The government's role in promoting corporate responsibility: a comparative analysis of Italy and UK from the relational state perspective

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the changing role of governments promoting corporate responsibility (CR) as a result of the challenges raised by globalisation.

Design/methodology/approach

CR is linked to the restructuring of governments' agendas in the framework of government/private sector/civil society relationships. It is a result of the research project that applies the Relational State Model Approach to the analysis of CR public policies. The relational state situates the relations between the public and private sectors, between the state and society, in the sphere of co‐responsibility.

Findings

The paper concludes that in the UK a more systemic, national government‐centred and business‐oriented approach prevails, while Italy has a more extensive, multi‐stakeholder and multi‐level approach.

Research limitations/implications

Future research should complete the comparative analysis expanding it to other European countries: northern and central European countries to analyse the difference between all European governments in order to promote CR.

Practical implications

The analytical framework of this paper could be used for academic, business leaders and policy makers to develop future actions in relation to CR public development.

Originality/value

The objective to be achieved is to understand the new political and public framework incorporating CR as a new form of governance. We compare two countries that represent two very different models of government action. The theoretical approach of the paper is based on the comparative analysis of CR governmental vision, objectives, strategies and internal government CR structure.

Citation

Albareda, L., Tencati, A., Lozano, J.M. and Perrini, F. (2006), "The government's role in promoting corporate responsibility: a comparative analysis of Italy and UK from the relational state perspective", Corporate Governance, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 386-400. https://doi.org/10.1108/14720700610689504