establishment of factories in the new-born cities caused a massive movement of people from the countryside,
9
giving birth to production centres characterized by low quality living standards. Having to live close to their workplace, workers literally found themselves enduring in overcrowded, filthy shacks, in poor hygienic conditions and with the risk of developing pathologies, such as cholera, milkmaids, typhoid and typhus. The need for a massive work force caused people to work between ten and twelve hours per day, in dangerous and polluted environments, while also women and children started to be employed in factories. Child labour became common, as children are more vulnerable than adults, could be paid lower wages and were granted no rights, such as the right to education. Women assumed a different role as employees in factories, workshops and coalmines, were paid lower wages than men and faced the double burden of working, taking care of domestic chores and raising children.
From an environmental point of view, the second industrial revolution caused several damages, as fossil fuels replaced natural energy sources such as wood, water and wind. Factories littered the cities with their coal emissions, which produced gases and killer fogs, causing many deaths for lung diseases, while the growing population started requiring more resources for its survival, leading to their massive exploitation. Industrial waste polluted canals and rivers, while hundreds of miles of railway tracks across Europe changed the landscape, representing the start of today’s massive urbanization.
The concept of Corporate Social Responsibility developed within this context, leaving no doubt on the responsibility that industries and businesses have towards society, people and the environment. Given these premises, one can definitely support the link between the industrial system and the abovementioned issues, agreeing that business must be held accountable and must, therefore, be regulated. The second industrial revolution also gave birth to labour right movements whose protests provided better working conditions and more rights not only to workers but also to weaker social groups, such as women and children. The first outcome of this general unrest were the Factory Acts, enacted between 1833 and 18448, which regulated child labour. Social justice movements also began to influence the UK political system, leading to the birth of what we know
8 In 1833 the British government passed the so-called Factory Acts, which regulated child labour. Although these acts did not completely eliminate this phenomenon, which continued later on in many European countries, it established the following conditions: “no child workers under nine years of age; employers must have an age certificate for their child workers; children of 9-13 years to work no more than nine hours a day; children of 13-18 years to work no more than 12 hours a day; children are not to work at night; two hours schooling each day for children and four factory
inspectors appointed to enforce the law”, available online at
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/1833-factory-act/. [Accessed on Feb. 21, 2017].
10
today as the British Labour Party.9 The introduction of regulations, such as the Factory Acts, shows how the rule of law is essential to regulate business in society. In this case, however, law served as a remedy to business’ mistakes and this view awakened the idea that business should act properly, in order to avoid negative turnovers: for this reason, one can refer to Social Responsibility of business.
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), on the other hand, was introduced by Carroll starting from the 1950s with the advent of the big the corporations. The concept of CSR has evolved throughout the years, but it still can be explained with the following definition:
“Corporate social responsibility, often abbreviated "CSR," is a corporation's initiatives to assess and take responsibility for the company's effects on environmental and social wellbeing. The term generally applies to efforts that go beyond what may be required by regulators or environmental protection groups.” (Investopedia, 2017).
Continuing with Carroll’s analysis of the evolution of CSR, this first chapter will provide an historical contextualization of CSR, analysing the period of the late 1800s and the decades between the 1950s and the 21st century, highlighting how business and CSR evolved hand in hand with history and society.
Late 1800s
In the period between the second industrial revolution and WWI, the concept of business ethics entered the corporate scene, trying to guarantee community-related welfare. In particular, the industrial élite began to express sympathy to its workforce and becoming sensitive to the problems related to the work environment. In this regard, citing management historian Daniel A. Wren’s words, Carroll speaks about “industrial betterment/welfare movement” and a “[…] mixture of humanitarianism, philanthropy, and business acumen.” (Carroll, 2008, p.21).
The great depression10 later contributed to strengthening the social role of factories, which were
9 The Labour Party was funded in the 19th century from the trade union movement, a movement that fought for workers’ rights during the industrial revolution. This party originally represented the rights of the proletariat and of male workers, in particular the ones employed in the factories. The party increased popularity during the years, becoming the first labour government in 1924. This party still exists today in the British legal system and has inspired labour movements across Europe.
10 The great depression took place in 1929 in the United States and spread one year later worldwide. It is considered the worst and longest economic depression of the 20th century. It originated in the United States with the stock market
11
starting to be considered as real institutions that could replace to some extent the role of the state, as the American political economist Nicholas Eberstadt underlined: “the corporations began to be seen as institutions, like the government” and “had social obligations to fulfil” (Eberstadt, 1973:
22). Businesses started undergoing the burden of social issues by providing workers with various facilities, such as hospitals, clinics, recreation facilities and much more. Philanthropy11 was moving its first steps into the business world and filled the loophole the state was not always able to take care of, especially regarding education and training for important professions, such as the medical ones. Particularly in the United States, great philanthropists, such as John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie or Enoch Pratt contributed to the community’s welfare with great projects, some of which are still present nowadays. For instance, in 1913, Rockefeller donated three billion dollars to educational facilities and medical schools, Carnegie established thousands of free libraries across the United States and Pratt funded in 1882 the Enoch Pratt Free Library in Baltimore, to empower society’s quality of life throughout education.
The “awareness”, “issue” and “responsiveness” era (1950s-1979)
These three decades were named by Carroll “awareness”, “issue” and “responsiveness” era (Carroll, 2008, p.25). Following his analysis, the “awareness era” (1953-1967) was the decade in which one can officially begin to speak about CSR, in concomitance with the extraordinary development of the corporate system. This period was characterized by “[…] the idea of corporate managers as public trustees, the idea of balancing competing claims to corporate resources, and the acceptance of philanthropy as a manifestation of business support of good causes.” (Carroll, 2008, p.26). Society was aware of the important role covered by CSR and the community’s need for CSR related philanthropy initiatives, which helped strengthening companies’ positions, roles and acceptance in society.
The “issue era” (1968-1973) was characterized by important social problems, which started rising
crash, leading to disastrous consequences, such as unemployment, economic crisis (especially in rural areas and in the heavy industry sector), and homelessness and further on drought and erosion of lands. In this period, corporations were asked to help rescue banks and financial institutions.
11 “Philanthropy involves charitable giving to human causes on a large scale. Philanthropy must be more than just a charitable donation. It is an effort an individual or organization undertakes based on an altruistic desire to improve human welfare. Wealthy individuals sometimes establish foundations to facilitate their philanthropic efforts.”, available online at http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/philanthropy.asp. [Accessed on Feb. 21, 2017].
12
with the beginning of the civil rights movements12 that affected and somehow influenced important CSR initiatives. During the “issue era”, in fact, CSR expanded its fields of action, driven by the rising public interest towards issues ranging from “[…] pollution control, charities, community affairs, recruitment/development of minorities, [to the] support of education” (Carroll, 2008, p.
33), as they were in some measure expected to be caused, and therefore had to be solved, by businesses. The environment was in particular one very intensely debated topic in this period.
“New environmental hazards stirred public concern as atomic energy was developed, the chemical revolution in agriculture boomed with innovation, and the proliferation of synthetic materials grew with the dominance of multinational corporations. The increased scale of power generation and resource extraction technology resulted in environmental degradation. The 1960s exploded with public outrage over the environmental damage resulting from the business practices of various industries.” (Steinbrenner Institute, 2008).
The public outrage generated by a series of environmental disasters, such as the Cuyahoga River Fire in 1969, which led to the writing of important laws, such as the Environmental Protection Act in 196913 and the U.S Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (United States Department of Labor, 2017)14. It is for this particular reason that the 1970s were named the decade of
“responsiveness” to these issues (Carroll, 2008, p.33). The 1970s brought important contributions to the CSR field, originating breakthrough theories which still today are taken as a decisive example for business conduct. One of these theories is the one formulated by John H. Johnson, one of the most important and influential American businessmen, who saw corporations as entities
“whose managerial staff balances a multiplicity of interests. Instead of striving only for larger profits for its stockholders, a responsible enterprise also takes into account employees, suppliers, dealers, local communities, and the nation.” (Johnson, 1971, p.50). With this statement, Johnson
12 The civil rights movements characterized the 1960s and 1970s decade in many world countries, most importantly United States, Canada, Australia, Northern Ireland, Czech Republic (in particular Prague) and the Soviet Union. This movement was mostly non-violent, with protests of civil resistance against authorities to gain equality before the law.
The protests, which led to a bigger impact in the United States, promoted civil, rights, LGBT, women’s and racial rights.
13 “The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) was one of the first laws ever written that establishes the broad national framework for protecting our environment. NEPA's basic policy is to assure that all branches of government give proper consideration to the environment prior to undertaking any major federal action that significantly affects the environment.”
14 “To assure safe and healthful working conditions for working men and women; by authorizing enforcement of the standards developed under the Act; by assisting and encouraging the States in their efforts to assure safe and healthful working conditions; by providing for research, information, education, and training in the field of occupational safety and health; and for other purposes.”.
13
became one of the first precursor of the stakeholder approach and of the theory of multiplicity of interests, to which more attention will be given in the following pages.
One last aspect that characterised these three decades was the involvement of factories in political matters. Since the 1950s, in fact, corporations engaged in education programs for Americans, in particular regarding anti-communist propaganda, which characterized the years of the Cold War.
Corporate education took place within and outside the work place and was carried out in various ways. Within the corporation, a wide range of materials used to be distributed to employees, such as in-company newspapers, courses and movies, while outside programs varied from distribution of anti-communist literature, pamphlets or seminars, distributed and held in schools, churches and any other place of gathering. Figures such as teachers, executives or clergymen were involved in this kind of propaganda, which some corporations supported also through scholarships and benefits for participants. Corporations, especially American ones, assumed a role of indoctrination, in particular regarding working values and values of liberty and independence.
1990s
CSR in the 90’s embraces the concepts of “Corporate Citizenship” and “Sustainability”
(Carroll, 2008, p.37). Carroll described this decade as characterized by “[N]ew concepts, such as global social investment, corporate reputation, community partnerships, corporate social policy, and others […]. In terms of management philosophy or policy, strategic giving, cause-related marketing, international donations, employee volunteerism, sustainability, and global corporate citizenship, emerged to characterize many CSR initiatives. The beneficiaries of CSR initiatives included the following: education, culture and the arts, health and human services, civic and community, international donees, community partners, and NGO partners” (Carroll, 2008, p. 38).
This decade introduced some of the most important milestones of CSR regulations related to sustainability, to be applied in an even more international environment.
14
A part from the numerous international and national conventions, the following points outline some of the most important regulations and summits of the 1990s for sustainable business development and global business ethics:
-1991 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro: during this summit, 180 countries agreed on the establishment of principles in support of sustainable development, giving birth to the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development.
-1992 Establishment of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development and of the Fairtrade movement.
-1996 CSR Europe is established, an organization that helps companies to achieve sustainable growth, profitability and human growth. In the same year the negotiation for the Kyoto Protocol on climate change occurred.
-1997 Launch of the Global Reporting Initiative to provide guidelines for sustainable reporting.
-1999 Under the guidance of at the time UN Secretary Kofi Annan, the international initiative Global Compact was established to help companies promote fair labour, respect of human rights and of the environment around the world. In the same year, the stock exchange Daw Jones introduced the Dow Jones Sustainability Index.15 Of course more important events, regulations and treaties took place in the 1990s, but the above-mentioned ones represented a perfect example of a more global and sustainable business model.
21st Century
This last century witnessed the entrance of CSR consultancy and auditing services, professional societies and institutionalized support. CSR is represented by a big umbrella of organizations with the aim of promoting and enhancing CSR initiatives not only in companies, but also in higher education. This is the era of standards and codes, social reports and partnerships
15 The Dow Jones Sustainability Index is the oldest global sustainability index that evaluates the sustainability performance of thousands of companies worldwide. It functions as it follows: “Each year we ask over 3,400 listed companies around the world between 80-120 industry-specific questions focusing on economic, environmental and social factors that are relevant to the companies’ success, but that are under-researched in conventional financial analysis.[...] This data, combined with sustainability and risk/return objectives of investors, is used to produce our family of indices, including our global indices, sub-indices, and innovative products like the multi-factor smart-beta ESG indices.”, available online at http://www.sustainability-indices.com/. [Accessed on March 1, 2017].
15
between companies and NGOs. CSR is a global phenomenon, which extends also to Europe.
According to a report issued by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), companies are even more required to respect regulations.
“Businesses are expected to obey the various laws which are applicable to them and, as a practical matter, often have to respond to societal expectations that are not written down as formal law. Since many enterprises now straddle numerous legal, regulatory, cultural and business environments, the challenge of legal and ethical compliance has become more complex. However, many businesses have attempted to meet this challenge. Working with trade unions, non-governmental organisations and governments, the business community has developed principles and management methods for addressing a range of issues about which it would have been incapable of organising any systematic response even as recently as two decades ago.” (OECD, 2001, p.7).
Examples of important international regulations and management methods have been provided by various organizations, such as the United Nations, the International Labour Organization, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and the European Union (Corporate Sustainability Reporting, 2017). Companies in the 21st century can surely benefit from respecting international regulations and obtaining certifications, which enhance their credibility and show consumers and the international community that their business in being conducted in a sustainable and ethical way.
“Certification is the process by which individual companies (factories, farms and other workplaces) and organizations undergo assessment by a third-party auditor. If the company meets the requirements set out in the standard or code, it can earn a certificate attesting to its compliance. Third-party certification involves an independent assessment declaring that specified requirements pertaining to a product, person, process or management system have been met.” (Social Accountability Accreditation Services, 2015).
However, despite the long evolution of CSR, a last, common and widely shared definition is the one provided by the European Commission in its 2001 “GREEN PAPER: Promoting a European framework for Corporate Social Responsibility” (European Commission, 2001).
16
“The Green Paper invites public authorities at all levels, including international organisations, enterprises from SMEs to multinational enterprises (MNEs), social partners, NGOs, other stakeholders and all interested individuals to express their views on how to build a partnership for the development of a new framework for the promotion of corporate social responsibility, taking account of the interests of both business and stakeholders.
Enterprises need to work together with public authorities to find innovative ways of developing corporate social responsibility. Such a partnership could make a significant contribution to achieving the objective of promoting a model of corporate social responsibility based on European values. [...] The European institutions - the Parliament, the Council of Ministers, the Commission - as well as the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions can stimulate the debate, give political support and organise an exchange of information and knowledge about corporate social responsibility.” (ibid.).
The aim of this document is to stimulate the creation of a common European framework for the application of Corporate Social Responsibility in businesses, as CSR is considered in this specific case a concept that goes beyond the general regulations that companies are expected to follow.
The European Commission’s aim is in fact to foster "an overall approach of quality and sustainability" through the "development of new partnerships and new spheres for existing relationships within the company regarding social dialogue, skills acquisition, equal opportunities, anticipation and management of change, at the local or national level with reference to the reinforcement of economic and social cohesion and health protection, and more generally on a global level, concerning environmental protection and respect of fundamental rights." (ibid.). The question is how to create an overall European framework of standards and laws to be implemented in a Union composed by different Member States, in particular as art. 288 (ex. Article 249 TEC) states that “[R]ecommendations and opinions shall have no binding force”16, therefore, actual laws at European level that can regulate CSR are necessary. As sustainability, profit and human rights
16 Chapter 2 “LEGAL ACTS OF THE UNION, ADOPTION PROCEDURES AND OTHER PROVISIONS” of the Consolidated Version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union sets the legal basis for the application of European Law in Member States. This article states the following:
“To exercise the Union's competences, the institutions shall adopt regulations, directives, decisions, recommendations and opinions. A regulation shall have general application. It shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. A directive shall be binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon each Member State to which it is addressed, but shall leave to the national authorities the choice of form and methods. A decision shall be binding in its entirety. A decision, which specifies those to whom it is addressed, shall be binding only on them.
Recommendations and opinions shall have no binding force.”
17
are concerns of all Member States of the Union, the idea is to try to create a common standard by getting inspiration from some specific regulations that are typical of different Member States. For example, making sure that each Member State has a Minister for Corporate Social Responsibility, as the UK established in 2000, or adopting a set of guidelines for industry on human rights, as the Confederation of Danish Industries did. The Commission’s GREEN PAPER on CSR provides an excellent idea for a common regulatory framework and the European Commission has already forwarded some recommendations regarding CSR principles, such as the Recommendation on the recognition, measurement and disclosure of environmental issues in the annual accounts and Annual Reports of Companies, the European Ecolabel or the Sustainability Impact Assessment of the proposed New Round WTO negotiations.
A part from following national or international standards, corporations have an important role regarding communication with the public and consumers, as these become more aware of company standards of production and exercise a significant influence on profits. Corporate communications become an important branch of CSR, which is in constant development as technologies evolve.
The second chapter of this dissertation, in fact, will provide an analysis of how companies communicate CSR, in particular international ones, which find themselves dealing with linguistic and cultural factors that directly influence customers’ expectations. After providing a brief historical background on CSR and its evolution, it is now possible to introduce some of the main theories and lines of thought, which have inspired and still inspire businesses today.
1.2 CSR Theories and lines of thought
There is a handful of theories and lines of thought which arose from the history of capitalism and which try to explain the interconnection of society, environment and business with ethics. For the sake of simplicity, only the three most influential and holistic approaches to CSR will be analysed: Freeman’s stakeholder theory, the Triple Bottom Line approach and Porter and Kramer’s concept of “Shared Value”.
1.2.1 The Stakeholder Theory
A stakeholder can be defined in a number of ways. A classic definition sees the stakeholder as “[…] a party that has an interest in a company, and can either affect or be affected by the
18
business. The primary stakeholders in a typical corporation are its investors, employees and customers” (Investopedia, 2017). However, the definitions has expanded in the past decade, considering as stakeholders also the community and the government. Indeed, a stakeholder is a person or group who is affected by and can affect a business, creating therefore a condition of mutual interest: a stakeholder is interested in the well-functioning of the firm and the firm relies on the support of its stakeholders. The basic idea is that business should create benefits for its stakeholders, which in time have numerically grown in the aftermath of globalization. A brief focus on the history of stakeholders can better explain the growing complexity of the interconnection between business and society. The aspect of creating wealth through business has its roots in capitalism, which has generated the expansion of multinational firms and bigger businesses. If before small family-run business was not separate from ownership, with the capitalist system more people became involved as actual stakeholders in the performance of the firm. An enhancement in invested capital, technology, machinery, production and employees translated into a much bigger responsibility for businesses to generate and guarantee wealth for all parties involved. Of course, the parties involved in this complex process vary from time to time and depend on the business itself. Each business, in fact, identifies its stakeholders in order to better guarantee the optimal conditions to fulfil its purpose. In order to identify a company’s stakeholders, drawing a stakeholder map, for instance, can result helpful (Freeman, 2007, p.12).
19
Fig.3 Managing for Stakeholders
The map identifies all stakeholders of a business by setting the most important ones at the centre and placing the rest in various levels, always following a criteria of importance. As shown in the example, the primary stakeholders are “communities”, “customers”, “employees”, “suppliers” and
“financiers”, while the secondary stakeholders are the “government”, “competitors”, “consumer advocate groups”, “special interest groups” and the “media”. But what are the criteria by which each company gives importance to its stakeholders and why is mapping stakeholders important?
Nowadays, in order to run a successful business, it is essential to outline a good CSR plan. First, a company must contact its stakeholders, draw a map to locate them in the business and finally engage with them. When setting up a business, it is crucial to make an assessment and to identify the necessary resources, know-how and financial availability that stakeholders can contribute with.
Priorities must be defined, as well as corporate communication methods by which all stakeholders can be engaged and informed about the company’s activities and of course, different businesses identify different stakeholders, in a constant dynamic and global environment.
20
“[T]here are many possible pictures. One might put customers in the center to signal that a company puts customers as the key priority. Another might put employees in the center and link them to customers and shareholders. […] There are many different combinations of relationships in a business and each group fights for its own interests, which also depend on the role that the group covers in the firm.” (Freeman, 2007, pp. 11, 12).
All parts are interconnected: a company needs loyal suppliers to provide the primary goods to produce products, as well as the suppliers need a company to which sell its goods; a company needs a trustworthy relationship with its consumers, which is built on the transparency and the quality provided by its products, while consumers need companies for the production of commodities; workforce is needed by both company and people and the list can go on. This to say that no stakeholder can be granted exclusive attention when it comes to business. In the light of this interconnected reality, it can be difficult for a manager to satisfy the needs of each party, but it is also true that the manager involved has to be aware of the fact that no business can be successful if it pursues the needs of just one group. As underlined by Freeman, the father of the stakeholder theory, “[T]aking a stakeholder approach helps people decide how companies can contribute to their well-being and kinds of lives they want to lead. By making ethics explicit and building it into the basic way we think about business, we avoid a situation of bad faith and self- deception.”(ibid., pp. 21, 22). Furthermore, “In order to create value we believe that it is better to focus on integrating business and ethics within a complex set of stakeholder relationships rather than treating ethics as a side constraint on making profits”(ibid., p.9). The United States of America provide some examples of this implementation, from the Equal pay Act of 1963 (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2017) to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (ibid.) against discrimination in hiring practices, adding to the list the Employment Act of 196717, the
17 “The following is the text of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (Pub. L. 90-202) (ADEA), as amended, as it appears in volume 29 of the United States Code, beginning at section 621. The ADEA prohibits employment discrimination against persons 40 years of age or older.”
21
Clean Air Act (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2017)18 and Clean Water Act (ibid.)19, covering philanthropic, ethical and environmental aspects of business.
1.2.2 Empirical evidence of the importance of the stakeholder theory
Numerous empirical studies have demonstrated how the application of the stakeholder theory can really benefit business, in particular when it comes to defining the issues that this approach can solve when managing a firm. The majority of studies on the applicability of the stakeholder theory have usually been inserted in the context of the strategic management of the firm and have been conducted following an empirical process based on the scientific method, hence, the collection and evaluation of data, reports, financial results or company ranking.
Examples of these studies are the ones conducted by business professor at University of Maryland Lee Preston and faculty professor of management at University of Minnesota, Harry Sapienza, as well as University of Chicago’s professor Rihahi-Belkaoui, who based their research on data collected by Fortune magazine. This research was focused on a survey of senior executives, analysts and directors who rated the ten largest companies in their own industries on a scale from 1 to 10 for eight aspects that determine a company’s reputation (Freeman, Harrison, Wicks, Parmar, De Colle, 2010, pp. 98, 99). The study conducted by Preston and Sapienza demonstrated the correlation between the companies’ rate of return and all the stakeholders (namely shareholders, employees, the community and customers) with their variables, as well as a positive correlation between the pursuit of the stakeholders’ interests and the sales growth. Rihahi-Belkaui, on the other side, provided similar results, showing that “both organizational effectiveness and social performances were positively related to size and profitability” (ibid., p.99). Many studies, which relied on the collection of data, have been conducted of the basis of the correlation between corporate management, stakeholder individuation and company performance, but the following
18 Signed in 1963, “The Clean Air Act (CAA) is the comprehensive federal law that regulates air emissions from stationary and mobile sources. Among other things, this law authorizes EPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to protect public health and public welfare and to regulate emissions of hazardous air pollutants.”
This Act aims to safeguard the air quality in order to prevent the worsening of the ozone layer, reduce acid rain levels and toxic pollutants.
19 “The Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters. [...] "Clean Water Act" became the Act's common name with amendments in 1972.”.
22
case study is able to offer an even more practical example of the importance of the stakeholder management, identification and involvement when pursuing profitability. This is the case of the successful construction of the Brazilian Science Park Ribeirão Preto.
A Science Park can be defined as “complexes of economic and technological development that aim to promote knowledge-based economies through the meeting of scientific and technological research, business, and government organizations in one place, offering support to the relations between these players.” (Pacagnella Jr., Silveria Porto, Pacìfico, Pereira Salgado Jr., 2015, p.41).
In particular, this kind of infrastructure is important because it creates an environment that
“encourages the generation and sharing of the knowledge that is produced, and the aim of turning it into applications that have commercial value.” (ibid., p.41). Creating a Science Park is a challenging operation because numerous parties must be put in contact and in agreement with each other and there are numerous necessities that have to be fulfilled. From financing the project, finding a construction site and obtaining construction permissions, to analyzing the population density, identifying the right technological profile of research centers in the region and attracting students and scientists for the project, the realization of such plan needs the identification and involvement of the right parties, hence, the application of the stakeholder theory. The stakeholders involved in this case were FIPASE (the Advanced Pole Institute of Health Foundation), the USP (University of São Paulo), the Ribeirão Preto City Government, the Department of Economic Development, Science, Technology and Innovation of the State of São Paulo, the MCTI (Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation) and private investors (venture capitalists). The successful realization of the project occurred through a long process of negotiations, meetings and informal discussions among all parties, thanks to which the project obtained important financial investments, permissions and attracted private investors (who earned most profits from the real estate development of the region). The need for more financial investments to end the project led to the meeting between USP and the Mayor of Ribeirão Preto to "discuss a proposal for building a business incubator and technology center in the Science Park, as well as the inclusion in the USP strategic plan" (ibid., p.47), while a further important stakeholder was also involved in the process in 2010, hence the Secretary of Economics, Science and Technology of the State of São Paulo, who provided ulterior investments for the project. The project for the construction of the Ribeirão Preto Science Park revealed to be a success because “[…] the project team was concerned from
