Corporate Social Responsibility and
Policy Making – What role does
communication play?
Case Study Report on Campina
Arno Mathis, Research associate
CSTM – Center for Clean Technology and Environmental Policy
CSR performance of Campina
The company has already a number of
strong policies in place, especially with
respect to the environment.
Campina has currently only reduced
competencies at its disposal to navigate
uncertainties but also to maximise potential
opportunities because of decentralised
stakeholder management.
Study focuses on:
• The exchange of general information related to
the dairy sector and issues related to CSR
(communication network)
• The exchange of resources in the form of joint
funding, shared equipment, shared personnel,
or shared facilities (resource exchange network)
• Interest positions of actors with respect to four
CSR issues in the dairy sector of the
Netherlands.
• Significance of actors‘ belief systems on the
interaction in the network
• Impact of Campina’s CSR engagement on
the interaction with public authorities
Information exchange network of the Dutch dairy
sector
Information exchange and shared resources network
Communication and shared resources network after K-cores
identification
Main findings:
Core group of actors in the Dutch dairy
sector with respect to policy-making are:
LNV, VROM, EZ, NZO, VNO/NCW, FNLI,
and Campina.
Friesland Foods does not belong to the
core group based on information and
resource exchange.
Betweeness of actors in the Dutch dairy sector
Eigenvector scores of actors in the Dutch dairy sector
Main findings:
• LNV, LTO, Campina and Unilever are
central according to betweeness
centrality
• According to Eigenvector centrality,
actors participating in the formal policymaking process are also central in the
information-exchange network (LNV,
VROM, EZ, Campina, NZO, Friesland
Foods)
Status of actors in the Dutch dairy sector
Information exchange network combined with actors’
policy positions with respect to self- and co-regulation
Interest positions of actors incorporated in
the communications network
• Self- and co-regulation types of policy
instruments are supported by: LNV,
VROM, NZO, EZ, SenterNovem and
Campina among others
• Not supported by: VON-NCW, FNLI and
Friesland Foods among others
• = Coalition of formally and informally
powerful actors in favor of soft types of
regulation
Institutional factors predetermining the
interaction of actors
• The political culture and tradition of the Netherlands:
Characterized by the notion of consensus, compromise, and
consultation.
• Basic institutional structure:
Corporatism is of great importance in the Netherlands, VNO-NCW,
FNLI, NZO, and the SER enjoy strong positions because of Dutch
corporatism
• The level of trust within the Netherlands:
The high level of trust and social capital in the Netherlands is very
important for the feasibility of horizontal steering instruments such
as covenants (type of co-regulation).
Corporate Social Responsibility and policymaking – does it make a difference?
The higher levels of stakeholder management due to higher levels of CSR
engagement are, the better (more intense and better mutual understanding) the
relationship with public authorities should be.
Confirmed.
In the policy subfield of CSR, actor coalitions are set up in line with actors’ policy
core beliefs.
Not confirmed.
The capacity of actors to influence the general policy-making process gets
bigger, the more access points (direct links or even shared resources) actors
have to public authorities.
Confirmed.
The more the private sector practices CSR policies and strategies, the more
co-regulation and self-regulation types of legislation should be observable.
Partly confirmed.
The higher the CSR performance and stakeholder management of a
company is, the easier it is for the company to get not only access to public
authorities, but also to get licences, permits, etc from the authorities which
results in lower bureaucratic costs.
Confirmed.
Thank you for your attention