Abstract

This paper was interested in trying to understand and establish the current corporate culture and human rights in multinational corporations. The paper made a review on their corporate social responsibility and human rights from a legal perspective from five corporations in the UK and the US. The researcher sought insights on the legal factors that affect the current corporate culture and human rights in multinational corporations. Data was collected from the company profile and databases with relevant information on the same. It was concluded that the information is relevant to the research objective and point at a research gap on the legal implications of CSR and human rights for multinational corporations in the UK, US and around the world. Organizations effect on human rights in critical ways. These effects have expanded over on-going decades as the financial and political impact of corporations has developed, and as enterprises have turned out to be more associated with conveying administrations beforehand given by governments. It has been established that CSR commonly insinuates the activities and corporations takes to roll out a couple of improvements to the general population paying little respect to the likelihood that the activities may not be essential or be done. All around, the CSR practices are not so much required by law or particularly helpful. Also, there are different factors related to corporate social duty including opportunity affirmation, around the world, government wants, social item pictures and supportability challenges. The paper also affirmed that human rights are important to the financial and social section of corporate movement. From the company databases, it was discovered that human rights make about 10 per cent of the main reasons the five multinationals have CSR activities. This presents the importance of human rights on the social responsibility of any firm. Enactments perceiving advantage corporations has been sought after in and embraced by the two states. Also, CSR is represented by an expanding number of all-inclusive norms and rules in various territories

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Lately, a regularly and ever inflating number of corporations around the world are getting to emphasize on the social responsibility of the corporations and multinationals (CSR) exercises. Experts in business management communicate that corporations should accept social responsibility as one of their key parts to create the essential introduce of their triumphs. At present, the corporate social duty has quit being alluded to as an equivalent word for the all-inclusive community (O'Donovan, 2002). Different corporations circulate their social responsibility of the corporations and multinationals reports or supportability report each year to allow general society to have a channel to take after their social responsibility of the corporations and multinationals exercises. Obviously, the organization gatherings of present day corporations treat social responsibility of the corporations and multinationals practices genuinely. The inspirations to wear down social responsibility of the corporations and multinationals practices are distinctive for differentiate firms. For example, a couple of corporations start to take social responsibility of the corporations and multinationals practices in light of the way that their opponents are doing. Concurrently, a consistently expanding number of customers will consider social responsibility of the corporations and multinationals when they intend to buy products and services or make payments to the corporations. If a corporation has the history of dumping unrefined waste to streams, different customers will not buy its products and services any more. On the other hand, if a similar corporation has done enormous work to protect natural resources, for instance, reusing energy cells from surrounding areas and introduce reasonable systems to keep these cells in use to minimize degradation, more clients will be glad to pick goods and services from it (Business for Social Responsibility, 2000).

CSR is a for the most part new limit in corporate that continues changing and progressing. Specialists have not yet totally examined how decisions identified with this social responsibility are made within these corporations and why workplaces have the most impact on corporate strategies of responsibility (Business for Social Responsibility, 2000). This social responsibility, or the corporations' duties have for their impact on social orders and the world has ended up being run of the mill in business. In every way that really matters, every corporation has its own particular sort of CSR practice or action. In addition, smaller corporations are changing in dynamism in corporate strategies of responsibility related terms. The social responsibility attempts are directly a principal bit of the culture of the business and are made a beeline for transforming into typical business behaviour in most worldwide business enterprises (O'Donovan, 2002).

The interaction of ethics, internal control, and distortion is basic in the cognizance of social responsibility of the corporations. Justifiable positions are utilized to determine how moral social control systems can be fittingly associated. In that capacity, they can provide unparalleled security, redesigned comfort, hoisted duty, better blackmail acknowledgment and is especially fruitful in disheartening deception, in this way improving corporate social responsibility among affiliations (Jamali and Mirshak 2007).

Over the last few years, multinationals have amazingly expanded their potential. Their growing development and broadened powers, because of procedure on privatization, has affected political, financial, and social undertakings around the world. While the essential responsibility regarding the satisfaction, insurance and regard of global human rights models is still in the hands of many countries, there is a developing acknowledgment that enterprises hold some level of duty too. In like manner, the developed idea of social responsibility of the corporations aligns to their duties on condition and social welfare. In any case, their effect on human rights can be investigated in how enterprises deal with their human assets, particularly inside developed economies where frequently their progenies are moved. Truthfully, human resource frameworks influence social responsibility of the corporations through the management and control of employee practices. As a result, universal growth objectives, for example, mitigation of poverty and changes in their health can be connected both to a positive management of representatives (specifically) and specialists of providers (indirectly). Notwithstanding, they meet social responsibility destinations, supervisors practice their caution on intra-hierarchical partner connections, and in delivering substantial social results including additional authoritative partners. At that point, proper worldwide controls with regards to human rights seem significantly more significant in regard to such decisional control.

The point must be repeated that under the present universal human rights law structure, corporations do not have any significant worldwide legal commitments; these commitments are generally borne by countries. In this way, even where a state or its authority is even not straightforwardly in charge of the genuine infringement of a universal human rights law, the nation can in any case be considered in charge of an absence of effective activity in reacting to, or keeping, the contravention of such human rights by enterprises and other non-state on-screen characters. Consequently, remembering that most corporations react better to deterrent direction by a state than to receptive suit, at the very least since it lessens vulnerability and hazard the current practice that proposes a state can just have locale over its own particular nationals, and that it can infrequently implement this ward in another country's domain must be changed. At the end of the day, the training whereby most transnational corporations (TNCs) work through auxiliaries incorporated in have states, and not incorporated in the condition of the central station of the TNC makes it exceedingly hard to consider the expanded endeavor responsible for human rights manhandle and should consequently be overhauled also. This when done successfully would mean such TNCs and their backups can be considered in charge of acts of neglect in have states

In spite of these contradicting perspectives of deliberate and required CSR, it is important to underline the way that CSR and the law are totally unisolated, they are interwoven and the administration is now assuming a significant part in it. This relationship can be shown by the way that there are several CSR guidelines concentrated on managing corporate exercises that are portrayed by a specific level of legal enforceability and that can't be thought about totally intentional.

CSR is represented by an expanding number of all-inclusive norms and rules in various territories like the earth, human rights, and hostile to corruption that enterprises intentionally apply to control their action and be socially capable. In addition, regardless of whether CSR and the law are completely isolated, they are entwined and the administration as of now assumes a part in it. This relationship can be shown in CSR where there are numerous guidelines that direct corporate exercises, which are portrayed by a specific level of legal enforceability and can't be thought about totally intentional. In like manner, CSR set off the improvement of required social and ecological detailing that powers corporations to report their exercises and uncover them. Another applicable point is the way that sets of accepted rules are by and large incorporated in providers and workers' agreements, which makes sets of principles enforceable. At long last, in many nations, there is as of now the commitment to conform to least legal measures the extent that the earth, work gauges, and reasonable rivalry are concerned. In this degree law in CSR could be an implication that triggers conceivable legal changes to accomplish the proposed CSR goals.

With regards to the control of CSR the key thought is that of circumspection, not voluntarism. Managing CSR isn't tied in with supplanting voluntarism with hard law, yet about directing tact through law so that it neither abrogates caution nor abandons it immaculate. For such purposes lawmakers utilize different systems to gather the administrative capability of corporations and their partners. With regards to CSR's effects on law, impacts are noticeable at different stages, from law-production to law-determination to law-authorization; dependable business rehearses to contain benchmarks of due industriousness and may improve neighbourhood limits in have nations. Following representations and investigation of such cooperation, CSR is described not only as 'self-direction' but rather as a rising standard, coming about because of a base up process, that associates with legal frameworks in both home and host nations. CSR ought to be examined for its part in the legal organization of the benchmark. The particular setting of regarding human rights in developing nations all through the task of huge corporate systems. For example, multinationals requires an adjusted idea of CSR and an educated comprehension of CSR's connection to law.

1.1.1 Two focused countries: UK and US

At a fundamental level, most would concur a business has an responsibility to comply with the law. Most would likewise concur that a for‐profit firm has some responsibility to win a benefit for financial specialists/proprietors/investors. This discussion by and large mirrors the contrast between the theory of capitalist power, the idea that the firm owes its most elevated and maybe just good responsibility to serve the monetary premiums of investors, and stakeholder theory, which holds the firm owes a more extensive social responsibility to an assortment of stakeholders who are affected by corporate action.

In the United States today, legal treatises debate whether there is a legally enforceable trustee responsibility with respect to corporate chiefs to serve investor surcharges over the premiums of various stakeholders. In any case, most would concur that, at any rate, there exists a social standard inside the United States—and to a specific degree additionally in the UK showcase economy—that the responsibility of business is to build the benefits of investors, and that the premiums of some other stakeholder bunches must be subordinate to this objective.

A fantastic representation of the U.S. investor power assumption can be found in the making of "advantage" corporations—another type of for‐profit business venture that expressly perceives and legitimizes the quest for social objectives close by benefit goals. While some have debated the legal requirement for such a frame, others have contended that profit corporations are important to counter the staggering prominent agreement that enterprises are legally committed to amplify investor benefits. The truth of the matter is that enactment perceiving advantage corporations has been sought after in and embraced by thirty states. Likewise numerous corporations have accomplished confirmation as profit corporations, underpins the nearness of a societal assumption against partnerships seeking after social advantages to the detriment of the premiums of investors.

Conversely, social business law seeks after an altogether different capacity in the European Union, where uncommon legal administrations have been set up for charge reasons, to propel open arrangement destinations, and to defeat EU rivalry principles and state help direction for social endeavors. Commonly these administrations, which at first sight take after the U.S. advantage organization don't take into account profit dispersion. Hence, dissimilar to their U.S. partners, are impossible for corporations seeking after both benefit and societal objectives. Worries about social undertaking's management damaging investor riches boost commitments under corporate law are essentially missing from the European discussion, as mainland European legal frameworks. For example, those of the UK, recognize that managers may deal with the firm in the social premium and human rights. The way that management may seek after corporate objectives other than investor riches boost has been credited to major contrasts in the advancement of corporate legal theory against various social foundations and monetary substances. These are described in legal grant as institutionalism versus contractarianism. In the US, researchers were worried by the quasi‐political, agency‐cost driving intensity of administrators. In the UK, legal researchers were worried about the situation of substantial investors in corporations and with their impedance with the best possible working of management. This prompts solid investor insurance against self‐interested management in the United States versus assurance of the endeavour and its stakeholders against greater part investors in the UK.

Corporate law in the nations specified above better backings a meaning of CSR in a way lined up with stakeholder theory. From this point of view CSR is on a very basic level about business considering themselves responsible for their effect on individuals and the planet. It is a far reaching approach that a company takes to meet or surpass stakeholder desires past proportions of income, benefit, and legal commitments. While mainland European corporate law's inclination for stakeholder theory keeps on moulding the scholastic talk about CSR, securities for investors have relentlessly expanded in the some time ago institutionalism‐oriented corporate law frameworks of the UK.

1.2 Purpose of this study

This paper was interested in trying to understand and establish the current corporate culture and human rights in multinational corporations. The paper made a review on their corporate social responsibility and human rights from a legal perspective. The researcher sought insights on the legal factors that affect the current corporate culture and human rights in multinational corporations

This paper seeks to be a guide to top executives to understand and establish the current corporate culture and human rights in their multinational corporations by conferring knowledge into human rights, corporate social responsibility and legal implications-related choices. It additionally distinguishes ways the executives of corporations can convey, actualize and deal with social responsibility of the corporations and human rights from a legal perspective.

1.3 Objectives

The general objective of this research was to understand and establish the current corporate culture and human rights in multinational corporations by looking at their corporate social responsibility and human rights from a legal perspective. This is broken down into specific objectives as follows;

1)        To establish how the law affects corporate social responsibility in multinational corporations?

2)       To establish how the law affects human rights in multinational corporations?

1.4 Research Questions

It is understood that the clarity and definition of nay research is based upon the researchers’ understanding of the research questions. Thus, understanding the research main questions is paramount. Also, the questions must be well drawn and comprehensive of the research topic (Saunders & Lewis, 2012). Based on the broad nature of this research and the research topic, clear and well phrased research questions are drawn to establish how the law affects corporate social responsibility and human rights in multinational corporations.

The researcher came up with the following research questions for this research;

1)        How does the law affect corporate social responsibility in multinational corporations?

2)       What are the effects of the law on human rights in multinational corporations?

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This section incorporates the theoretical framework used by the researcher. It also has review of relevant studies and theories that provide for the qualitative data required in this research and a summary of the literature review in relation to the topic of research

2.2 Theoretical framework

This involves the relevant theories in multinational corporations’ social responsibilities.

2.2.1 Stakeholder Theory

Stakeholder theory looks at a business structure starting with the way it interacts with the world. This is to say that the theory focuses more on the obligation of the business to the society. It list those who will be affected by (or affect) the business as stakeholders on the kind of obligations and responsibilities they can impose, albeit justifiably, on any business enterprise or corporation. In short, stakeholder theory states that those live that those the business enterprise or corporation touches hold an obligation and a right to participate in its direction or management. Once the stakeholders surrounding a corporation have been identified, stakeholder ethics are then identified. The purpose of the firm, as unearthed by this theory, is to make the most in profits on a collective background. Here profit is not defined in monetary terms but as human welfare.

2.3 Review of relevant studies and theories

According to Kang et al. (2010), CSR commonly insinuates the activities an corporation takes to roll out a couple of improvements to the general population paying little respect to the likelihood that the activities may not be essential or be done. All around, the CSR practices are not so much required legally or particularly helpful (Arendt and Brettel 2010). It is expressed that business activities are termed as social responsibility practices when they are driven by corporations without a thought on their interests however giving a dedication as an "inhabitant" to amass a prevalent society (Petrenko, Aime, Ridge and Hill 2016).

Petrenko, Aime, Ridge and Hill (2016) postulate that that the corporate social responsibility practices should be the responses for getting quality life, thriving society. Toward the day's end, the CSR activities can be a system for publicizing to indicate corporations worries on moral issues, security and social welfares. There are other CSR works out, for instance, make genuine and interesting offers to magnanimous affiliations.

There are different factors related to social duties or corporations including opportunity affirmation, around the world, the needs of governments, images of social products and challenges in supportability. It is basic to contain the possible results to give prospective times enough resource when their period locks in on using current advantage for address their own particular matters. Meanwhile, corporate duty activities ought to be done ceaselessly to show the ethical photos of the corporations. It is amicability among benefits and financial change (Bogart, 2013). Along these lines, social responsibility of the corporations may not give direct interests to the accomplices and delegates of the corporations. Nevertheless, the general favorable circumstances passed on by corporate social duty activities will feedback to the corporations in the whole deal.

Corporate duty on soceity has grown definitely as corporations have ended up being more open (Athanasopoulou and Selsky, 2015). The results of social responsibility of the corporations from examine show that there is a creating irregular state responsibility to corporate duty. The surveys found that a higher rate of corporate spending designs was allocated to social duty throughout the years, suggesting a more grounded focus and responsibility. Emphatically, a corporation that does research on the financial point of view, political and business related conditions exhibited that social responsibility of the corporations specifying has moved from a purposeful to a key responsibility of firms in the course of the most recent decade (Hooker, 2012). In light of social responsibility of the corporations sanctioning and extended accomplice enthusiasm for clear reporting, corporate expounding on this responsibility has instantly changed. The quantity of firms effectively associated with social responsibility of the corporations is by and by almost 4000 up from around 500 10 years back (Athanasopoulou and Selsky 2015). This development reflects the creating design among corporations worldwide to issue reports demonstrating their devotion to natural and social concentrations close by ordinary budgetary ones.

While CSR reports are not new, corporations go up against more grounded propelling powers presently to release standard reports on their social responsibility of the corporations attempts due to fortified outside examination (Burton and Goldsby 2009). Clients, now more than ever, can impact the path corporations to cooperate, and this requires a deep focus on social responsibility. Research attributes this impact by clients to four components. These components are data, openness, social responsibility and globalization. Since clients currently have extensively more data that promptly accessible and available, they can be more perceiving about the corporations whose products and services they purchase. Corporations then become more noticeable on internal and outside pressure to execute social responsibility programs, and the present downturn on the economy of the world has expanded the essentialness of social responsibility of the corporations’ ventures.

According to Angus-Leppan Metcalf and Benn (2010), in the state of citizenship in corporations that incorporated a diagram of authorities, more business investors are seen to having strong social responsibility procedures improves the organization. The audit revealed that various best officials assume that a relationship among CSR and reputation is continuously fundamental when the official open's uncertainty of business is high. Plus, when corporations are working in the midst of outrageous financial conditions, more conspicuous thought is taken to the matters that add to and impact their essential concerns (Aguinis and Glavas 2012).

There is in like manner a setup corporation among reputation and advantage. Studies show that strong reputations need to extend a motivating force in endeavors. Most surveys exhibit that corporations with decently incredible reputations are better arranged to keep up higher net incomes after some time. Also, they communicates that the reputation  of corporations is a basic key asset that adds to firm-level decided profitability and demand that a reputation  that is strong is associated with unrivalled cash related execution (Brammer, Jackson and Matten 2012).

2.4 CSR and human rights

The idea of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is often thought to suggest that corporations have a level of responsibility in their social and environmental surroundings and effects in addition to their financial matters (Business for Social Responsibility, 2000). This is regarded as the triple concern approach involving the financial, environmental and social aspects of corporate movement. The importance and estimation of corporate social responsibility may contrast in different settings, contingent upon local factors including natural conditions, the legal structure and the society at large.

Human rights are important to the social, financial and natural sections of corporate social responsibility of. For instance, in work rights expecting corporations to pay reasonable salaries and wages to their employees may influence the financial perspective. Also in human rights, the privileges not to be racially segregated are applicable to the social understanding of corporate social responsibility. Furthermore, the environmental factors of corporate social responsibility may influence a scope of human rights, like the right to clean water to drink. In this way, while the essential responsibility regarding the implementation of global human rights norms lies with most central governments, there is a growing acknowledgment that enterprises additionally have an imperative part to play (Jamali and Mirshak 2007).

Organizations effect on human rights in many significant ways. These effects have expanded over the decades as the political and financial impact of corporations has developed. It has also grown as enterprises have turned out to be more associated with offering corporate social responsibility that was earlier given by governments (O'Donovan, 2002). Organizations have come to realize that being regarded as a decent corporation entails paying attention to the human rights of the people who are in contact with the organization. They may be direct contacts like clients and employees or aberrant contact. These corporations are also reacting to the anticipation by stakeholders that partnerships will result in their social wellbeing. The level of a corporations activities are intended in corporate social responsibility programs can influence the choices of both workers and customers of a particular organization according to Kang et al. (2010).

Over the previous ten years or so, the global network has made tremendous advances I elucidating connections between multinationals and people’s rights. Many deliberate actions on human rights and social responsibility of the corporations have been produced by organizations, NGOs, governments and other business entities (Jamali and Mirshak 2007). These actions are governed by a set of rules and regulations that announce certain methodology and have their activity records. Thus, there are many multinationals that have a dedication to many issues regarding human rights and their guidelines. This insinuates the growing understanding of the social requirements for corporations to ensure their interests and those of their stakeholders is at per with the new social requirements

A contribution of multinational partnerships in human rights issues and violations begets global attention as they uncover emotions on the nature of their employees and society’s wellbeing. These cases are a clear indications of how multinationals are responsible for adverse human rights violations in their host countries. These have exposed the weaknesses in the legal frameworks of their host nations. This indicates gaps in the law and international guidelines where criminal law is directly used to evaluate the corporate social responsibility of these corporations.

A clear example is the Bhopal case in India. This is regarded as the worst disaster in human rights violations, corporate social responsibility and international law. Close to 30 tons of a toxic gas was released, spreading all through the city in 1984 by Union Carbide plant which is an American organization in the city of Bhopal in India. Thus, it has been blamed to thousands of deaths and leaving many other individuals with wounds. The repercussions have been seen throughout the years in problems with disability, respiratory challenges and poor living conditions among the victims (Jamali and Mirshak 2007). The case has dragged on over the years despite happening before the Guideline Principles were enacted. The Indian government and local activist blame the corporation for the disaster while the corporation maintains it was a case of sabotage. Thus issues of satisfactory management of corporations and their alignment to local laws on human rights have emerged.

On a larger scale, multinationals now appreciate the need for administrative laws in relation to their business activities and social responsibility of these corporations. The importance of legal frame work that is both straightforward and well-working in undertaking their activities has been appreciated (Business for Social Responsibility, 2000). The Guiding Principles are positively a fundamental legal resource in the issues of international law with regards to human rights/ corporations and their host nations are working together to deal with the issues of violations of human rights. Also, the absence of enforcement of laws and the obvious case of governments dealing with their authoritative issues has proved to be a major setback.

These days, a few arrangements of the Constitution of the US and the UK are on a level plane material against corporations, for anticipating manhandling by business endeavors. Nonetheless, the level of blame required for an organization's social responsibility and human rights could simply be a carelessness standard. In contrast with that, the due persistence, a requirement in the Guiding Principle, is as also seen as an ambiguous idea. Assertively, it would be insufficient to settle corporates' misbehaviours. In addition due diligence on these issues like human rights  and corporate social responsibility could turn into a parameter for pulling in financial specialists and customers towards more capable substances of corporate managements.

2.5 Summary of literature review

 It has been established that CSR commonly insinuates the activities and corporations takes to roll out a couple of improvements to the general population paying little respect to the likelihood that the activities may not be essential or be done. All around, the CSR practices are not so much required by law or particularly helpful. Also, there are different factors related to corporate social duty including opportunity affirmation, around the world, government wants, social item pictures and supportability challenges. The literature also affirmed that human rights are important to the social, financial and natural sectors of corporate movement. Many multinationals have direct effects on human rights in critical ways. These effects have expanded over the years as the political and financial impacts of corporations have developed, and as enterprises have turned out to be more associated with offering foods and services that were beforehand given by governments.

Therefore, the information is relevant to the research objective and point at a research gap on the legal implications of CSR and human rights for multinational corporations in the UK, US and around the world.

 

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

Every research depends on the nature that the methodology used. Therefore, the design and procedures used are pivotal in coming up with accurate conclusions of the research. The methods used to collect data or their combined uses are clear factors in the success of the research (Saunders & Lewis 2012). Therefore, the researcher gets the chance to be on point when analyzing the strategies to be used. This is because it comes up with the main goal of the research and its findings.

3.2 Research Design

The design is the general strategy of the research from the preparation, data collection to analysis (Bryman and Bell, 2015). This research adopted a design design that depended on the strategy of research instruments from the point of planning to the study itself. This research was designed to use a qualitative design to collect data from several multinationals in the UK and the US on the effects of the law corporate social responsibility and human rights in multinationals. Thus, it is designed to use available secondary data to come up with conclusions as per Creswell (2014).

The fundamental research techniques mostly used in this kind of research are a blend of qualitative and quantitative designs.  According to Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2016), the two approaches can either be used or independently or together when relying upon the way the data was required. However, for this research, qualitative data was considered as the main research questions required thematic answers based on findings from secondary data sources. This research, being of a sociological nature, used qualitative research with a thematic analysis approach.

3.3 Data Collection Methods and Sampling

This research was structured to use secondary data from multinational corporations in The US and the UK. Five major corporations based in either country were identified for the study. The corporations were Google, Facebook, BP, McDonalds, Apple and Royal Dutch Shell. The data was mainly from company profiles on their corporate culture and human rights looking at their corporate social responsibility and human rights from a legal perspective. The data was then classified according to the research questions. Additional information was used form the literature review to compare with data collected from the firms.

More secondary data sources were selected up from web sources, magazines, newspaper articles, library sources, and business books that concentrated the current corporate culture, their corporate social responsibility and human rights from a legal perspective. Databases used for the survey were those that had information the current corporate culture and human rights in multinational.

3.4 Sources’ Selection Criteria

Relevant information to be used into the study was selected on its significance to the topic. Data that gave insights on the current corporate culture and human rights in multinational corporations by looking at their corporate social responsibility and human rights from a legal perspective was used. Nevertheless, unessential and unrelated information was rejected.

3.5 Data Analysis Methods

As the data was from different sources and mainly qualitative, a meta-analysis was required. The data from different information sources was combined under themes, from the objectives, and presented in analysis in graphs [based on similarity] and charts. The data analyzed using statistical measures like medians, means and modes. Triangulation was useful in comparing data from the other sources with data from the company websites and databases.

 

 

CHAPTER 4 DATA ANALYSIS, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Introduction

Data analysis was done according to the research questions. Tis section provides the results from data analysis and is presented in charts, tables, graphs and other figures. The results are then discussed according to the information from the literature review in each section.

4.2 Thematic analysis

 

4.2.1 Law and Human Rights in Multinational Corporations

 

From the company databases, it was discovered that human rights make about 10 percept of the main reasons the five multinationals have CSR activities. This presents the importance of human rights on the social responsibility of any firm.

 

 

 

Figure 4- 1 Reason for CSR in Firms

Corporate law in the nations specified by the above company data better backings a meaning of CSR in a way lined up with stakeholder theory. From this point of view CSR is on a very basic level about business considering themselves responsible for their effect on individuals and the planet. It is a far reaching approach that a company takes to meet or surpass stakeholder desires past proportions of income, benefit, and legal commitments. While mainland European corporate law's inclination for stakeholder theory keeps on moulding the scholastic talk about CSR, securities for investors have relentlessly expanded in the some time ago institutionalism‐oriented corporate law frameworks of the UK.

 

Corporate Social Responsibility and Human Rights in Multinational Corporations: A Legal Perspective