Corporate Social Responsibility of Business in the Natural and Urban Areas of the Lublin Province

Open access


Subject and purpose of work: The purpose of the study was to compare the behavior of companies located in the areas of nature value and in their proximity with companies located in urbanized areas in the Lublin Region in terms of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).

Materials and methods: The study was conducted by means of the diagnostic survey method, using direct interviews.

Results and conclusions: Companies located in valuable natural or close to natural areas tend to undertake ecological and environmental investments (27.68%), care for the common good (54.46%), and treat employees well (54.46%) as compared with the companies located in urban areas (10.72%, 25.89% and 25.89%, respectively). Sensitivity to nature is primarily the result of the company’s direct contact with nature, the recognition of the importance of protecting it, as well as of good treatment of employees, that is it results mainly from the combination of business and personal relationships with employees. Firms located in urban areas are much more likely to support charitable donations (22.33%), which is a result of higher returns by these companies and more frequent requests for financial assistance. Further research in this regard should concern factors that make the entrepreneurs more willing to implement CSRs in their companies.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Bilińska K. (2013). Wykorzystanie koncepcji CRS w działalności sieci handlu detalicznego. Handel wewnętrzny – rynek – przedsiębiorstwo – konsumpcja - marketing3 72-79.

  • 2. Bowen H. R. (1953). Social Responsibilities of the Businessman. New York: Harper & Row.

  • 3. Carroll A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review 4(4) 497-505.

  • 4. Gautam R. Singh A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility practices in India: A study of top 500 companies. Global Business & Management Research 2(1) 41-56.

  • 5. GUS (2017). Bank danych lokalnych. Pobrano z:

  • 6. Handelman J.M. Stephen J.A. (1999). The role of marketing actions with a social dimension: Appeals to the Intuitional Environment. Journal of Marketing 63 33-48.

  • 7. Hildebrand Ch. (2000). Probleme und Tendezen bei der Entwickl ung eines einheitlichen Unweltgutezeichens fur das Hotel und Gaststattendewerbe Diplomarbeit Fachhochshule Munchen. Studiengang Tourismus Zusammenarbeit mit Herbert Hamele ECOTRANS unpublished Referenced in FEMATOUR.

  • 8. Kiron D. Kruschwitz N. Haanaes K. Streng V. Velken I. (2012). Sustainability nears a tipping point mit Sloan. Management Review 53(2) 52-64.

  • 9. Lim J.S. Greenwood C.A. (2017). Communicating corporate social responsibility (CSR): Stakeholder responsiveness and engagement strategy to achieve CSR goals. Public Relations Review 1(6) 186-192.

  • 10. Lindgreen A. Swaen V. Maon F. (2009). Introduction: Corporate social responsibility implementation. Journal of Business Ethics 85 251-256.

  • 11. Nazari J.A. Hrazdil O.K. Mahmoudian F. (2017). Assessing social and environmental performance through narrative complexity in CSR reports. Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics 13(2) 166-178.

  • 12. Pedersen E. R. (2006b). Between Hopes and Realities: Reflections on the Promises and Practices of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Copenhagen: PhD School of Technologies of Managing/Copenhagen Business School.

  • 13. Pedersen E. R. Neergaard P. (2006a). The bottom line of CSR: A different view. In: B. Measuring F. Hond G.A. Bakker. P. Neergaard (eds) Forthcoming in Managing Corporate Social Responsibility in Action (p. 55-62). Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing.

  • 14. Rabiański R. (2011). Biznes odpowiedzialny społecznie. Zagadnienia korzyści praktyki In: Wschodnioeuropejskie Centrum Demokratyczne. Norweski Mechanizm Finansowy (p. 1-30). Warszawa: Minister Spraw Zagranicznych RP.

  • 15. Rogowski R. (2003). Znaczenie wartości moralnych w działalności gospodarczej przedsiębiorcy. In: L. Kaliszczak S. Marczuk (eds.) Społeczne i ekonomiczne determinanty przedsiębiorczości – subregion tarnobrzeski w procesie zmian (s. 11-25). Tarnobrzeg: Wydawnictwo Państwowej Wyższej Szkoły Zawodowej im. prof. Stanisława Tarnowskiego w Tarnobrzegu.

  • 16. Rok B. (2004). Odpowiedzialny biznes. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Forum Odpowiedzialności Biznesu.

  • 17. Rok B. (2009) Czy przywództwo etyczne w działalności gospodarczej jest możliwe? Prakseologia 149 187-203.

  • 18. Rybak M. (2004). Etyka menedżera - społeczna odpowiedzialność przedsiębiorstwa. Warszawa: PWN.

  • 19. Sen S. Bhattacharya C.B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research 38 225-243.

  • 20. Sokołowska A. (2013). Społeczna odpowiedzialność małego przedsiębiorstwa. Identyfikacja – ocena – kierunki doskonalenia. Wroclaw: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego.

  • 21. Soroka A. Mazurek-Kusiak A. (2014) The importance of corporate social responsibility of enterprises in business. Acta Scientiarum Polonorum Oeconomia 12(2) 117-125.

  • 22. Walsh J.P. Weber K. Margolis J.D. (2003). Social issues and management: our lost cause found. Journal of Management 29 860882.

  • 23. Zwolińska-Ligaj M. (2015). Społeczna odpowiedzialność biznesu w sektorze biogospodarki na obszarach przyrodniczo cennych województwa lubelskiego. Economic and Regional Studies/Studia Ekonomiczne i Regionalne 8(1) 92-111.

Journal information
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 89 89 0
PDF Downloads 71 71 1