Gözde TORUN

165

KURUMSAL SOSYAL SORUMLULUK FAALİYETLERİ VE BU FAALİYETLERİN HALKIN PARLAMENTOYA BAKIŞINA ETKİSİNİN İNCELENMESİ: DANİMARKA PARLAMENTOSU ÖRNEĞİ

Kalkınma ve refah devlet anlayışı içinde gelişim gösteren sosyal politikalar, ekonomi endeksinin dışında toplumsal fayda anlayışını da içermektedir. Uygulamaya konulan sosyal politikalar, gelişim sürecinde Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk (KSS) politikalarına dönüşmüştür. Sosyal politika ve sosyal devlet eksenli görüşler modernizasyon ile hız kazanarak KSS temellerinin atılmasının öncü adımları olarak değerlendirilmektedir. Bu nedenle KSS'nin ülkelerin politikalarına endeksli olarak modelleştirilmesi gereklilik olarak görülmektedir. Dünyanın refah ülkelerinden Danimarka, son yıllarda önemli gelişmeler gösteren KSS faaliyetleri ve uygulama alanları ile dikkat çekmekte ve Gayri Safi Milli Hasılası (GSMH) ile ilk sıralarda yer almaktadır. Bu çalışmada KSS ekseninde Danimarka Parlamentosunun KSS stratejileri, sorumlulukları ve uygulamaları ve bütün bunların toplumuna etkileri ele alınmıştır

THE ANALYSIS OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ACTIVITIES AND THE EFFECT OF THESE ACTIVITIES ON THE PUBLIC'S PERSPECTIVE TOWARDS THE PARLIAMENT: DANISH PARLIAMENT CASE STUDY

The social policies which have developed within the development and welfare state understanding include the social benefit concept in addition to the economic indices. The implemented social policies have transformed into Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) policies during the development phase. Social policy and social state based opinions have gained momentum with modernization and are considered as the pioneering steps towards establishing the CSR foundation. Therefore, the modernization of CSR in accordance with the policies of the countries is seen as a necessity. Being as one of the welfare states of the World, Denmark draws attention to itself with its CSR activities and fields of applications which have shown important developments lately and is placed among the top countries in terms of gross national product (GDP). This study examines the CSR strategies of the Danish Parliament in terms of CSR strategies, responsibilities and applications and the effect of these on the public
PDF

___

  • Aalborg University, 2008. Adejumo Theophilus Adekunle, Corporate Social Responsibility in Denmark: Making a Case for Public /Private Sector Synergy, Msc. Environmental Management Thesis Report Department of Development and Planning.
  • Academic Ranking of World Universities, 2016. Denmark, http://www. shanghairanking.com/, (Erişim: 25.08.2016).
  • Aktan, C.C. 2007. Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk, İşletmeler ve Sosyal Sorumluluk, İGİAD Yayınları:4, İş Ahlâkı Kitaplığı:2, İstanbul.
  • Anker, H.T., Olsen B.E. ve Ronne A., Country Report: Denmark Landmark Energy Agreement And New Rules The Energy Agreement 2012-2020, s.132.
  • Balta Peltekoğlu, F. 1993. Halkla İlişkiler ve Sosyal Sorumluluk, Marmara Üniversitesi, İletişim Fakültesi, Marmara İletişim Dergisi, Sayı:2, Nisan, s.179.
  • Banerjee, S.B. (2008). Corporate Social Responsibility: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. Critical Sociology, City University London, 34(1), s..22.
  • Beland, D. 2005. Ideas and Social Policy: An Institutionalist Perspective, Social Policy & Administration, 11 January, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ j.1467-9515.2005.00421.x/full, (Erişim: 12.12.2016).
  • Bhave, A.G. 2009. Experiences of the Role of Government in Promoting Corporate Social Responsibility Initiatives in the Private Sector, Recommendations to the Indian State of Gujarat, Thesis for the fulfilment of the Master of Science in Environmental Sciences, Policy & Management Lund, Sweden, June, IIIEE Theses 2009:01.
  • Bilgili, M. ve Kocalar A.O. 2014. Bazı Kavramlar Açısından Çevre ve Eğitiminin Değerlendirilmesi Akademik Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Y:2, S:7, Aralık, s.469.
  • Bredgaard, T. 2003. Corporate Social Responsibility Between Public Policy and Enterprise Policy, The Role of Trade Unions in Corporate Social Responsibility Initiatives, European Trade Union Institute, 8 December.
  • Brown, D. ve Knudsen, J.S. 2012. How do Domestic Institutions Influence Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)?: An Examination of Government Policies and Company Initiatives in Denmark and the UK, Council of Europeanists Conference in Boston, Session: Regulating Europe, 23 March, s.18.
  • Brown T.J. ve Dacin P.A. 1997. The Company and the Product: Corporate Associations and Consumer Product Responses, American Marketing Association, vol. 61, No.1, Jan., s.68.
  • Buhmann, K. 2011. Migration of CSR-Related International Norms Into Companies Self-Regulation Through Company Law: The Danish CSR Reporting Requirement, University of Oslo Faculty of Law Legal Studies, Research Paper Series, No.2011- 05.
  • Bui, H. ve Welt A., The Danish Corporate Canvas: Corporate Social Responsibility and the Integration of Danish Immigrants, Humanity in Action, http://www. humanityinaction.org/knowledgebase/93-the-danish-corporate-canvascorporate-social-responsibility-and-the-integration-of-danish-immigrants, (Erişim: 01.06.2016).
  • Business in The Community (BITC) http://www.bitc.org.uk/, (Erişim: 25.08.2016).
  • Carson, R. 1962. Silent Spring, https://archive.org/stream/fp_Silent_SpringRachel_Carson-1962/Silent_Spring-Rachel_Carson-1962_djvu.txt, (Erişim: 18.08.2016).
  • COM, 2001. Green Paper Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility, Comiıssion of the European Communities, Brussels, 18.7.2001, 366 Final, s.7.
  • COM, 2011. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, A Renewed EU strategy, 2011-14 for Corporate Social Responsibility, European Commission, Brussels, 25.10.2011, 681 final, 2011, s.6.
  • COM, 2016. Recommendation for a Council Recommendation on the 2016 National Reform Programme of Denmark and Delivering a Council Opinion on the 2016 Convergence Programme of Denmark, European Commissıon Brussels, 18.5.2016, 325 final.
  • CSRgov, Corporate Social Responsibility and Reporting in Denmark: Impact of the Third Year Subject to the Legal Requirements for Reporting on CSR in the Danish Financial Statements Act, Legislation, Danish Business Authority, http://csrgov. dk/, (Erişim: 16.08.2016).
  • CSRgov, Corporate Social Responsibility and the Danish Responsibility Authority, Danish Business Authority, http://csrgov.dk/, (Erişim: 09.07.2016)
  • CSRgov, Responsible Growth in Denmark, Danish Business Authority, http:// csrgov.dk/, (Erişim: 09.07.2016).
  • Dahlsrud, A. 2008. How Corporate Social Responsibility is Defined: An Analysis of 37 Definitions, Ocak v.15, s.1.
  • Danmarks Okonomiske Dfordringer, Rengeringen, http://regeringen.dk/aktuelledagsordener/danmarks-oekonomiske-udfordringer/, (Erişim: 28.08.2016).
  • Davis, K. ve Blomstrom, R.L. 1971, Business Society and Environment, Social Power and Response, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, s.85.
  • Denmark.dk, Government and Politics, The Official Website of Denmark, Government and Politics, http://denmark.dk/, (Erişim: 21.08.2016).
  • Durdu, Z. 2009. Modern Devletin Dönüşümünde Bir Ara Dönem: Sosyal Refah Devleti, Muğla Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi (İlke), Bahar, s.22.
  • Educatıon Policy Outlook Denmark, OECD, April, 2014.
  • Ellen, P.S., Webb, D.J. ve Mohr L.A. 2006. "Building Corporate Associations: Consumer Attributions for Corporate Socially Responsiple Programs", Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, v.34, no.2, s.147.
  • Fajertag ve Pochet P. 2000. Social Pacts in Europe, New Dynamics, Second Edition, European Trade Union Institute (ETUI), Brussels.
  • Folketinget, http://www.ft.dk/, (Erişim: 18.07.2016).
  • Friedman, M. 1970. The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits, The New York Times Magazine, September 13. s.1
  • Guide for Canadian Business 2006. Corporate Social Responsibility: An Implernentation, Ottawa, s.5.
  • Gül H. ve Sallan Gül S. 2007. Sosyal Devletten Çalışma Refahına Geçişte Sosyal Haklar ve Yoksullar, Amme İdaresi Dergisi, C:40, S:3, Eylül, ss.1-30.
  • Habek P. ve Wolniak, R. 2013. Analysis of Approaches to CSR Reporting in Selected European Union Countries, Coven Page, International Journal of Economics and Research, Nov-Dec, s.83.
  • Hansen, J.E. ve Sato, M. 2012. Climate Sensitivity Estimated From Earth's Climate History, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University Earth Institute, New York.
  • Hasbisch, A., Jonker, J., Wegner, M. ve Schmidpeter R. 2005. Corporate Social Responsibility Across Europe, Discovering National Perspectives of Corporate Citizenship, Berlin Heidelberg New York, Springer.
  • Hohnen, P. 2001. Processes of Marginalisation an Analysis of New Forms of Exclusion On the Danish Labour Market, The Open Labour Market, Working Paper, Socialforskningsinstituttet, The Danish National Institute of Social Research, s.7.
  • Hurst, T. 2011, Earth Industry, Denmark Taking Corporate Social Responsibility Seriously, on October 6, http://earthandindustry.com/2011/10/denmark-takingcorporate-social-responsibility-seriously/, (Erişim: 20.07.2016).
  • IOE, 2003. Corporate Social Responsıbility An IOE Approach International Organisation Of Employers Adopted by the Management Board on 21 March, s.2.
  • Keith N., Corporate Social Responsibility an International Perspective, World Focus, v.9, Number 3, A Technical Publication of ASSE's International Practice Specialty.
  • Kendal, D.M. 2014. CSR and Extraterritorial Jurisdiction-International Law Boundaries to Human Rights Litigation, Human Rights Consulting, Issues Paper, Copenhagen, February.
  • Keskin, S.C. ve Yüceer, D. (2013). Danimarka'da Vatandaşlık Eğitimi, Sosyal Bilgiler Eğitimi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2013:4(1), ss.97-120.
  • Knopf J, Kahlenborn W., Hajduk T., Weiss D., Feil, M. Fiedler R. ve Klein J. 2010.
  • Corporate Social Responsibility National Public Policies in the European Union, European Commission, Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion, Unit C2, Manuscript Completed in November.
  • Lofgren, K., Andersen K.V. ve Sorensen, M.F. 1999. The Danish Parliament Going Virtual, Oxford University Press, s.493.
  • Luetkenhorst, W. 2004. Corporate Social Responsibility and the Development Agenda. Inter Economics, Intereconomics, 39(3):157-166, May, s.157.
  • Meehan J., Meehan K. ve Richards A. 2006. Corporate Social Responsibility: the 3C-SR Model, The Management School, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK, Emerald, İjse.33,5/6, s.386.
  • Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark (UDENRIGSMINISTERIET), 2016, Denmark Part of an Exclusive Group of Countries, 13.04.2016, http://um.dk/en/news/ NewsDisplayPage/?newsID=5CF977E2-A900-4BA3-87C4-D2DDC26E305D, (Erişim: 13.04.2016).
  • Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark (UDENRIGSMINISTERIET), 2016, Denmark Ranked as a European Leader in Innovation, 27.07.2016, http://www.investindk. com/News-and-events/News/2016/Denmark-Ranked-as-a-European-Leader-inInnovation, (Erişim: 27.07.2016).
  • Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, (UDENRIGSMINISTERIET), 2016, Record Year For Invest in Denmark, 04.03.2016, http://um.dk/en/news/ newsdisplaypage/?newsID=EA3F4D2B-1CF7-4000-BBF5-67C52F30FAFF, (Erişim: 04.03.2016),
  • Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, (UDENRIGSMINISTERIET), 2016, Transparency International: Denmark is the Least Corrupt Country in the World, 27.01.2016, http://um.dk/en/news/newsdisplaypage/?newsID=7868548C-37B8- 4D9E-9393-E99E6E545E7C, (Erişim: 27.01.2016).
  • Nielsen, M.E.J. ve Frederiksen, C.S. 2015, Political Institutions and Corporate Social Responsibility: A Nordic Welfare State Perspective From Denmark, in Corporate Social Responsibility in Europe Springer International Publishing, ss.197-208,
  • OECD 2008a, Annual Report, s.10.
  • Ören, K. (2011). Sosyal Politika, Sözkesen Matbaacılık Tic. Ltd. Şti. Ankara, s.31.
  • Özler, Z. 2009. Lizbon Antlaşması, İktisadi Kalkınma Vakfı Değerlendirme Notu, Ekim, No:9.
  • Petersen, K. 1997. Fra Ekspansion til Krise Udforskning af Velfærdsstatens Udvikling Efter 1945, Historisk Tidsskrift, Bind 16. Raekke, 6 (1997)-2.
  • Porter M.E. ve Kramer, M.R. 2006. Estrategia y Sociedad, Harvard Business Review, America Latina, Diciembre, s.7.
  • Rahman, S. 2011. Evaluation of Definitions: Ten Dimensions of Corporate Social Responsibility, World Review of Business Research. vol.1, No.1, March, s.171.
  • Regeringen, http://regeringen.dk/, (Erişim: 24.08.2016).
  • Rosdahl A. 2002. The Policy to Promote Social Responsibility of Enterprises in Denmark, The Open Labour Market Working Paper 10:2002, The Danish National Institute of Social Research.
  • Sabuncu Y. 2006. Yurttaşlık ve Çevre Bilgisi, Sosyal Devlet Sosyal Adalet İlkesine Dayanan Devlet, Anadolu Üniversitesi, Açık Öğretim Fakültesi, Ön Lisans Programı-891, s.70, https://books.google.com. tr/s?id=wkTkvyeQ3nYC&pg=PA70&lpg=PA70&dq=sosyal+devlet+ sosyal+adalet+ilkesine+dayanan&source=bl&ots=klfVuuZRTF&sig =BFTlj35zAL4pFMOk0E0_7YCNyJs&hl=tr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjhI6InZjPAhUMcBoKHdnVA2AQ6AEIRTAH#v=onepage&q=sosyal%20devlet%20 sosyal%20adalet%20ilkesine%20dayanan&f=false, (Erişim 16.07.2016).
  • Social Venture Network (SVN), http://svn.org/, (Erişim: 25.08.2016).
  • TDK, http://www.tdk.gov.tr/index, (Erişim: 16.08.2016).
  • The Danish Government, 2008. Action Plan For Corporate Social Responsibility, May.
  • The Danish Goverment, 2009. Denmark's National Reform Programme, First Progress Report, Contribution to the EU's Growth and Employment Strategy (The Lisbon Strategy), October.
  • The Danish Government, 2010. Denmark 2020, Knowledge>Growth>Prosperity> Welfare, February,
  • The Danish Goverment, 2011. Denmark's National Reform Programme 2011, May.
  • The Danish Goverment, 2012. The Corporate Social Responsibilit Responsible Growth Action Plan for Corporate Social Responsibility, 2012-2015, March.
  • The Danish Goverment, 2012. The National Reform Programme Denmark 2012, April.
  • The Danish Goverment, 2013. The National Reform Programme Denmark 2013, April.
  • The Danish Goverment, 2014. Implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, March.
  • The Danish Goverment, 2014. The National Reform Programme Denmark 2014, April.
  • The Danish Goverment, 2015. Convergence Programme Denmark 2015, March.
  • UNCTAD, 2004, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Disclosure of the Impact of Corporations on Society: Current Trends and Issues, New York and Geneva, s.22.
  • Undervisnings Ministeriet, 2009. Faelles Mal Samfundsfag, Fagaefte 5, handbogsserie nr.7.
  • Uludağ, A. 2013. Avrupa Birliği'nde Ekonomik Krize Karşı Önemi Hatırlanan Bir Araç: Aşırı Açık Prosedürü, T.C. Maliye Bakanlığı Avrupa Birliği ve Dış İlişkiler Dairesi Başkanlığı, Haziran.
  • Vallentin, S. 2015. Governmentalities of CSR: Danish Government Policy as a Reflection of Political Difference, Journal of Business Ethics, 127(1), ss.33-47.
  • World Hapiness Report, 2016. VOLUME I.
  • Yorgun, S. 2013. Sosyal Politika Açısından 6356 Sayılı Sendikalar ve Toplu İş Sözleşmesi Kanunu. Çalışma ve Toplum, 2013/4, ss.357-379.
  • Zairi M. 2000. Social Responsibility and Impact on Society, Perspectives, The TQM Magazine, v.12 N.3-2000, s.174.
Türk İdare Dergisi-Cover
  • ISSN: 1300-3216
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 2 Sayı
  • Başlangıç: 1928
  • Yayıncı: İçişleri Bakanlığı
Arşiv
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

TÜRKİYE'DE İL YÖNETİMİ: YERELLEŞEN İL YÖNETİMİ ÜZERİNE KAVRAMSAL BİR ANALİZ

Konur Alp DEMİR

LOBİCİLİK VE KAMU YÖNETİMİNDE KATILIM

Cenay BABAOĞLU

TÜRKİYE VE DÜNYADA GÜVENLİ KENT YAKLAŞIMI: KENTSEL GÜVENLİK Mİ? GÜVENLİ KENT Mİ?

İlker GÜNDÜZÖZ

KURUMSAL SOSYAL SORUMLULUK FAALİYETLERİ VE BU FAALİYETLERİN HALKIN PARLAMENTOYA BAKIŞINA ETKİSİNİN İNCELENMESİ: DANİMARKA PARLAMENTOSU ÖRNEĞİ

Gözde TORUN