English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Corporation social responsibility is no longer only a concept existing in theoretical research field, but has extended its scope into solving practical problems. The emergence and development of theories concerning corporation social responsibility has exerted a vast and even subversive influence on the modification of traditional company law and the reshaping of corporate governance structure. From the perspective of law, this paper gives a brief introduction to the world's major countries’ reaction towards the reform of corporate governance models under the influence of corporation social responsibility. In view of the status quo of the operation of corporate governance and the existing laws and regulations in China, this paper aims to puts forward a feasible corporate governance system and development path specific to China’s national conditions from three aspects: "expanding its explanation of corporate purpose and perfecting the duty rules of the board of directors", "setting up social responsibility committee under the board of directors" and "strengthening the protection of workers’ interests", which altogether will make a great contribution to the advancement of corporate governance in China. The Definition of Corporation Social Responsibility Corporation social responsibility is a controversial topic from the time of its birth. Objections are that once the company admits that it has social responsibility, all kinds of groups will propose requirements to the company. The results will shake free capitalist private property ownership, and bring about market mechanism disorder. American economist Milton Friedman argues that company has a sole kind of social responsibility, which is to make maximum the profits for shareholders by using resources in activities. Scholars with positive opinion argue that company holds the duty of society, that is to request company's decision makers consider the benefit of other stakeholders in addition to consider shareholder interests when making business decisions. This can resolve the contradictions between profit and public policy. In mid and late 20th century, the issue of corporation social responsibility attracted Chinese scholars’ study interest and close attention, and distinctive concept expressions are formed. Among them, professor Lu Daifu thinks that corporation social responsibility is the enterprise’s seeking and satisfying of social benefits, which is to maintain and improve social interests. This obligation and maximizing shareholders’ interests both constitute corporation social responsibility and economic responsibility. 1 Taiwan scholar professor Liu Lianyu argues that for-profit enterprise decision-making authority should give up profit-making intention and serve for the majority’s expectations after confirming that a certain matter conforms to most people’s expectations.2 From the above Chinese and western scholars’ definition of corporation social responsibility, although the expressions are different, all contain the common understanding of the concept, namely due to the double attributes of corporation personality, on the one hand, the company should reflect its economic efficiency and make profit for shareholders; on the other hand, also want to reflect its sociality, that is to take social goal as company's responsibility, which must take into account the interests of other stakeholders. 3rd International Conference on Science and Social Research (ICSSR 2014) © 2014. The authors Published by Atlantis Press 415 The Influence of Corporation Social Responsibility on the Reform of Corporate Governance The word stake first appeared in the 1708 Oxford dictionary, which is explained as stake that people use in the activities. Then, the word "stakeholder" specifically refers to stakeholders. Definition of stakeholders in early stages is that "stakeholders are organizations which could not survive without their support". In 1984, Freeman redefined "stakeholders” from the angle of corporation strategy management that “stakeholders are those benefited or damaged because corporate events and their rights are respected or infringed by corporate activities". 3 The idea laid the outline for later study of stakeholders. Thus, stakeholder theory and corporation social responsibility spirit are interlinked. Both research categories are similar, including shareholders, employees, suppliers, consumers and communities. The appearance of stakeholder theory undoubtedly has important theoretical value. It laid the theoretical basis for ways and means for late stakeholders involvement in corporate governance research. There is no doubt that the concept of corporation social responsibility goes from stakeholder theory into the research category of corporate governance. Traditional corporate governance’s starting point and foothold are only dedicated to the fulfillment of the interests of shareholders, which is the profit for shareholders and company. The external legal regulation means, such as environmental protection law, consumer law and labor law are to protect the other stakeholders. But social selective ignorance of the negative effect on the company for a long time causes a series of negative effects of "external machine" to the society. Profit is not god, nor the devil. "We should build a harmonious state, and make each of us support profit principle in our own responsibility framework". 4 In fact, the protection of other stakeholders shall be reflected in the purpose of corporate governance, and not simply rely on external regulation means. Therefore, a new governance model should be established to seek maximized shareholder interests and stakeholder interests protection, that is multiple governance mode. Multiple governance essence is to establish company's capital investors’ systematic institutional arrangements for their interrelation and inter-influence. Corporate Governance Models with the Concept of Social Responsibility Under the push of world economic globalization and integration, world's corporation governance models present interinfluence and inter-studying. Economic globalization is a kind of economic phenomenon based on market economy. Since the 1980s and 1990s, gradually a unified global market economy is built up. Global corporate governance models presented two forms, respectively Anglo-American corporate governance and German-Japanese corporate governance. These two governance models respectively represent the two purposes of corporate governance, namely "shareholder first", and "stakeholders". (a) Shareholders-oriented mode ---Anglo-American corporate governance model Shareholders-oriented mode is generally pursued in Anglo-American countries, emphasizing the protection for the interests of shareholders, and the supervision of managers is the key point of corporate governance. But do not deny the interests of stakeholders. This model is based on "trust" relationship between shareholders, directors, and managers. As a neutral, director coordinates the interests of all parties. Director of shareholder has fiduciary duty, and has the responsibility of client and shareholders interests service. In addition to this, other stakeholders’ protection is realized by reducing the directors' duty of seeking the interests of shareholders. Stakeholders Legislation in the United States is this model. The earliest stakeholders law legislation is in Pennsylvania in the United States. After Pennsylvania, forty states have formulated stakeholders law. In 2006, British "Company Law" carried on a further modification. In its 170-177, the firm purpose understanding is expanded. Among them, article 172 redefined the general obligation of director as "for the sake of the overall rights and interests of the members of the company and promote company success" as much as possible. It is obvious that the director duty involves a wider scope than before. Under the guidance of the concept, corporate governance is not only concerned

The social responsibility of corporation and its impact on the reformation of corporate governance structure: a discussion from the perspective of law