Thomas Johannes Dalsant

Corporate Social Responsibility and

Philanthropy in the European Outdoor Industry:

An Investigation of Different Outdoor Brands

and their Perceptions

A dissertation submitted to the School of International Development

of the University of East Anglia in Part-fulfilment of the requirements

for the Degree of Master of Arts

January 2015

ii

Statement of Copyright: The author retains the copyright to this dissertation. This work

should not be published in part or in full without the prior written consent of the author.

Any references or quotations used for other personal or institutional research should be

fully cited. ©

Acknowledgment

I would like to thank my supervisor Dr. Maren Duvendack, who supported me during my

research and writing stage. Further, I thank my interviewees who were patient to answer

all of the research questions, and gave me important and insightful information on the

topic. Finally, big thank goes to all of my friends from university and home and my family,

who supported my research and helped me through this dissertation time.

iii

Table of Contents

List of Abbreviations ............................................................................................................. v

List of Figures ....................................................................................................................... v

Abstract ............................................................................................................................... vi

Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 CSR and the Outdoor Industry .............................................................................. 1

1.2 Outline ................................................................................................................... 3

Literature Review .......................................................................................................... 4

2.1 Conceptual Framework = Base Camp .................................................................. 4

2.2 Adapted Framework = Advanced Camp ............................................................... 6

2.3 CSR Definitions ..................................................................................................... 8

2.4 CSR in present times .......................................................................................... 10

2.5 CSR and Development ....................................................................................... 11

2.6 Corporate Philanthropy ....................................................................................... 12

2.7 NGOs and business ............................................................................................ 13

2.8 The role of Marketing .......................................................................................... 14

Methodology ............................................................................................................... 16

3.1 Collection of Data ................................................................................................ 16

3.2 Analysis of Data .................................................................................................. 17

3.3 Ethical Clearance ................................................................................................ 17

Discussion and Analysis ............................................................................................. 18

4.1 CSR approach ..................................................................................................... 18

4.2 Trend ................................................................................................................... 19

4.2.1 A general trend............................................................................................. 20

4.2.2 Do what is desired by global stakeholders and benefits your company ..... 21

4.2.3 Evaluation .................................................................................................... 22

4.2.4 The role of marketing ................................................................................... 23

4.2.5 NGO’s ........................................................................................................... 24

Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 25

iv

References.................................................................................................................. 27

Appendix ..................................................................................................................... 35

7.1 Interview Guideline/Questions ............................................................................ 35

7.2 Ethical Clearance ................................................................................................ 36

7.3 Consent Form ...................................................................................................... 47

v

List of Abbreviations

CRM – Cause Related Marketing

CSR – Corporate Social Responsibility

CP – Corporate Philanthropy

DBA – Director of Business Association

SP – Strategic Philanthropy

PFC – Per fluorinated Compounds

List of Figures

Figure 1: Pyramid of Global Corporate Social Responsibility and Performance (Source:

Carroll, 2004) ....................................................................................................................... 5

Figure 2: Adapted Framework (adapted from Carroll, 2004) .............................................. 7

Figure 3: CSR learning stages (Source: Zadek, et al., 2009: Exhibit 3) ............................. 9

Figure 4: Source: (McBreen, 2004, cited in Kramer & Kani, 2006) .................................. 15

vi

Abstract

This dissertation examines broadly two main topics: Corporate Social Responsibility

(CSR) and the Outdoor Industry in Europe. This paper takes the work of Carroll (1979,

1991, 2004; Carroll & Buchholtz, 1999; Carroll, et al., 2003; Carroll & Shaban, 2010) and

his pyramid of CSR. Adapting it to the newest challenges in the business world,

especially focusing on the Outdoor Industry in Europe. An industry of increasingly

importance and growing profits, in which CSR plays a crucial role because of the clear

link to nature and the pressure made by big NGO’s. Further attention will be given to

Corporate Philanthropy (CP), and if there is a rising trend in supporting CP projects. A

strategic alignment of CP in the Outdoor Industry will be investigated more deeply,

focusing on the main drivers of marketing and competition within the sector. These two

drivers have brought companies towards rethinking their approach towards CP and

communication, engaging more in marketing these projects. The problem therefore is

that the focus shifts from the product to the project, taking the attention away from the

real issues and engagements in the supply chain. The interviewed CSR managers

seemed to be aware of these issues and that the focus should be on legal and ethical

responsibilities of companies, and not on philanthropic drivers. However, the industry is

growing and diverse players are entering, this augments the possibility of players that

see CSR more as a marketing instrument and hereby CP as an easy way to create a

good reputation. In this light also the role of NGO’s will be investigated, as project

partners that have full responsibility over the projects, evaluation and gives credibility to

brands.

1

Introduction

"For the end consumer it is easier to understand if we build a school as if we solve chemical issues

in the supply chain… and you don’t want to communicate these issues too loud " (CRSM 2014)

This quote reflects the polarized and maybe extreme view of the topic that this paper is covering.

Namely the Outdoor Industry and its engagement in CSR and corporate philanthropic projects in

developing countries. Both topics, CSR and the Outdoor Industry, have actually one crucial

characteristic in common; both of them experience an important boom of popularity in the last year,

this caused also an increase in the complexity of the topic and making this dissertation of exceptional

relevance to the CSR landscape today. This dissertation aims to address the growing relationship

between the outdoor industry and corporate philanthropy, and therefore contribute to the sparse

literature on this growing topic.

1.1 CSR and the Outdoor Industry

CSR is widely used both in the academic circle as in the hard practical world of business. Some

consider it as the solution for much of our problems on the planet: from poverty to climate change

(Van Marrewijk, 2003). A recent study of McLean and Jhanji, (McLean & Jhanji, 2014) partly organized

through the Global Compact, of over 30.000 consumers, showed that: 85% of respondents think that

the business world is responsible for enhancing their quality of life. Just one percent less as they give

to the government. Companies should lead in tackling social and environmental issues on our planet.

These expectations are even higher in developing and emerging countries, such as Nigeria (where

the expectation is over 95%), Brazil and India (McLean & Jhanji, 2014). These expectations become

crucial for companies if we consider that more and more companies, also in the Outdoor sector, are

moving towards these new markets (Jing & Chang, 2013; Van Cranenburgh & Arenas, 2014).

The Outdoor Industry itself has experienced a steady and sustained growth rate. In the USA, one of

the most important Outdoor markets worldwide, the growth of the industry was around 5%, from 2005

to 2011, in a time where many other sectors struggled (OIA, 2013). Some companies had even higher

rates, such as VF Corp that had a revenue increase of 8,5% due to the growth one of the biggest

players in the Outdoor field, The North Face, that is part of their group (Prior, 2014). Similar patterns

are also visible in the European market, with a growth rate of around 3% (EOG, 2013). Such markets

are not left alone and competition and acquisition are rising. Middle-sized and family owned

companies still characterized the European market 2 decades ago; but this characteristic is steadily

2

changing. At the same time, players that were not concerned with outdoor sports at the beginning are

starting to invest, because of the revenue possibilities. The Japanese shoe brand Asics bought the

Swedish company Haglöfs to expand their sales worldwide (Reuters, 2010). The Adidas Group,

already trying since a decade to enter into the Outdoor sectors, bought 2011 the popular US shoe

brand “Five Ten”, famous for its climbing shoes (adidasAG, 2011). The French Lafuma Group is

similarly expanding, since they bought the brands Millet and Eider (Tricoire, 2008).But probably one

of the most famous cases was the German brand Jack Wolfskin, formerly hold by Quadriga Capital

and Barclays Private Equity, was sold to the US investment company Blackstone. The acquisition

should bring Jack Wolfskin new capital for expansion in the growing Outdoor market (Blacktsone,

2011).

This increasing competition and trend of acquisitions, stands on the side with a rising engagement of

the industry on CSR topics. The Outdoor Industry is already, by definition of its on clientele, linked to

topics concerning nature and the environment. Therefore also more vulnerable for allegations and

attacks by NGO’s. Probably the biggest campaign was Greenpeace Detox, including the special

campaign on Outdoor brands, “Chemistry for any weather” (Greenpeace, 2013). Also on the social,

side the Industry got pressure (Amann, 2010; Hinzmann, et al., 2012). These campaigns were one of

the reasons why the Industry became more aware of problems and focused on issues of CSR. The

topic brought the companies together and increased cooperation (OIA, 2014). Similar happened in

Europe through the European Outdoor Group, enhancing the cooperation within the industry and with

different NGOs (EOG, 2014)

To summarize, there is an international trend towards more CSR and the pressure on business to

solve global issues is rising consistently. The Outdoor Industry, experiencing sustained and high grow

rate in the last decade, is also facing these issues. Increasing competition within the industry and

pressure from external stakeholder is making CSR an important topic. All of the interviewed CSR

mangers confirm this fact; social and environmental issues have become crucial factor in the industry.

Within this field, I will look on the CP as part of CSR, but above all because of the tendency in the

business world to go towards a strategic philanthropy (SP) (Porter & Kramer, 2002). For development

studies, this trend is important because the main production sites and future markets for the Outdoor

Industry are in developing or emerging countries (OutDoor, 2013).

Geographically, this research will focus on several European Outdoor Brands. Historically

philanthropy has played a different role in the Anglo-American background and in Europe (Gautier &

Pache, 2013). In Europe, philanthropic giving was less important because the state had historically a

broader legal framework and social net. Income taxes in Europe are also higher and provide normally

the financial foundation for higher education for example (Crane & Matten, 2004).

3

1.2 Outline

The aim of this paper is, firstly to look at CSR as a complex concept, and secondly how the Outdoor

Industry perceives it. The framework I will use comes from the important work of A. Carroll, probable

one of the most important theorist in the CSR field (Blowfield & Murray, 2011). Taking a narrower look

to corporate philanthropic (CP) projects funded by the industry in developing and emerging countries.

These countries play a major role when talking about CSR, and CP, in the Outdoor Industry, because

they are the major production countries and constitute future markets (Hinzmann, et al., 2012).

Consequently the question if CP is becoming more strategic, and if links to the core business arise.

Another central point will be to what factors we can relate this rising trend to, considering above all:

CSR in general, marketing, and competition within the industry. These three factors are not mutually

excluding each other, but interconnected. When talking about Outdoor Industry, I do consider actually

Outdoor Brands that produce apparel and/or equipment for the Outdoor sector as their main economic

activity. Some of them have also a direct retail system but their major role is to design and produce

products. I do not include Outdoor travel agencies or Outdoor retailers. This definition and

differentiation is in line with how the European Outdoor Group selects its members (EOG, 2014).

This paper will contribute to the rising literature of CSR by adapting the pyramid of CSR by Carroll

(1991) and add some recent development to it. It will investigate CSR from an Outdoor Industry point

of view, and therefore add some industry specific insights. Furthermore, there is almost no research

on this rising sector. Corporate Philanthropy has been widely discussed in the literature but mostly

only in the Anglo-American background (Gautier & Pache, 2013). This paper will contribute to the

literature by giving an inside from a European perspective. Additionally in exanimating how the

Outdoor Industry is changing its approach to CP to make it strategic.

The research is based on the following questions.

1) What is the definition of CSR used in the Outdoor Industry? Investigating more in detail if also

CP is included and how.

2) This dissertation will also address the crucial question of whether philanthropic giving is getting

more strategic, examining above all the criteria for choosing the project itself, partner and the

location. The extent to which Outdoor brands actually know about the impact that they have

will also be an important element.

3) Thirdly, is there actually a trend under Outdoor Brands to engage more in such projects?

Considering more specifically what role does the overall CSR trend play and how important

are marketing and competition within the industry.

The paper is structured in different chapters. The first chapter was the introduction that gave a brief

outline of the main topics and the research purpose. Chapter two will be a general literature review,

4

giving an overview of the conceptual framework of the paper, and the existing literature on: the

definition of CSR, CSR and development, NGO’s and business, and finally the role of marketing. The

next chapter will describe the methodology used during the primary research. Analysis and Discussion

will be the main chapter, analysing the primary data and relating it to the existing theories and

concepts. The main arguments of a growing trend in CSR and strategic CP will be described and the

main drivers. The last chapter will be the Conclusion, in which I will summarize my findings and

highlight key points for future research.

Literature Review

In this chapter, I will analyse the existing literature concerning the different research issues. Starting

with outlining the conceptual framework that underpins my research, based on the CSR pyramid by

A. Carroll (1991). Further, I will highlight the academic literature related to the different main

arguments of my research. This is crucial to get an overview of the different scientific basic

surrounding the different issues.

2.1 Conceptual Framework = Base Camp

The conceptual framework that guided this research is based on the definition of CSR that A. Carroll

made during his research. It is considered as foundation and starting point when discussing the topic.

Therefore, it will be called, coming from a mountaineering and Outdoor tradition, “Base Camp”. As

the stage where you build up your fundament for every further exploration and strengthen your

knowledge about the local environment before going to higher points to the “Advanced Camp”.

Carroll was the first to coin the term CSR in 1979 and that defined the different responsibilities that

CSR covers (Carroll, 1979; Blowfield & Murray, 2011). Concerns about business ethics and socially

responsible companies are nothing new, and nor is the discourse surrounding it. Since the mid-19th

century, academics were writing about why and what the responsibilities of companies are. Above all,

American companies were most engaged in philanthropic giving. In 1979, Carroll published its paper

“A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance” where he defined the four

responsibilities of companies: economic, legal, ethical and discretional responsibilities (Carroll, 1979).

He has redesigned this framework two times in 1991 and 2004, to adapt to the new challenges of

business in a globalized word (Carroll, 1991, 2004 ) (See figure 1).

5

Figure 1: Pyramid of Global Corporate Social Responsibility and Performance (Source: Carroll, 2004)

The groundwork of the CSR pyramid is the economics responsibility of every company. By producing

goods or services for a society and selling them to a fair price, the society recognises the value of the

product or service (Carroll, 1979, 1991). The problem is than in a globalized world, companies are

working in multiple societies and therefore have to pay attention to what is the price that they can ask

from the consumers (Carroll, 2004). The goal of every business here is to make profit for future growth

and remunerate their shareholders (Carroll & Buchholtz, 1999). Legal responsibilities include the duty

of the business to respect the law under which they operate, because society gave them the possibility

to be productive (Carroll & Buchholtz, 1999). This does not count only for the home country of the

business, but for every country where a company operates. Becoming even more important in

countries where legal enforcement is not that strong, as in China for example (Carroll, 2004). The

ethical responsibilities are present in all activities or practices that stakeholders expect from the

company, in home and host countries. Marketing plays a crucial role in this part, because if companies

do not respect the stakeholder’s expectations, they will have lost their reputation (Carroll, 2004).

“As long as publications such as Multinational Monitor publish their annual lists of the “ten worst

corporations” in global business, executives will find justifiable and practical reasons to care about

ethics” (Carroll, 2004, p. 117)

6

In a globalized business world, it is important to recognize ethical standards throughout all business

activities. This implies practicing a moral universalism, because stakeholders in developing countries

often are not protected by strong ethical norms. The highest point of the pyramid are the philanthropic

responsibilities. Including all activities that are purely voluntary or discretionary. In the early version

Carrol argued still that these action were not expected by the society, but then changed this in his

later work, by adding that nowadays corporations are expected to be a good citizen and to engage in

that field (Carroll, 1979, 2004).

As Carrol himself adds, “No metaphor is perfect, and the Global Pyramid of CSR is no exception”

(Carroll, 2004, p. 117). One major criticism is that his research was mainly focused on US corporations

that historically have a different perception of business ethics as their international counterparts

(Crane & Matten, 2008). The four responsibilities of Carroll are interconnected differently in diverse

countries and continents. For example, philanthropic activities are not popular in Europe, because the

legal framework is already stronger and income taxes significantly higher (Crane & Matten, 2004).

The African background however is the reverse, and here philanthropy plays a crucial role for every

corporation operating, for example investing in education or health system (Visser, 2006).

2.2 Adapted Framework = Advanced Camp

This section describes how the CSR framework can be adapted to reflect current research by Carroll

and other contributors to the role of CP. This stage is called Advanced Camp, exploring the CSR

pyramid more deeply starting from the knowledge built up in the Base Camp section

Recent research by A. Carroll himself and other authors have shown that there have been essential

changes in the business perception of CSR. The change of CP towards a strategic approach, the role

of marketing and the role of NGOs in that field. Already in 2003, A. Carroll collaborated on an article

about the strategic approach towards philanthropy; “Philanthropy as Strategy When Corporate Charity

“Begins at Home” (Carroll, et al., 2003) and later added to this theme in his 2010 paper “The Business

Case for Corporate Social Responsibility: A Review of Concepts, Research and Practice” (Carroll &

Shaban, 2010).

“Strategic philanthropy, giving of corporate resources to address non business community issues

that also benefit the firm’s strategic position and, ultimately, its bottom line, has been conceptualized

as being at the opposite end of the corporate philanthropy continuum from altruism, which is giving

without concern for reward.” (Carroll, et al., 2003, p. 170)

Coming back to our pyramid, this expands our definition of CP to a strategic one. The approach is

now to “do what is desired by global stakeholders and benefits your company”, having developed

7

from the original, altruistic version of “Do what is desired by global stakeholders”. The strategic

approach benefits therefore not only the designated project by enhancing efficiency and increasing

entrepreneurship, but also the company (Carroll & Shaban, 2010). As Porter and Kramer argue, SP

can enhance the competitive advantage of companies (Porter & Kramer, 2002). Through enhancing

their marketing possibilities and improve the relationship with governmental and non-governmental

organisations. Therefore, CP can be used in a strategic way to increase corporate interests (Carroll

& Shaban, 2010).

Consequently, Carroll & Shaban (2010) redefine the pyramid, and move beyond the previous

orientation around economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic responsibilities. Of course, once, it were

these four responsibilities that formed the traditional CSR (Carroll & Shaban, 2010) but it is now clear

that we move towards a new “essence of CSR” of ethical and philanthropic CSR. (See figure 2)

Marketing is a particularly relevant element of CP , as many researchers claim, advancing the image

of a brand or managing reputation risk has always been one of the most fundamental drivers behind

CSR (Newell & Frynas, 2007; Zadek, et al., 2009; Carroll & Shaban, 2010; Hawkin, 2012).

Figure 2: Adapted Framework (adapted from Carroll, 2004)

8

Furthermore, I will also introduce the player of NGOs into the concept. They are of growing importance

in the field as either informal regulatory bodies or cooperation partners (Jamali & Keshishian, 2009).

Further, they guarantee evaluation of the projects and give credibility both to brands and causes

(Blowfield & Dolan, 2014).

2.3 CSR Definitions

Within the last 30 years, companies started to offshore and outsource, detaching them from their

production and suppliers, working in a so-called vertically integrated value chain (Porter & Kramer,

2011). This trend enforced the CSR movement, because increasing control of activities was

necessary to avoid economic risk. Nowadays almost every multinational company has a system in

place to monitor their social and environmental impact in the value chain (Blowfield, 2007). The

problem is that, even today, there is no clear definition of what CSR involves and what not. It can be

different things in different backgrounds, reflecting its social nature (Campbell, 2007; van der Voort,

et al., 2009). From a historical point of view, CSR is just the latest appearance of the debate about

business ethics. As an additional consideration, we have also a geographic discrepancy. Some

countries have a system where business is socially responsible, but do not call it CSR. Such as in

Japan, where social obligations towards employees and the society are deeply rooted in the business

society, but not called CSR (Blowfield & Frynas, 2005). Similar patterns are visible also in India, Latin

America or China; countries do have historically different focus points, such as health, education or

environmental issues (Zadek, et al., 2009).

A widely used approach, considering also the historical perception, divides CSR in 3 approaches;

shareholder, stakeholder and social (van Marrewijk, 2003). The shareholder approach, or also

neoclassic view, is characterized by Milton Friedman, who argues that the only social responsibility

that companies have is to make profit, as long as they stay in boundaries of free competition and no

deception (Friedman, 1970). Profit maximization for the shareholders is the core point of business

and not creating benefits for society or community (van Marrewijk, 2003). Therefore, activities such

as reputation management or employee recruitment through social engagement are all valid profit

maximizations, and should not be named socially responsible at all (Friedman, 1970). Another path

takes the stakeholder approach, which uses not shareholders as the ultimate goal, but the different

stakeholder groups that companies affect with their operations. The most important scholar was R. E.

Freeman with his book “Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach” in 1984 (Freeman, 1984).

During the 1960’s and 1970’s another approach started to develop, with a focus on social issues

without combining them directly to business and profit. Companies such as Patagonia, Body Shop or

Ben and Jerry became the symbol of this second wave of CSR, or also societal approach. (van

Marrewijk, 2003; Vogel, 2005). CSR is hereby perceived as something new, that goes beyond CP,

recognizing that companies have a responsibility to avoid harming the environment and taking care

9

of social issues. Based on the stakeholder approach, it takes a broader framework, including all

societies that affected by business actions (Crane & Matten, 2004).

Another approach to consider is the view of companies and above all their reputation management.

Generally, we can divide between two paths that companies try to take: a defensive and offensive

(Kramer & Kani, 2006).

The defensive approach can be seen in a Friedmantian tradition of not considering the issues on

social or environmental side and using only instrumental justifications (Blowfield, 2012). A famous

example hereby is the case of Nike being attacked by newspapers and consumers for the poor

working condition of an Indonesian supplier; their reaction was purely defensive: the supplier is an

external company and not under their control or responsibility (Kramer & Kani, 2006). Nevertheless,

consumer boycott and criticism did not stop. Nike had to change their ways, and start to engage more

actively with suppliers in environmental and social issues (ibid.)

Companies may also adopt an offensive approach (Kramer & Kani, 2006). Simon Zadek, a leading

adviser and scholar in the field of sustainability and CSR, has evolved this bipartite partition in a five-

stage classification (See figure 3).

Figure 3: CSR learning stages (Source: Zadek, et al., 2009: Exhibit 3)

10

Defining the first stage as the defensive stage, in which companies defend attacks on their reputation

that could affect their profit, such as the previous case of Nike or the energy sector that denied its

responsibility for climate change (Zadek, et al., 2009). The next stages, developing in some ways a

more offensive approach, are the path that companies take often towards a strategic and civil

engagement. On this level, social issues are not seen as reputation or economic risk, but as an

opportunity to create a cooperation between companies (Zadek, et al., 2009).

The approaches advanced by Zadek et al. (2009), confirm the trend that is included in the Advanced

Camp. Ethical and philanthropic responsibilities are considered as most important to tackle and to

integrate into your core business.

2.4 CSR in Present Times

Still today CSR remains a vague concept and combined often with mere reputation management or

marketing (Lin-Hi, 2010; Porter & Kramer, 2011). Different approaches are included in the term of

CSR, stakeholder engagement, corporate citizenship, business ethics, triple bottom line or

stakeholder dialogue (van Marrewijk, 2003; Lin-Hi, 2010). CSR is conceived as something custom

made and adapted to the framework of the company (Vogel, 2005). The problem hereby is that every

company defines individually if concentrating on ethical issues on the supply chain or philanthropic

engagement. Creating cases in which, for example, there is a high voluntary engagement for

communities, but environmental and social issues in the supply chain are not considered (Campbell,

2007).

Porter and Kramer published in 2011 an article entitled “The Big Idea: Creating Shared Value”. They

argued that companies should create economic and social value with their behaviour. This way they

can create a unique competitive advantage that benefits both society and business. As for example,

Vodafone’s mobile banking system M-Pesa (Porter & Kramer, 2011). The concept of shared value

had high influence in the business world and companies such as Nestle, Coca-Cola, Intel, HP, Royal

Dutch Shell or Novartis were among the founders (SharedValueInitiative, 2014). Problematic is, that

those companies will only involve in topics that are relevant to enhance their competitive advantage,

and that they are constantly hold to account for their behaviour. Preventing them from engaging in

topics that are not efficient or profitable, but would benefit the poor (Blowfield & Dolan, 2014).

The confusion over CSR is still present nowadays. However, there is a clear trend towards combining

social engagement with the core business, to create “shared value”. Sustaining the adapted version

of the CSR pyramid, in which philanthropic engagement, is not only what the society desire but what

benefits also the society.

11

2.5 CSR and Development

Business is taking a crucial role in the development world, constituting the third player in the field,

besides the state and civil society (Banks & Hulme, 2014). The private sector is not only investing in

developing countries for new offers and market opportunities, but is also making philanthropic projects

that are often worth more than the incoming FDI of some poor countries (WEF, 2005). Being able to

operate more efficiently and investing huge amounts of money business is seen by DFID as “more

inclusive, equitable and poverty reducing” (cited in Jenkins, 2005). But not everything seems to be

that optimistic, a rising trend shows that many private led initiatives have missed their goals of

enhancing development (Edward & Tallontire, 2009).

Underlying the rising importance of the private sector is also the neoliberal trend, rooted in the politics

of the 1980’s and 1990’s, that has influenced organizations until nowadays. The state has withdrawn

its role in different sectors and left them to the private sector, which, it is hoped, should organize and

implement solutions in a better, more efficient way (Newell & Frynas, 2007; Frynas, 2008). The

problem herby is that politics are put out of important roles such as providing education and in general

the welfare system, undermining their ability to create democratic liability (Ferguson, 1994; Baur &

Schmitz, 2012). Additionally poor people are seen as entrepreneurs that haven’t realized their

possibilities yet, and that have to be activated. As the Shell Foundation argues, “…enterprise and

business DNA are keys to eradicating poverty and that a great deal more of both are needed…” (Shell,

2005, p. 12). On the other side many critics argue that common pro poor entrepreneur projects such

as micro credit or products for the poor do not have the impact that they have claimed, or do not tackle

chronic poverty (Banerjee & Duflo, 2011; Duvendack, et al., 2011). Business engagement under this

neoliberal frame has to be seen as critical because the state has still a crucial role in providing

resources and instutions, crucial for human development (Banks & Hulme, 2014).

In line with a more relational appraoch to povety, it is crucial to recognize that, business CSR activities

are rarely intended to tackle issues such as social exclusion or power inequalities. Women workers

and freedom of association have for example been overlooked by codes of condusts for most of the

time (Newell & Frynas, 2007). To start their developing efforts, General Electric, wanted to find a

environmentally and socially friendly situation, if not they would have not been sure if it works. Under

the business perspectives, you only start projects with a perspective of success and efficiency

(Kramer & Kani, 2006). But communites that don’t have already a good standard are left out of such

projects. This shows how companies work rather in a management approach instead of development,

in which factors such as efficency, investment and returns have a higher priority as empowerement,

social inclusion or equality (Utting, 2007).

12

In practice many researchers claim that there is still considerable gap between the claimed efforts

and the actual implementation, moreover we still know quite little about the impact of the actions that

are done (Ite, 2005). Code of conducts for example, argue to cover a wide range of issues. In reality

they made a considerable progress in workers safety, higher wages, and no child labour, but almost

neglected issues such as freedom of association (Vogel, 2005). Moreover companies begin to use

sub suppliers that are not audited and where labour standards are normally low (Utting, 2007).

In the lack of regulation, voluntary standards have evolved instead, to both lead companies in their

behaviour but also to give them more credibility (Zadek, et al., 2009). These standards are audited by

third party verification companies or NGOs, but the way of auditing differs. No or rarely unannounced

checks on the place, short assessment times and high levels of corruption and falsification of

documents occur (Blowfield, 2007; Newell & Frynas, 2007).

Undoubtedly has the business world made a step forwards in tackling issues in their supply chain,

through their CSR appraoch, even though there are still matters left out. The step forward, integrating

poor in the business world and considering business as the solution to global poverty, has to be seen

critical. Existing power relations in societies, social exclusion and chronic poverty are topics that are

not covered by such an approach (Utting, 2007)

2.6 Corporate Philanthropy

CP has an important role in CSR as described before. In this subchapter, I will explain more what

actually CP is, and the trend towards more strategic philanthropy (SP).

The problem with CP is similar with the one of CSR, there is no real definition, and academic literature

is lacking of a clear conceptual base (Gautier & Pache, 2013). Terms such as charity giving, corporate

citizenship, good citizen or community investment, are in the business context often linked to CP (Lin-

Hi, 2010). The most general description would be that philanthropic engagement does not expect any

direct return from their recipients, differentiating it from sponsorship in that way. The recipient is the

society in which companies are active with their operations (Gautier & Pache, 2013). One of the

drivers to engage in CP is improving the firm’s image and reputation. As often, being one of the first

visible elements of CSR engagement of companies is CP, contradicting already the altruistic definition

that companies do not expect any return from it (Lin-Hi, 2010). Exxon Mobil’s involvement in

distributing mosquito nets in Tanzania differentiates them from other companies that were not

engaging in such fields. They were not engaging because of altruistic reasons, but to create a

competitive advantage (Blowfield & Dolan, 2014). Similar patterns are seen in cause related

marketing, where buying a product is related directly to a donation towards a project; pushing the

loyalty of consumers towards brands (Gautier & Pache, 2013). Another study found that firms with a

13

poor environmental and social performance have higher spending on CP, trying to find legitimacy

through their philanthropic involvements (Chen, et al., 2008).

Actually, there is little or no knowledge about what is actually the impact of such engagement in

developing countries, as described in section 2.5 CSR and Development. Focusing above all on

infrastructural projects, such as health centres or schools, the deeper lying problems of power

relations on the grassroots level are often not touched (Mosse, 2010; Sharma & Mehta, 2012).

Summing up, there is a significant trend towards linking CP to the core business and making it

strategic. Therefore, CP is not an oxymoron anymore, giving money away altruistically without

expecting any gain, but has become a part of profit maximization, linked to the economic responsibility

of a company (Carroll & Shaban, 2010; Gautier & Pache, 2013). The term strategic philanthropy has

become more important after an article published by Porter and Kramer in 2002 (Porter & Kramer,

2002); CP should be seen as strategic tool to combine both the needs of the society and business.

For example investing in education is valuable for the society but also for business, to get a better-

educated workforce. This has nothing to do with marketing, value for business should be created

outside the PR machine, only then it is really strategic. In addition, a strict monitoring and evaluation

is important (Porter & Kramer, 2002). Selecting projects from which business can create value and

that are measurable has therefore become crucial. Topics that are not measurable and valuable for

companies, fall out of this pattern and are not concerned, for example community development or

chronic poverty (Ite, 2005). The strategic approach to philanthropy is seen as an important path for

business to solve different global poverty issues and enter in new markets (WBCSD, 2004).

2.7 NGOs and Business

At the beginning, NGOs emerged in combination with business above all as new regulator, taking the

vacuum left out by the state, as consequence of neoliberal policies or weak political system in general

(Brugmann & Prahalad, 2007). Nowadays cooperation between the two is increasing, where business

is seeking the knowledge and credibility from NGOs for their CSR activities and, at the same time,

NGOs are in need for new sources for funding and better accountability (Brugmann & Prahalad, 2007;

Baur & Schmitz, 2012).

In general, we are able to distinguish three stages of partnership. The first one is a simple

unidirectional collaboration, in which companies give NGOs funding for projects, little engagement

between the two partners and projects are not connected to the core business of the donor. This

cooperation is typical for an altruistic corporate philanthropy approach (Jamali & Keshishian, 2009).

The second stage, also called be-responsible or transactional stage, is characterized by a higher level

of engagement and investment in the cooperation (ibid.). Companies do not see NGOs as enemies

14

but partners to gain new knowledge and expertise to implement their CSR activities (Eid & Sabella,

2014). Vice versa, NGOs gain skills in business topics such as marketing. The professionalization of

philanthropic engagement is taking place, where projects are seen in a strategic way (Brugmann &

Prahalad, 2007). In the integrative and third stage, cooperation has a clear strategic significance for

both partners. Business is seeking out for new business models in new markets, above all developing

countries, where NGOs have already created a big network. NGOs themselves have to find new ways

to tackle poverty and have become important players on the global area (Jamali & Keshishian, 2009).

Credibility and legitimacy are factors that companies are seeking from the cooperation with NGOs,

because they are perceived as legitimate representatives of civil society issues, suppressed groups

and environmental issues (Curbach, 2008). Without a credible partner, companies could be claimed

to do greenwashing or harm the poor. It is therefore crucial to find authentic and credible NGO

partners (Blowfield & Dolan, 2014).

The cooperation becomes problematic when companies begin to shape the agendas of NGOs, away

from the grassroot needs of the poor towards more profitable and efficient issues that are more

appealing to companies. (Baur & Schmitz, 2012). Because of lack of funding, NGOs have to cooperate

with the rising CSR trend to guarantee their financial survival and guarantee higher level of awareness

in the public (Hawkin, 2012). For example, The Coca Cola Company has been criticized by a wide

range of organisations for exploiting the groundwater and polluting the environment in their Indian

factories. NGOs worldwide played a crucial role in investigating and spreading this information around

the globe. Coca Cola’s reaction was to find another NGO, the WWF, who was willing to create a

partnership, to regain credibility and legitimacy for their CSR project (Curbach, 2008). Shell behaved

in a similar way in Nigeria, by choosing an NGO partner who was more willing to cooperate and

comparatively less critical of the company (Baur & Schmitz, 2012).

The risk for NGOs to co-opt to business is there, but this does not mean that NGO’s have to become

puppets of the private sector. If they know about the risk of co-optation they can deal with it, and there

are several types of NGOs which all take several roles in challenging or cooperating with business,

or both together (Burchell & Cook, 2013). Further studies have shown that often companies are still

in the first stages of cooperation, where the risk of business shaping NGO agendas is low, because

of the low engagement (Jamali & Keshishian, 2009).

2.8 The Role of Marketing

Reputation management and therefore marketing played a crucial role in rise of CSR. The model

examples are Nike or Shell, who only started to engage in CSR because of the reputation risk and

damage that allegations have created (Vogel, 2005). With an increasing level of engagement in

15

CSR also the benefit for the image of the company increases, as Kramer and Kani point out in their

graphic(See figure 4) (Kramer & Kani, 2006).

CSR as a marketing tool covers the management of criticism towards the firm and changing the

perception towards “being a good company” (Newell & Frynas, 2007). Generally studies have

shown that engaging in social welfare and environmental issues, gives companies the possibility to

charge premium prices or increase the loyalty of consumers towards them (Walker & Kent, 2013)

That is where philanthropic engagement starts to play a strategic role in marketing (Gautier & Pache,

2013). SP is not nameless or hidden by the company, as altruistic engagement has often been, not

having any background, profitable purpose. However, the engagement is shared and linked to the

business core elements (Ponte & Richey, 2014). SP is intended among other as reputation

management tool (Kramer & Kani, 2006; Newell & Frynas, 2007; Sharma & Mehta, 2012). As a result,

CSR activities, and above all CP, have to be aligned with the core business of companies, to be

recognized and representable to their image and be used as marketing (Hawkin, 2012). In contrast

with Porter and Kramer (2002) who argued that, strategic philanthropy is only strategic, if companies

are also benefiting without marketing (Porter & Kramer, 2002).

A specific form of CSR used as marketing tool, is cause related marketing (CRM). By buying a

product, consumers automatically donate a certain amount of the price to a cause, mostly

Figure 4: Source: (McBreen, 2004, cited in Kramer & Kani, 2006)

16

environmental, social or animal welfare. The cause does not have to be linked to the product itself,

but can be anything (Ponte & Richey, 2014). Companies do link causes to their core business, to

make strategic decisions in their CP engagement, and to avoid that they are seen as exploiting the

cause, as for example fast food chains that sponsor health related issues (Hawkin, 2012).

Problematic are CRM because they separate the attention of the consumer from the product to

another cause. For example has the US brand TOMS build his business system around CRM: by

buying a pair of shoes, the company will distribute shoes to poor communities. The company benefits

as does the community where the shoes are distributed, is what the brand claims. However,

allegations have been publicized in which the company has been widely criticized for bad working

conditions, child labour and low wages in their production sites (Ponte & Richey, 2014).

The reputation of a brand is at the core of many businesses and part of economic responsibilities.

The risk is that more focus is given to CSR activities usable for marketing and therefore valuable for

companies, and not to initiatives that target affected suppliers and communities. Furthermore, the

focus of consumers is often shifted to issues away from the core CSR issues of a company. For

example a study of the most important 30 non-profit organisations working with CRM in the US

showed that water provision, disaster relief and health care are mostly used in CRM initiatives

(Hawkin, 2012). Not considering topics such as empowerment, social inclusion, production conditions

or chemical issues in the supply chain, that would be actually more important for societies directly

affected to the company.

Methodology

3.1 Collection of Data

The data for the primary research was collected through semi-structured interviews with nine

participants. Semi-structured interviews have been chosen as a method because they enable to

discover a social phenomenon more deeply as with other methods, such as surveys, and to achieve

insights in participants experience and opinions (Denscombe, 2010). Further, they are not as strict as

structured interviews, allowing participants to develop their ideas and talk more broadly about the

topic (ibid.). However, interviews are a human interaction and both the participant and the interviewee

collaborate in gathering the data. Therefore can the data derived no be seen as very neutral, but

influences by both (Holstein & Glassner, 2004). The interviews were made through meeting the

participant directly, through skype/telephone calls and in two cases in written form because it was not

possible otherwise.

17

For selecting the participants, a purposive sampling approach has been applied, with a homogenous

sample (Snape & Spencer, 2003). All of the participants have a leading position in CSR topics in the

company, being or CSR manager or in a similar position. Six CSR representatives were interviewed,

all of them employed in leading firms of the European Outdoor Industry, excluding the United

Kingdom. The companies range from small-family owned companies (under 100 employee) to

conglomerates that own more than five brands and have over 500 employees. These choices

guarantees a homogenous picture of the research topic. As already highlighted before, CP is

perceived very differently in diverse countries, above all in Anglo-Saxon countries, where

philanthropic engagement has a different historical role. Therefore, no company based in the United

Kingdom was included in the sample. (Crane & Matten, 2004, 2008).

To assure a high quality of the data a triangulation of observers was used. This guarantees a higher

accuracy of the data and offers a bigger picture of the topic (Denscombe, 2010). The focus of the

research was on Outdoor brands. For the purpose of triangulation interviews with an outdoor retailer,

an NGO and a business association have been made and compared to the gathered data of Outdoor

brands.

For the secondary data collection, academic search engines such as EBSCOHOST and Google

Scholar were used. Bibliographies of articles that were gathered in an initial stage were used to find

more detailed and further papers.

3.2 Analysis of Data

The analysis of the data followed a deductive approach, starting from a general conceptual framework

of Carroll’s (1979, 1991) CSR pyramid. The CSR Pyramid framework was adapted after the analysis

of the primary data, following a more inductive approach, generating a theory from the collected data.

However, it is not unusual in social research to use both of these concepts and move back and forward

from literature and data collection (Gibbs, 2007; Willi, 2007). The data derived from the interviews

were transcripted and coded until arriving to a general concept, related to the research question. The

language of the interviews were German or English. To cite the German interview, the author

translated parts of them to English.

3.3 Ethical Clearance

All participants are anonymous, neither the company names or in which country they are based is

named in the paper. If cited, they are named CSRM (CSR manager); even if some participants call

their positions slightly differently, to guarantee their anonymity. Only the director of a business

18

association is also cited in the text as DBA. The approved Ethical Clearance and consent form, given

to every participant, can be found in the Appendix.

Discussion and Analysis

This chapter will show the major findings of the primary research done for this paper. The interviews

concentrate first on the concept of CSR and how it is perceived by the interviewed manager, and

secondly on the rising importance of CP and if there is a possible trend in the Outdoor Industry. This

second subchapter is characterized above all by two major factors: competition/marketing and the

role of NGOs.

4.1 CSR Approach

This chapter will first describe how companies deal with the thematic around CSR, comparing it to the

advanced framework and existing literature on different approaches.

All of the interviewed companies had an approach in place to organize topics around CSR. In two

cases, they were not called directly CSR but rather Corporate Responsibility, however handling the

same issues as the other participants that called their approach CSR. “We have a CSR management,

fulltime, or CR management as we would call it, which handles topics around sustainability and social

aspect in the supply chain“(CSRM 2014). This confirms the theory that CSR as an approach is

becoming more important, though it is still lacking of a clear definition and structure in the business

world (Van Marrewijk, 2003). Every company has adapted the approach to their individual structure.

As CSR managers have in general a managerial role of overlooking and organizing topics surrounding

CSR, it depends highly on the company what exact tasks they have though. In some cases, they are

also responsible for chemical and safety issues, social issues on the production sites, or are

environmental officers.

Generally CSR covers topics of environmental, social and legal issues and is seen as a tool, as one

CSR manager said: “CSR is a tool - not just for marketing - but to meet national and international

regulations, guidelines and legislation - a tool to make us better - not just to sell more - really that

should be lower in the list of values of CSR - it’s a tool to be better” (CSRM 2014). Using the

conceptual framework, we see that the all four responsibilities are included in the concept of CSR.

Economic responsibility is important, as one manager said, “…we are a business and not an NGO…”

(CSRM 2014), because it constitutes the basic of every company. Legal responsibility also plays a

crucial role, as for example avoiding hazardous chemicals that are banned in Europe or social issues,

such as human rights, in the supply chain. Nevertheless, company’s engagement goes actually

19

beyond that, towards ethical issues such as guaranteeing not only standard wages, but also living

wages, less working hours or avoiding hazardous chemicals that are not banned, but could harm the

environment.

Donations to projects in the developing world, and donations in general, are conceived as part of CSR

by the participants, but not with a high priority. “Everything what is considered Corporate Citizenship,

therefore all the projects you are talking about, are a marginal phenomenon, and not priority of CSR”.

Interestingly they do not call their engagement philanthropy, but more as donations, social

responsibility or corporate citizenship. CP is generally linked specifically to a more Anglo-Saxon

background, which explains why it is not mentioned so heavily in the wider European framework.

“There are surely also cultural differences, for example in the USA, where donations have a higher

importance and less the work on the supply chain” (CSRM 2014). However, all of the companies have

some philanthropic engagements in developing countries and elsewhere.

To summarise, participants confirm the pyramid of Carroll (1991), with its four responsibilities (Carroll,

2004). Showing though that the essence of CSR is not, as perceived by Carroll, only ethical and

philanthropic issues but also legal (Carroll & Shaban, 2010). It is actually hard to tell from the data if

legal responsibility lies in the essence of CSR, as Carroll & Shaban (2010) would call it, or if it is

already ethical responsibility. In developing countries, Outdoor brands often go over state regulations,

with higher wages and less working hours, but work also on host and home country regulation, as

participants claim.

The stakeholder approach by Freeman or the later more societal approach, do actually fit also to the

CSR conception of the Outdoor Industry (Freeman, 1984; Vogel, 2005). The question hereby is more

whom they perceive as stakeholders, and if they extend it to all the societies, they effect, as in the

societal approach. Cooperation between brands and integrating it in into the core business values are

also part of CSR. “Sustainability is a central value of the company and integrated in almost every

business process” (CSRM 2014). This highlights that they are not using a defensive way of thinking

about CSR, but going towards a more strategic and civil approach, where cooperation and the use of

CSR as competitive advantage plays a crucial role; “there is a high level of cooperation the sector, for

example concerning down or PFC” (Zadek, et al., 2009, CSRM 2014 ;).

4.2 Trend

This chapter will tackle the main issues of this paper: if there is a trend in the Outdoor industry to

sponsor charity projects and what this trend can be related to. It will be divided in four parts: a general

trend towards CP, more specific tendency for SP, the role of marketing and competition, and the role

of NGOs.

20

4.2.1 A general trend

All participants did confirm a feeling that more and more companies are engaging in CP projects.

They did not have any statistical data. CSR in general has become important in the sector, and CP is

definitely also a part of it. This does confirm that their perception of CSR, even though individualized

for every company, does include CP. Even if some academics argue against the idea that CP should

be considered part of CSR, Outdoor companies are including it in their growing attention towards CSR

(Lin-Hi, 2010).

“The feeling that you have to do something for the common welfare is growing in the sector. It is a

fairly easy and basic step to enter into the CSR thematic, you just have to take some money and

support a project” (CSRM 2014). Here the problem is apparent, that if you enter with CP in the CSR

thematic and you focus just on that, without really tackling crucial issues that you are facing in your

supply chain. "First and easy step to enter into the CSR thematic is to do such projects, you don’t

have to change anything internally or on your products" (CSRM 2014) or as another manger argued

“ You cannot sponsor a project empowering mountain people and have child labour in your production

on the other side. That is a no go.”(CSRM 2014). For the CSR mangers interviewed, this is a crucial

part. You can engage in such projects very legitimately, but the major part of CSR is getting your legal

and ethical responsibilities right.

Above all, the work in your supply chain and changing your products is crucial. This is important,

otherwise the danger of a rising importance of CP is actually that the attention is distracted away from

the big problematic issues in the supply chain, towards just making projects that are easier to

communicate (Vogel, 2005; Utting, 2007; Sharma & Mehta, 2012)

An important consideration is that the sample chosen for the interview was actually quite small, and

managers have stated that there is variety of companies in the Outdoor Industry that act actually

differently. Of which some might use CP as communication for their CSR engagements, without really

being active in their core business and supply chain. “The company with the biggest budget, would

seem to be the best, but this doesn’t imply that they have actually changed something on their

products or on the core business” (CSRM 2014).

“In a sense, philanthropy is icing on the cake-or on the pyramid, using our metaphor” (Carroll, 1991 ,

p. 42). Such as Carroll argued in 1991 that CP should be actually only the top of all the work done for

CSR, it is actually also perceived by the CSR managers interviewed. “There are already many projects

that have been organized since years, such as waste removal in the Himalayas or Supporting

Sherpa’s, but they are getting more attention and are increasing” (CSRM 2014). Showing actually that

21

there is altruistic engagement in the industry, and has been there already since years. As one

manager said, she even does not know how many projects the president of her company has

operating; only the most important ones are really managed through the CSR manager.

Nevertheless, they see that there is also change in the approach to CP; it is becoming more

professional, strategic and aligned to the core business. Supporting also the change of Carroll’s

definition of the CSR pyramid, in emphasizing that ethical and philanthropic responsibilities are the

essence of CSR (Carroll & Shaban, 2010). This will be the topic of the next chapter, the tendency

towards a strategic CP.

Drivers for this trend are actually two: pressure/competition and marketing. Pressure is actually

created as more companies are active in such projects, "for sure, the more projects are and are

communicated, the more pressure is created in the industry" (CSRM 2014). Companies are trying to

get a competitive advantage when they communicate such projects more actively. This has changed

in the last 10 years, there is a considerable trend towards a more proactive communication “We have

been really reluctant to communicate, but we feel the pressure in the sector, and there is a possible

race to the top in communication” (CSRM 2014). The problem arises, if all of the companies engage,

than no one has a competitive advantage anymore, the so-called “Porter – Paradox” (Blowfield &

Dolan, 2014). The issue of the rising competition in the communication will be treated more in detail

in the next chapters.

4.2.2 Do what is desired by global stakeholders and benefits your company

This phrase, an adaption of Carroll’s (2004) definition of philanthropic responsibilities to include a

more strategic orientation, shows what strategic is in his heart. A win-win situation for both the

company and the society (Porter & Kramer, 2011). As shown in the advanced camp framework, there

is a trend towards a strategic approach towards philanthropy. Therefore, two points are crucial for SP,

a win-win situation and a good evaluation of the impact, otherwise you cannot be sure that your

company does take a benefit (Porter & Kramer, 2002).

During the interviews, it became clear that for the brands it is crucial that their engagement is clearly

linked to their core business. “A thematic link to the core business is crucial, it would not make any

sense to make other projects, that would not be comprehensible for our stakeholders, further we don’t

have any competences in other sectors” (CSRM 2014). This seems to be a first step towards a

strategic approach; because all of them accept that projects have to be close to the core business on

one side and that the first benefit for companies, doing such project is an image benefit. “The benefits

can be diverse, but above all image; it would be an illusion if a company would engage totally without

thinking of the communication possibilities that arise”(CSRM 2014). Companies do not engage very

22

altruistically but they do take a benefit out of their engagement, even though there is a considerable

difference in the level of communication, between the companies.

The link to the core business is created in choosing the right type of project and location. In general,

all projects are in some way linked to the nature and the outdoors. “The outdoors is what we are about

- at a personal level for most in the industry and as our market - Emotions - people love dolphins -

Practicality/self-interest ; I need a path in my mountains -but: The conservation and protection of the

Outdoors is no 1” (CSRM 2014). Secondly projects concerning education of worker in the production

sites, or of alpine guides in different mountain regions. These projects have a link to the core business

and are supported by the industry. This creates a win-win situation for companies because they can

use the connection clearly for their communication. It is important for companies to choose projects

that can be linked to the company; otherwise the danger of being seen as “cause exploitive” is high”

(Hawkin, 2012). Interestingly one participant goes even further in her description of what topics are

actually interesting for the industry; “the nature: because our consumer love nature and we depend

of it, without nature our company would not exist” (CSRM 2014).

4.2.3 Evaluation

Another crucial characteristic of a strategic approach to CP is a strong evaluation and monitoring, as

Porter and Kramer argue in their paper (Brugmann & Prahalad, 2007; Porter & Kramer, 2011). In

general, though evaluation plays a minor role for companies, they do receive annual reports for major

projects, and some of them have maybe had an employee at the project location, but there is no

systematic evaluation in place. First, because they do not see it in their competences and they do not

have the budget for it. That is why they actually trust to the partners to do the evaluation. A participant

answered on the question if they have any direct evaluation: “I know some of our competitors do that,

that is great, but we can’t and don’t want to spend our resources there.” (CSRM 2014). That reflects

also the picture that literature gives generally about CSR activities of companies in developing

countries. The knowledge of what actually happens in the field, is rarely assessed by companies

directly or even in a more structured way (Ite, 2005). The evaluation is left in the hands of NGOs in

whom they trust. The fact is that companies see their role not as development agent, but as a sponsor

for projects to enhance the common welfare, as the director of a business association said, “The

companies don’t see their engagement in the light of an development agent or political work, to

produce in Vietnam, or to engage actively in Vietnam, is something different” (DBA 2014). The

Outdoor industry does not feel like having such a big role and importance as big companies, such as

Adidas or H&M, which are active in bigger field (TheGuardian, 2014). “We don’t think we are big

enough to be active politically, there are other brands that are active, such as Adidas or H&M” (CSRM

2014). Even though they might have a variety of impacts with their projects in developing countries,

as described in the “CSR and development” chapter the awareness is not as developed, or not

23

recognised to lie in their hands. As one CSR manager said "It doesn’t matter what is the reason behind

the projects, the nature or the people do benefit anyway”, the question that arises, though is if

companies can guarantee that people and nature benefit, if evaluation is left more or less totally to

NGOs? (CSRM 2014). As for example the case of the extractive industry shows, where a culture of

dependency on CP giving was created partly, companies such as Shell, Exxon or Total invest over

100 million dollars in education or health projects, where the donations though are considered a

compensation to the environmental damage that they create (Ite, 2005; Frynas, 2008). This damage

may include creating inequality, fragmentation, social and economic insecurity, as highlighted for

example by the case of the mining industry in Papa New Guinea (Banks & Gliberthorpe, 2012)

The outdoor industry itself though, is quite diverse and already in the sample of six CSR manager, a

variety of approaches was represented. Companies that had only one or two projects, with high and

direct level of evaluation, companies with around 5 projects, and others with many projects, of which

some specific projects are followed more in depth by the CSR manager. In summarizing though, we

can say that also the Outdoor Industry is going towards a strategic approach, as CP is not merely

altruistic anymore but plays a clear image benefit for the brand. This is in line with the advanced

framework, marketing and competition are pushing CP away from its altruistic origin, and economic

concerns are actually playing a significant role in philanthropic engagement. How the market card is

played depends highly on the company, even though there is a trend to use more openly, and is

discussed in the next section more deeply.

4.2.4 The role of marketing

As described in the chapter above, marketing or communication does play a crucial role in CP and

above all in making philanthropic engagement valuable for companies. “It would be an illusion if

companies would engage without having any marketing or communication purpose” (CSRM 2014).

There is also a considerable literature that shows that reputation management and communication

plays a crucial role in changing from a defensive way of approaching CSR to a more active outlook,

and especially the important role of CP (Kramer & Kani, 2006; Newell & Frynas, 2007; Ponte & Richey,

2014). This is also shown in the advanced camp framework with the move towards a strategic

philanthropy.

As it became clear throughout the interview, it is easier for companies to communicate CP

engagement as activities in their supply chain, or core business. “The end consumer understands

better if we build a (omitted charity project of the company), as issues in the supply chain. Already

99.99% of them are out of it if you communicate these issues, they are too complicated and you need

some expertise. Further there is the danger to get into a huge mess.” (CSRM 2014). “To communicate

to the consumer that we don’t use any C8 (hazardous fluorocarbon chemical: comment by author)

24

anymore, is not as easy. But projects such as (charity project of the company) are positive and are

more suitable for marketing” (CSRM 2014). The perception of the majority of the CSR managers is

that for communication, CP issues are better and easier to use if they fit to your brand and sustain

your image. The only problem is that such projects do actually shift the attention from the core task

and problems of CSR, the product and supply chain, towards issues away from it, that have nothing

to do with the main activities of the business (Hawkin, 2012; Ponte & Richey, 2014). In general it

doesn’t fit to the image of brand to use for example less hazardous chemicals in their supply chain,

admitting to have used hazardous chemicals before, this is what one CSR managers described “as

getting into a huge mess”.

As mentioned before, the Outdoor Industry is also diverse and different players are trying to push the

communication forwards concerning their core activity issues. CSR managers have to tackle different

issues concerning their internal management structure, who stop them to communicate different

issues. “When I started I wanted to bring up CSR and new ideas and use in low profile internal and

then external communication. But our owner said no: We are all environmental pigs – let’s be better

and then we can talk…we have been 'hampered' from playing this card because our leadership felt

much of what others doing is green-whitewashing” (CSRM 2014). Often companies had a kind of “do

well but do not talk about it” strategy, concerning both CSR and CP topics, to avoid getting into the

greenwashing problematic. However, they are increasingly facing pressure because more and more

companies are actually pushing their CSR communication: “The end consumer has the feeling that

we are totally inactive on CSR issues, therefore is the way of not communicating CSR issues neither

the right” (CSRM 2014). The danger is actually that engaging too much in CSR communication you

move into greenwashing.

Nevertheless, on the other hand it is actually also a form of greenwashing to not communicate issues

of your core activity and use CP to move away the attention from your product, even if not done

intentionally. “Engaging and communicating CP goes into the direction of greenwashing. The

consumer and NGOs are not stupid, if you just communicate these issues and do not move forwards

to your business processes and products, you are not credible anymore.” (CSRM 2014). Companies

have to realize that if they communicate only SP issues they are not credible anymore in the long-

term; all parts of CSR economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic responsibilities have to be a part of

the communication, as one interview said. “The foundation of CSR is transparency, and do not

communicate would be totally wrong” (CSRM 2014).

4.2.5 NGO’s

Another player in this field are actually NGOs. Their role in the framework of CSR are clearly two:

evaluation and credibility. None of the interviewed companies are actually, directly themselves

25

conducting projects in another country; this is not in their competence and know how. They rely on

the expertise of NGOs in that field, to organize and evaluate the projects. Evaluation was described

in the chapter above; here we concentrate on the credibility part.

Companies choose their partner not through a structured or formal system, but through an informal

and reputation based system. “We had a good feeling of the people, this happens in an informal way”

(CSRM 2014). Partners are mainly chosen by the credibility that they have and that they can give to

the project. This reflects that the cooperation of the private sector and NGOs is still at a low level of

unidirectional or transactional stage (Jamali & Keshishian, 2009) where the partnership is more

focused on a low level of expertise exchange and trust on NGOs. “We don’t have a formalized process

for CSR projects in place, because we don’t have actually many partners” (CSRM 2014). The

cooperation with NGOs is actually crucial to give credibility to their engagement “We do have to work

with organisations; organizing projects by our self would not have much sense, because they give the

projects credibility” (CSRM 2014). Companies have to be sure that their engagement is credible, and

that can be done in working with reliable partners. Above all, in marketing thinking, credibility plays a

major and important role (Blowfield & Dolan, 2014).

Brands are also realizing that projects are increasingly of importance and a process of

professionalization of the sector takes place (Brugmann & Prahalad, 2007). “Not every projects works

from the beginning on, you have to control it strictly, but now we are on a good point and can advance

it yourself. Before there was a small organisation, but it didn’t work, so we build our own with a new

partner” (CSRM 2014). Still the risk on co-optation is low. The CP engagement of the outdoor industry

is still only a small part of their CSR engagement, compared to other industries such as the mining or

oil, where community development and CP does play a crucial role. Furthermore, outdoor brands

often work with local NGO’s of their region or with projects where they are just one of many

contributors. “Our budget is not as big to create our own project. The money goes in one pot of many

contributors that finance that project” (CSRM 2014).

Conclusion

In conclusion, we can say that CSR is of a rising importance in the Outdoor Industry. Interestingly

CSR as a concept is perceived as the principle approach to philanthropic, ethical and legal

engagements. Not forgetting that the economic responsibilities do underlie all of them and are

important. The study did not confirm Carroll & Shaban (2010) argument that the essence of CSR is

just ethical and philanthropic responsibility, but that the legal framework has a crucial role. Operating

in a complicated supply chain, it is crucial for the work of CSR to guarantee legal compliance right up

26

until the product consumption stage. Legal compliance is the foundation of ethical and philanthropic

engagement. Not guaranteeing the safety of workers and of products, but engaging and

communicating CP projects, is very close to greenwashing. The interviewed companies also realize

this fact.

This leads to the next conclusion that this research shows. There is a trend towards engaging more

in CP projects and its main benefit is marketing. Nevertheless, if companies do enter into the CSR

thematic in sponsoring and communicating CP projects as main purpose, it should be clear that the

core issues are somewhere else. Philanthropic engagement should be as Carroll said “the icing on

the cake” (Carroll, 1991 , p. 42), and not the main function of CSR. This was also, what participants

argued what they are doing. However, the outdoor industry is a growing sector and the danger is that

not all companies want to afford the engagement in CSR and just stop at CP, which is comparatively

easy, economical and good to communicate.

The trend towards a strategic CP is actually there, even if we cannot say that Outdoor brands are

using projects for a merely strategic reason as defined by Porter and Kramer (Porter & Kramer, 2002).

They are strategic in the sense that projects are aligned to the core business of companies and are

used as a marketing tool. The altruistic reason for engagement is disappearing. Problematic is that

evaluation plays a minor role and that companies do actually not know much about what is happening

on place of the project. These responsibilities are given to the NGOs and brands do not recognize

that they should monitor more. Cases of CP projects that were actually not as successful as planned

can be seen in the community development efforts of mining industries.

Marketing does play an increasing role, also because companies do want also a reputation push for

their increasing effort in CSR. An important conclusion is that communication should not be focused

on CP projects because they are more positive and easier to communicate, but on CSR as a whole

and therefore also transparency. In that, way companies can avoid allegation of greenwashing and

be more public about what they are actually doing.

This research tried to give some answers on the questions around CSR, trends of CP and strategic

CP. However, there were some limitations where further research is needed. The sample was only

build upon six CSR managers and focused on Europe. Addition data research through surveys or

other methods could refine the outcomes and help to get a better picture of the phenomena.

27

References

adidasAG, 2011. adidas AG: adidas Group to acquire outdoor specialist Five Ten. [Online]

Available at: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/03/idUS54232+03-Nov-2011+HUG20111103

[Accessed 13 11 2014].

Amann, S., 2010. Outdoor-Hersteller fallen bei sozialer Verantwortung durch. [Online]

Available at: http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/service/studie-outdoor-hersteller-fallen-bei-sozialer-

verantwortung-durch-a-705681.html

[Accessed 13 11 2014].

Banerjee, A. & Duflo, E., 2011. Porr Economics: A radical Rethinking of the way to fight global

poverty. 1 ed. New York: PublicAffairs.

Banks, G. & Gliberthorpe, E., 2012. Development on whose terms?: CSR discourse and social

realities in Papua New Guinea's extractive industries sector. Resources Policy, 37(2), p. 185–193.

Banks, N. & Hulme, D., 2014. New development alternatives or business as usual with a new face?

The transformative potential of new actors and alliances in development. Third World Quarterly,

35(1), pp. 181-195.

Baur, D. & Schmitz, H., 2012. Corporations and NGOs: When Accountability Leads to Co-optation.

Journal of Business Ethics, Issue 106, p. 9–21.

Blacktsone, 2011. Blackstone kauft Jack Wolfskin. [Online]

Available at: http://www.blackstone.com/news-views/press-releases/details/blackstone-kauft-jack-

wolfskin

[Accessed 13 11 2014].

Blowfield, M., 2007. Reasons to be cheerful? What we know about csr's impact. Third World

Quaterly, 28(4), pp. 683-695.

Blowfield, M., 2012. Business and development: making sense of business as a development agent.

Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society , 12(4), pp. 414 - 426.

Blowfield, M. & Dolan, C., 2014. Business as a development agent: evidence of possibility and

improbability. Third World Quarterly , 35(1), pp. 22-42.

28

Blowfield, M. & Frynas, J., 2005. Setting New Agendas: Critical Perspectives on Corporate Social

Responsibility in the Developing World. International Affairs, 81(3), pp. 499-513.

Blowfield, M. & Murray, A., 2011. Corporate Responsibility. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Brugmann, J. & Prahalad, C., 2007. Cocreating Business's New Social Impact. Harvard Business

Review, Issue Febraury, pp. 80-90.

Burchell, J. & Cook, J., 2013. CSR, Co-optation and Resistance: The Emergence of New Agonistic

Relations Between Business and Civil Society. Journal of Business ethics, Issue 115, pp. 741-754.

Campbell, J. L., 2007. Why Would Corporations Behave in Socially Responsible Ways? An

Institutional Theory of Corporate Social Responsibilit. The Academy of Management Review , 32(3),

pp. 946-967.

Carroll, A., 1979. A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance. The Academy

of Management Revie, 4(4), pp. 497-505.

Carroll, A., 1991 . The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management

of Organizational Stakeholders. Business Horizons, Issue July-August , pp. 39-48.

Carroll, A., 2004. Managing ethically with global stakeholders: A present and future challenge.

Academy of Management Executive, 18(2), pp. 114-121.

Carroll, A. B., Buchholtz, A. K. & Saiia, D. H., 2003. Philanthropy as Strategy: When Corporate

Charity "Begins at Home". Business Society, Issue 42, pp. 169-201.

Carroll, A. & Buchholtz, A., 1999. Business and society: ethics and stakeholder management. 2nd

ed. London: South-Western.

Carroll, A. & Shaban, K. M., 2010. The Business Case for Corporate Social Responsibility:A Review

of Concepts, Research and Practice. International Journal of Management Reviews.

Chen, J., Patten, D. & Roberts, R., 2008. Corporate Social Performance or Legitimacy Strategy?.

Journal of Business Ethics , 81(1), pp. 131-144 .

29

Chen, W., Merz, M. & Peloza, J., 2010. Standardization or localization? Executing corporate

philanthropy in international firms. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing

, Issue 15, pp. 233-252.

Crane, A. & Matten, D., 2004. Business Ethics: A European Perspective : Managing Corporate

Citizenship and Sustainability in the Age of Globalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Crane, A. & Matten, D., 2008. Business Ethics: Managing corporate citizenship and sustainability in

the age of globalization. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Curbach, J., 2008. Zwischen Boykott und CSR Eine Beziehungsanalyse zu Unternehmen und

NGOs. Zeitschrift fuer Wirtschafts- und Unternehmensethik, 9(3), pp. 368-391.

Denscombe, M., 2010. The Good Research Guide for small scale social research projects. 4th ed.

Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Duvendack, M. et al., 2011. What is the evidence of the impact of microfinance on the well-being of

poor people?, London: University of London.

Edward, P. & Tallontire, A., 2009. Business and Development - towards re-politicisation. Journal of

International Development, Issue 21, p. 819–833.

Eid, N. & Sabella, A., 2014. A fresh approach to corporate social responsibility (CSR): partnerships

between businesses and non- profit sectors. Corporate Governance, 14(3), pp. 352 - 362.

EOG, 2013. European outdoor sector continues to grow. [Online]

Available at: http://www.europeanoutdoorgroup.com/news-press/european-outdoor-sector-

continues-to-grow

[Accessed 13 11 2014].

EOG, 2014. Membership. [Online]

Available at: http://www.europeanoutdoorgroup.com/about-us/membership/

[Accessed 13 11 2014].

EOG, 2014. Sustainabilty. [Online]

Available at: http://www.europeanoutdoorgroup.com/conserve-sustain-care/sustainability/

[Accessed 13 11 2014].

30

Ferguson, J., 1994. The Anti Politics Machine: Development and Bureaucratic Power in Lesotho.

The Ecologist, 24(5), pp. 176-181.

Freeman, R. E., 1984. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Marshfield: Pitman

Publishing Inc.

Friedman, M., 1970. The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits. [Online]

Available at: http://www.colorado.edu/studentgroups/libertarians/issues/friedman-soc-resp-

business.html

[Accessed 14 11 2014].

Frynas, J., 2008. Corporate Social Responsibility and International Development: Critical

Assessment. Corporate Governance, 16(4), pp. 274-281.

Gautier, A. & Pache, A.-C., 2013. Research on Corporate Philanthropy: A Review and Assessment.

Journal of Business Ethics, Issue November.

Gibbs, G., 2007. Analysing Qualitative Data, in The SAGE Qualitative Research Kit. London: SAGE.

Greenpeace, 2013. Chemistry for any weather. [Online]

Available at: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/news/Blogs/makingwaves/chemistry-for-

any-weather/blog/47680/

[Accessed 13 11 2014].

Hawkin, R., 2012. A New Frontier in Development? The use of cause-related marketing by

international development organisations. Third World Quarterly, 33(10), pp. 1783-1801.

Hinzmann, B., Cisariková, A., Königshöfer, M. & Luginbüh, C., 2012. Für faire

Produktionsbedingungen bei Outdoor-Herstellern, Firmenprofile 2012, Berlin: INKOTA-netzwerk

e.V. – Kampagne für Saubere Kleidung – Deutschland .

Holstein, J. & Glassner, B., 2004. The active interview. In: D. Silverman, ed. Qualitative Research,

theory, method and practice. Londond: SAGE, pp. 140-162.

31

Ite, U., 2005. POVERTY REDUCTION IN RESOURCE-RICH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: WHAT

HAVE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS GOT TO DO WITH IT?. Journal of International

Development, Issue 17, p. 913–929.

Jamali, D. & Keshishian, T., 2009. Uneasy Alliances: Lessons Learned from Partnerships Between

Businesses and NGOs in the context of CS. Journal of Business Ethics, Issue 84, p. 277–295.

Jenkins, R., 2005. Globalization, Corporate Social Responsibility and poverty. International Affairs,

81(3), pp. 525-540.

Jing, Y. & Chang, L., 2013. Springboard to success. [Online]

Available at: http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/weekly/2013-03/29/content_16355461.htm

[Accessed 13 11 2014].

Kramer, M. & Kani, J., 2006. Changing the Game Leading corporations switch from defense to

offense in solving global problems. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Issue spring, pp. 22-29.

Lin-Hi, N., 2010. The problem with a narrow - minded interpretation of CSR: Why CSR has nothing

to do with philanthropy. Ramon Llull Journal of Applied Ethics, 1(79), pp. 79-94.

McLean, E. & Jhanji, A., 2014. The Consumer Study: From Marketing to Mattering, s.l.: Accenture.

Mosse, D., 2010. A Relational Approach to Durable Poverty, Inequality and Power. The Journal of

Development Studies , 46(7).

Newell, P. & Frynas, J., 2007. Beyond csr? Business, poverty and social justice: an introductio.

Third World Quarterly, 28(4), pp. 669-681.

OIA, 2013. The Outdoor recreation economy, Boulder, Colo.: Outdoor Industry Association.

OIA, 2014. Getting Started with Corporate Responsibility. [Online]

Available at: http://outdoorindustry.org/responsibility/gettingstarted.html

[Accessed 13 11 2014].

OutDoor, 2013. Production in the Far East: Fairness first. [Online]

Available at: http://www.outdoor-show.com/od-en/visitors-news/Production-in-the-Far-East--

Fairness-first.php

[Accessed 13 11 2014].

32

Ponte, S. & Richey, L., 2014. Buying into development? Brand Aid forms of cause-related

marketing. Third World Quarterly, 35(1), pp. 65-87.

Porter, M. & Kramer, M., 2002. The Competitive Advantage of Corporate Philanthropy. Harvard

Business Review, Issue December, pp. 1-15.

Porter, M. & Kramer, R., 2011. Creating Shared Value. Harvard Business Review, Issue January .

Prior, A., 2014. The Wall Street Journal. [Online]

Available at: http://online.wsj.com/articles/vf-profit-climbs-as-outdoor-and-action-sports-sales-climb-

1405683399

[Accessed 13 11 2014].

Reuters, 2010. Japan's Asics buys Sweden's Haglofs for $128.7 mln. [Online]

Available at: http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/07/12/asics-haglofs-idUSTOE66B05E20100712

[Accessed 13 11 2014].

SharedValueInitiative, 2014. Strategic Partners. [Online]

Available at: http://sharedvalue.org/partners/funders

[Accessed 17 11 2014].

Sharma, S. & Mehta, S., 2012. Where Do We Go From Here? Viewing Corporate Social

Responsibility through a Sustainability Len. The Journal Contemporary Management Research ,

6(2), pp. 69 - 76.

Shell, F., 2005. Enterprise Solutions to Poverty: Opportunities and Challenges for the International

Development Community and Business, London: Shell Foundation.

Snape, D. & Spencer, L., 2003. The foundations of qualitative research. In: J. Ritchie & J. Lewis,

eds. Qualitative research practice: A guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. London:

SAGE, pp. 1-14.

TheGuardian, 2014. H&M and Swedfund cooperate in developing Ethiopia’s textile industry. [Online]

Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/hm-partner-

zone/2014/sep/03/swedfund-develop-textile-industry-ethiopia

[Accessed 24 11 2014].

33

Tricoire, P., 2008. Lafuma rachète Eider. [Online]

Available at: http://www.lefigaro.fr/societes-francaises/2008/06/11/04010-20080611ARTFIG00640-

lafuma-rachete-eider-mais-affiche-une-perte.php

[Accessed 13 11 2014].

Utting, P., 2007. csr and equality. Third World Quarterly, 28(4), pp. 697-712.

Van Cranenburgh, K. C. & Arenas, D., 2014. Strategic and Moral Dilemmas of Corporate

Philanthropy in Developing Countries: Heineken in Sub-Saharan Africa. J Bus Ethics (2014)

122:523–536, Issue 122, pp. 523-536.

Van der Voort, J., Glac, K. & Meijs, L., 2009. ‘‘Managing’’ Corporate Community Involvemen.

Journal of Business Ethics, Issue 90, p. 311–329.

Van Marrewijk, M., 2003. Concepts and Definitions of CSR and Corporate Sustainability: Between

Agency and Communio. Journal of Business Ethics, Issue 44, p. 95–105.

Van Marrewijk, M., 2003. Concepts and Definitions of CSR and Corporate Sustainability: Between

Agency and Communion. Journal of Business Ethics, Issue 44, p. 95–105.

Visser, W., 2006. Revisiting Carroll's CSR pyramid : an African perspective . In: M. Huniche & E.

Pedersen, eds. Corporate Citizenship in Developing Countries: New Partnership Perspectives.

Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press , pp. 29-55.

Vogel, D., 2005. The market for virtue :the potential and limits of corporate social responsibility.

Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.

Walker, M. & Kent, A., 2013. The Roles of Credibility and Social Consciousness in the Corporate

Philanthropy-Consumer Behavior Relationshi. Journal of Business Ethics, Issue 116, p. 341–353.

WBCSD, 2004. Doing business with the poor: A field guide, Geneva: WBCSD, c/o EarthPrint

Limited.

WEF, 2005. Building on the Monterrey Consensus: The Growing Role of Public-Private Partnerships

in Mobilizing Resources for Development, Geneva: World Economic Forum.

34

Willi, J., 2007. Foundations of Qualitative Research> Interpretive and Critical Approaches.

Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

Zadek, S. et al., 2009. Responsible Business in Africa: Chinese Business Leaders’ Perspectives on

Performance and Enhancement Opportunities, Harvard: AccountAbility, Enterprise Research

Institute, DRC-ERI.

35

Appendix

7.1 Interview Guideline/Questions

Personal/Company Background:

Name Company/Organisation:

Position:

For how long are you already in the company?

Organisational issue

How are "sustainability" topics organized in your company? Is there a specific approach/system in place?

Does your company/organization have any "development" - "charity" projects in developing countries?

How did you choose the partner and the country for the project? o Is your company also economically active in the project host country?

o What factors where crucial in choosing your partner/country?

Project/Content specific

Why did you choose this type (content) of project?

What kind of topics do you think are appealing to the Outdoor industry? (not the location but more the topic that the project is tackling)

What impact do you expect from the project?

o What do you know about the impact?

o What problems could arise possibly?

Where in the company does the responsibility for the projects lie?

Broader

Do you think that there is a rising number of companies that engage in such projects? if yes what could be the reasons?

o What role does the rising importance of CSR activities play?

How strong do you think is the marketing purpose?

Do you think that the public could see such projects as a mere marketing strategy?

What are the benefits that a company takes from such projects?

36

7.2 Ethical Clearance

Guidance on ethics is available in the International Development Ethics Handbook and on the

UEA website http://www.uea.ac.uk/dev/ethics Please consult these sources of information before

filling this form.

You must submit this application form and any accompanying documents as follows:-

1) Electronically to dev.ethics@uea.ac.uk AND copy to your Supervisor.

2) A hard copy INCLUDING THE REQUIRED SIGNATURES to:

DEV Local Office, room ARTS 1.72, School of International Development.

Checklist: BEFORE submitting please check the following:

You have included a consent form.

Your Supervisor has read, commented on and signed your ethics form and

accompanying materials.

You have included your name in the file name of the electronic copy of the form and any

accompanying documents.

You have completed the top Section of the PART B of the form (on the last page)

You have submitted a risk assessment form signed by you and your supervisor to

Learning and Teaching Services.

If you are asked to resubmit your application follow the guidance in Part B

COMPLETE ALL SECTIONS IN PART A AND APPLICANT INFORMATION IN PART B

PERSON(S) SUBMITTING RESEARCH PROPOSAL

Name(s) of all person(s)

submitting research proposal.

Including main applicant

Status

(BA/BSc/MA/MSc/MRes/

MPhil/PhD/research

associate/faculty etc.)

Students: specify your course

Department/Group/

Institute/Centre

(Omitted) MA DEV

37

APPLICANT INFORMATION Forename (Omitted)

Surname (Omitted)

Gender (Omitted)

Student ID number (if applicable) 100049200

Contact email address (Omitted)

Date application form submitted

1st application or resubmission? resubmission

PROJECT INFORMATION Project or Dissertation Title

The Outdoor Sports Industry and the Development World: Expectations of the Outdoor World and the reality

* DEV/DEVco faculty or DEVco research associate applications only:

* Project Funder

* Submitted by SSF or DEVco?

If yes – Project Code:

Postgraduate research students only:

Date of your PP presentation

SUPERVISOR AUTHORISATION A student’s supervisor is asked to certify the accuracy of the following account. If the supervisor

is out of the country at the time of submission they should send an email to

dev.ethics@uea.ac.uk stating that they have seen and approved the application.

Name of supervisor(s) Position held

(Omitted) Lecturer in Development Economics

Signature (supervisor of student) Date

APPLICANT SIGNATURE Signature (proposer of research) Date

(Omitted)

06.08.2014

38

1. OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY Describe the purposes of the research/project proposed. Detail the methods to be used and the

research questions. Provide any other relevant background which will allow the reviewers to

contextualise your research or project activities. Include questionnaires/checklists as

attachments, if appropriate.

The research will consider a topic that has become more and more important in the private sector, and therefore also in the rising Outdoor Sport industry. Development projects are widely started by different companies and organisations. There is a huge public debate whether this projects are for a mere marketing purpose or what other reason lies behind. Some discussions are also if companies are aware of the impact may have with these projects. This whole debate has to be seen in the light of a rising CSR activity in the Outdoor Industry, more and more companies want to be more “sustainable” and “social activities” ( development projects) are rising on popularity. The objective of this research will be divided into two parts, the first will be made with the primary data I will collect and The objective of the primary research will be to answer the research question of “Why do Outdoor brands/related NGO’s/business association start development projects?”. This will be done with semistructured interview questions. This data should help me to get a picture of the Outdoor Industry The overall purpose of the data collection will be to find out what expectations and reason guide the industry to start development projects. As we know the private sector is entering more and more in the development industry. The Outdoor Sport industry has been out of this till some years ago. So why this shift? Further I will be interested in what kind of projects they would be interested in and if further economic benefits for the industry would play a role in any way. Also if they are concerned with the evaluation of the projects. The goal of my research will be to get a bigger picture of the intentions and expectation of the different actors in the outdoor industry, and how serious they take the development discussion. Trying to draw some conclusion about how positive this projects could be and what recommendations would be important for the different actors. The research questions guiding my dissertation are

Why do Outdoor brands/related NGO’s/business associations start development projects?

What are their expectations for those projects?

Is there an evaluation of the projects in place, to measure positive or negative outcomes? o What would be their reaction if there would be negative outcomes?

Is there a high or low awareness of the actors of possible consequences/impacts in the long term of the project?

Further interview questions will be: Why are certain projects preferred over others ( for example many projects are based in Nepal)

What was the underlying reason of funding/organizing such projects?

With whom do they cooperate? ( local/international actors or directly) o Was the reason behind the funding of a project mere charity or a different

motivation?

39

1. OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY

Is there a regular contact with the project organizer?

What is the reach of the project? ( how many people are involved directly?)

Is the projects used for any marketing purpose?

How high is the awareness of cultural or social gaps and issues?

Is there a possible combination of the production in Asia and development projects in Asia?

The primary data collection, interviews, will include different actors of the outdoor industry, starting from brands (Omitted), (Omitted), and I am still in contact to get further brands)), NGO’s (Omitted) and business associations (Omitted). The interview partners will be the CSR Managers of the brands, and the project managers, or private partnership relations manager of the NGO’s. Considering the business association I will interview the CSR Manger, who is in charge of the CSR topics of the member companies.

2. SOURCES OF FUNDING The organisation, individual or group providing finance for the study/project. If you do not require

funding or are self-funded, please put ‘not applicable’

The study itself is self-funded. In the first period of my primary research ( till 30.09.2014) I will be still employed as an intern for (Omitted), who will be also a participant of my primary data collection. The salary I receive is not linked directly to my research. It does only coincide with my research for the month of September 2014, because I will work on the data collection during my working time. The overall research will start in September, if I get the ethical clearance, and if not in October. (Omitted)doesn’t pay me directly for my research but allows me to work on it during my working time if no other more urgent issues are present.

3. RISKS OR COSTS TO PARTICIPANTS What risks or costs to the participants are entailed in involvement in the study/project? Are there

any potential physical, psychological or disclosure dangers that can be anticipated? What is the

possible benefit or harm to the subject or society from their participation or from the study/project

as a whole? What procedures have been established for the care and protection of participants

(e.g. insurance, medical cover) and the control of any information gained from them or about

them?

To avoid any disclosure risk or risk for the employees I will talk with, I will keep the primary data confidential and anonyms it. Further I will give them clear information about the possibility to opt out of the interview or to withdraw their data, during the interview or also the writing period.

I will give the participants the possibility to have an executive summary of the dissertation after my deadline in January 2015. Therefore they can use the recommendation I have drawn as Information.

Some of the participants know each other already from different meetings and work together in different associations. To avoid any repercussion in for their working environment, I will keep the

40

3. RISKS OR COSTS TO PARTICIPANTS primary data confidential. be It will be made clear to the participants in the consent form that their name will be anonymized clearly and therefore the risk for repercussion will be low. I will not cite their name or the organisation they are part of.

Further all information's will be saved only on my PC and anonymised directly, therefore only I will have access to the data. The only information I will public is if the participant is part of A company, NGO or a business association ( but not the name of the organisation), this information is needen to make my analysis of the different stakeholders.

To avoid any possible risk for reputation, because of the small sample and the connection that some participants have, I will analyse the data carefully and omit data that could possibly cause negative consequences for the participants. I therefore considered different academic literature on this topic, for example: Mertens, D.M. and Ginsberg, P.E. (Eds) (2008) The Handbook of Social Research Ethics. London: Sage.; Research Ethics and Data Quality: The Implications of Informed Consent, Graham Crow, Rose Wiles, Sue Heath, Vikki Charles, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 9, Iss. 2, 2006,

.

Further it is important to mention that this topic is not one of the main communication topics in the outdoor industry and does not create polarization such as other topics (chemicals issues for example)

4. RECRUITMENT/SELECTION PROCEDURES How will study/project participants be selected? For example will participants be selected

randomly, deliberately/purposively, or using lists of people provided by other organisations (see

section 11 on Third Party Data)?

The participants will be selected purposively by me to create a good picture of Outdoor brands, NGO and business associations. It will follow basically a “Snowball procedure”, that the different participants will provide me with new contacts.

5. PARTICIPANTS IN DEPENDENT RELATIONSHIPS Is there any sense in which participants might be ‘obliged’, to participate – for example in the

case of project beneficiaries, students, prisoners or patients – or are volunteers being recruited?

If participants in dependent relationships will be included, what will you do to ensure that their

participation is voluntary?

A depending relation could be created because I will be still employed with (Omitted) till the end of September. To guarantee their voluntary participation I will ask them to sign the Consent form and give them every information to opt out. The fact that I will be still employed by (Omitted) at the time of the interview could create a problem about the reliability of the interview. First I will ask them the same interview questions as the other participants, to guarantee that they are on the same level as other participants. Further

41

5. PARTICIPANTS IN DEPENDENT RELATIONSHIPS my internship is going only until the end of September and does not conflict with the rest of my research. The possible information bias would affect, only the interview with one participant from (Omitted), therefore I will consider this interview carefully and guarantee the same question as for the other participants. In addition I will compare the data coming from (Omitted) with data coming from other participants, if they differ heavily I will not use them In case someone is not voluntarily participating, and it will be clear to me I will stop the interview, or not start it if it is clear to me before the beginning of it, and not consider the given answers. The possibility that someone of the participant is in a dependent relation, and will participate involuntarily. There is no pressure for them to participate in my research because there is no huge benefit for them, except to have a copy of my dissertation The only participants that could be in a dependent relationship are employees of the (Omitted). But my internship is finishing there at the end of September and as a internship i am not in a position to pressure other employers to participate. Further I write my dissertation totally independent of them and they will have no further benefit as other participants. There should be no other dependent relationship and I will analyze the data deriving from the (Omitted) interview carefully, and if they differ significantly of the other data, I will not consider it in the analysis. Further it is clear that the different actors come from different organization that represent various standpoints in this debate.

In general the topic I will research on is not as polarized and discussed as many other and therefore poses a low risk that participants will be forced to participate.

6. VULNERABLE INDIVIDUALS Specify whether the research will include children, people with mental illness or other potentially

vulnerable groups. If so, please explain the necessity of involving these individuals as research

participants and what will be done to facilitate their participation.

The research will not include any vulnerable individuals. The issue of being in a dependent relation with (Omitted) has been described in section 2 and 5. However I will take any precautions to not include vulnerable groups or individuals in my interviews.

7. PAYMENTS AND INCENTIVES Will payment or any other incentive, such as a gift or free services, be made to any participant?

If so, please specify and state the level of payment to be made and/or the source of the

funds/gift/free service to be used. Please explain the justification for offering payment or other

incentives.

There will be no payments or incentives.

42

8. CONSENT Please give details of how consent is to be obtained. Participants must be aware of their

entitlement to withdraw consent and at what point in the study/project that entitlement lapses. A

copy of the proposed consent form, along with a separate information sheet, written in simple,

non-technical language MUST accompany this proposal form as an ATTACHMENT.

The interviews will be made through electronic channel ( skype) or directly per person, in both cases I will guarantee that the participants will receive and sign the consent form or give me maximal an verbal consents, that will be in any case recorded. The consent should be given or in written form ( by handing out the consent form), by electronic signature via mail or maximum a verbal consent that will be recorded. Further I will make it clear to the participants that they have every right to withdraw from the interview or their data latest mid-December. They will have the possibility to contact me in any case for questions or to withdraw electronically via mail. They will have all the information about the research, the topic and the set of questions before the interview. In consequence they can decide if participating or not. Their name will be anonymised always, except they ask specifically to be cited directly. Please see the consent form for further information.

9. CULTURAL, SOCIAL, GENDER-BASED CHARACTERISTICS What consideration have you given to the cultural context and sensitivities? How have cultural,

social and/or gender-based characteristics influenced the research design, and how might these

influence the way you carry out the research and how the research is experienced by

participants? For example, might your gender affect your ability to do interviews with or ask

certain questions from a person of a different gender; might it affect the responses you get or

compromise an interviewee? How might your position /status as a UK university based

researcher affect such interactions?

The risk for cultural or social issues is low, because all of my participants will be from (Omitted). Considering that I am also from a Central European culture, (Northern Italy) there should be no social or cultural issues. The interviews will be or in English, German or Italian, as I am fluent in all this languages there should be no issue or language based problem. I will also take in consideration gender based characteristics. In searching for participants I will choose them only because of their position and consent to participate and not what gender they have. I will try to find a balance between the genders if possible to avoid and gender based bias. My position as I UK based researcher should not create any problems, as most of the participants them self come from a academic background or are used to work with researchers. Therefore I will guarantee that the participants had understood the topic, questions and that they can opt out of the interview when they want to.

43

9. CULTURAL, SOCIAL, GENDER-BASED CHARACTERISTICS

10. CONFIDENTIALITY Please state who will have access to the data and what measures which will be adopted to

maintain the confidentiality of the research subject and to comply with data protection

requirements e.g. will the data be anonymised?

The data will be saved only on my personal computer and not on any other device, also not on the working computer of the (Omitted). This device is saved with a password that is only accessible for me. Further my personal computer is only accessible to me because protected with a password. Every participant will be anonymised, except they ask me specifically do cite them directly. I will therefore not cite their name or the company they make part. I will describe them in the consent the difficulty of being anonymised in such a small sample, but that I will take every measure to guarantee that. This will be for example: trying to broaden the sample, finding different participants in the various sectors(NGO’s, business associations). Above all I won’t public any sensitive Information that could possibly cause negative consequences for the participants.

11. THIRD PARTY DATA Will you require access to data on participants held by a third party? In cases where participants

will be identified from information held by another party (for example, a doctor or school)

describe the arrangements you intend to make to gain access to this information.

I will not require any third party data.

12. PROTECTION OF RESEARCHER (THE APPLICANT) Please state briefly any precautions being taken to protect your health and safety. Have you

taken out travel and health insurance for the full period of the research? If not, why not. Have

you read and acted upon FCO travel advice (website)? If acted upon, how?

The research will be or happen in (Omitted) or in my home region in Northern Italy and therefore there should be no extraordinary risk that wouldn’t exist also at the UEA in Norwich.

13. PROTECTION OF OTHER RESEARCHERS Please state briefly any precautions being taken to protect the health and safety of other

researchers and others associated with the project (as distinct from the participants or the

applicant). If there are no other researchers, please put ‘not applicable’

44

13. PROTECTION OF OTHER RESEARCHERS Not applicable

14. RESEARCH PERMISSIONS (INCLUDING ETHICAL CLEARANCE) IN HOST COUNTRY AND/OR ORGANISATION The UEA’s staff and students will seek to comply with travel and research guidance provided by

the British Government and the Governments (and Embassies) of host countries. This pertains

to research permission, in-country ethical clearance, visas, health and safety information, and

other travel advisory notices where applicable. If this research project is being undertaken

outside the UK, has formal permission/a research permit been sought to conduct this research?

Please describe the action you have taken and if a formal permit has not been sought please

explain why this is not necessary/appropriate (for example, for very short studies it is not always

appropriate to apply for formal clearance).

As I am a citizen of the European Union there is no need of a permit to stay in Germany or Italy where I will conduct my research.

15. MONITORING OF RESEARCH What procedures are in place for monitoring the research/project (by funding agency, supervisor,

community, self, etc.).

I will inform my supervisor at the UEA regularly on the progress of my dissertation and emerging problems

16. ANTICIPATED USE OF RESEARCH DATA ETC What is the anticipated use of the data, forms of publication and dissemination of findings etc.?

The primary data will be used to write my dissertation. The dissertation will maybe be published in parts if it could be of interest for the academia after beginning of January 2015.

17. FEEDBACK TO PARTICIPANTS Will the data or findings of this research/project be made available to participants? If so, specify

the form and timescale for feedback. What commitments will be made to participants regarding

feedback? How will these obligations be verified?

The dissertation will be made available to the participants if they want so, probably also with an executive summary.

45

18. DURATION OF PROJECT The start date should not be within the 2 months after the submission of this application, to allow

for clearance to be processed.

Start date End date

September/October ( depending when I get the ethical clearance)

6 January 2014

19. PROJECT LOCATION(S) Please state location(s) where the research will be carried out.

(Omitted) ( Germany, till the end of September), Bolzano (Italy, possibly for an interview), Tisens ( Italy for the rest of the period)

APPLICANT INFORMATION To be completed by the applicant

Forename (Omitted)

Surname (Omitted)

Student ID number (if applicable) 100049200

UG, PGT or PGR (if applicable) (Omitted)

Supervisor (if applicable) (Omitted)

Project Title Development projects and the Outdoor Industry: Why are they starting development projects and what expectations do they have? Comparing with already existing literature on private funded/lead development projects and draw racomandations.

RESUBMISSIONS – IF YOU ARE ASKED TO RESUBMIT YOUR APPLICATION FOLLOWING

REVIEW BY THE COMMITTEE PLEASE ALSO ATTACH A LETTER WITH YOUR REVISED

APPLICATION DETAILING HOW YOU HAVE RESPONDED TO THE COMMITTEE’S

COMMENTS. Students please ensure your supervisor has approved your revisions before

resubmission.

REVIEWERS’ RECOMMENDATION () To be completed by the Ethics Committee

Accept x

Request modifications

Reject

REVIEWERS’ CHECKLIST Delete as appropriate

Risks and inconvenience to participants are minimised and not

unreasonable given the research question/ project purpose.

All relevant ethical issues are acknowledged and understood by the

researcher.

Procedures for informed consent are sufficient and appropriate

46

REVIEWERS’ COMMENTS

COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION Ethical approval is granted.

SIGNATURE (CHAIR OF THE INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ETHICS COMMITTEE) Signature Date

(ommited)

22.08.2014

47

7.3 Consent Form

Hello,

My name is (Omitted) and with this consent form I want to give you some general

information about my research before asking you the consent for participating to

this interview. I am currently a student of the University of East Anglia in the MA

course (Omitted).

In this research, I will focus on development initiatives started in the outdoor

industry. With the rising of the “sustainability thinking” in this industry also

development projects started to play a role. I would like to discover, through

interviewing different players why this trend happening and what the expectations

are. Comparing those results with the academic literature on private started

projects and their impact.

I want to emphasize that you can contact me at any point of the interview, before

and after the interview. You can also withdraw from the interview at any point and

from the research until mid-December. This would consequently mean that I

would not consider your data for my research. Further, I would like to remind you

that you are not obligated to participate to this interview.

The only possible benefit you could have from participating is an electronic copy

of the dissertation or an executive summary, both of them would be shared after

the beginning of January if requested by the participant.

I would like to remind you that I will automatically anonymise your data and not

cite you or the company you are part of directly in the thesis. Except you disagree

in the line bellow that your are anonymise. In that case, I will cite you and the

organisation you make part of directly. In that case, I remind you that I do not

take any responsibility for any possible future repercussion, caused by my

research, however unlikely that would be.

I should be also clear to you that given the small sample of participants in this

research, and the few actors in this field in the Outdoor Industry, it would be

easier to trace your answers back even if I anonymise them. I will take every

measure to avoid that and will try to broaden the sample as possible. Further, I

will try to find different players from different sector to have more variety. In case I

think that certain data is too sensitive I will not public it to not put participants in

48

difficulty. I will take also every measure possible in the text to guarantee

anonymity.

The primary data I will collect will be treated confidential and will be only

accessible from my laptop that is password secured.

If there are any questions or something that is not clear, please contact me

(Omitted). My research is supervised by (Omitted). You can contact her for further

questions on my work (Omitted).

Agreement to participate and be digitally recorded:

I declare that I have understand the topic of the research and that the information

was given to me in written or in oral form (audio). Further, I know that I can

contact the researcher at any point of the interview and afterwards for any

question. I understand also that I have the right to opt out of the interview at any

point of time and that I can withdraw my data until mid-December. I have been

able to ask any questions to the researcher.

I, _______________________________ agree/disagree to participate in this

interview/research.

I, _______________________________ agree/disagree that the interview is

digitally recorded.

I, _______________________________ agree/disagree that all of my data will

be ANONMYCED. If I disagree, my name and the organisation I am part of can

be cited directly in the work.

Signature of Interviewee:

_________________________________ Date: ________________

Signature of Researcher:

_________________________________

Date:________________