Understanding Corporate Social Responsibility of the Corporate Sector to SDG 7: Energy for All: A Lesson of Developing Countries, Nepal
Keywords:
SDG, CSR, Corporate Sector and CSR FundAbstract
Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 7: energy for all is a global agenda to Nepal, where about 85 percent rural population have not access to energy for lighting and about 40 percent of the bottom 20 percent extreme poor access energy. The government has been initiating alternative energy to reduce such huge energy gap. Still it is not sufficient for wider impact. The corporate sector’s social responsibility is alternative hope for further collaboration. However, still energy for all campaign is sluggish. In this context, this paper examines CSR of the corporate sector in Nepal and its contribution in SDG 7: energy for all. The paper has employed explorative and descriptive method based on secondary and primary data. The paper finds a better knowledge of stakeholders about CSR but its fund is informal and small. Its size is unsystematically least. It is voluntarily nature to the corporate sector. Its impact is narrow. In SDG 7: energy for all, there is no knowledge about SDG 7, no CSR activity and event because of no mandatory, no knowledge and no idea. Therefore, almost all stakeholders opine to make it mandatory and prioritized SDG 7: energy for all for its positive impacts in the society at large and wider.
References
2. Afful K. Corporate Social Responsibility. Organization. Kathmandu: ODC. 2003.
3. Belloumi M. Energy consumption and GDP in Tunisia: Cointegration and causality analysis. Energy Policy 2009; 37: 2745-2753.
4. Berle AA. For whom corporate managers are trustees: A note. Harvard Law Review. USA: Harvard School of Law 1932; 45(8): 1365-1372.
5. Boulding KE. “The Economics of Energy” The Energy Crisis: Reality or Myth, Washington: American Academy of Political. 1973.
6. Bowden N, Payne JE. The causal relationship between U.S. energy consumption and real output: A disaggregated analysis. Journal of Policy Modeling 2009; 31(2): 180-188.
7. Carroll AB. Corporate Social responsibility. Business & Society 1999; 38: 268-295.
8. Centre Bureau of Statistics (CBS). Population Census, Kathmandu: CBS. 2011.
9. Cheng-Lang Y, Lin HP, Chang CH. Linear and nonlinear causality between sectoral electricity consumption and economic growth: Evidence from Taiwan. Energy Policy 2011; 38: 6570- 6573.
10. Costantini V. Martini C. The causality between energy consumption and economic growth: A multi Sectoral Analysis Using Non-Stationary Cointegrated Panel Data. Energy Economics 2010; 32: 591-603.
11. Dodd EM Jr. For whom are corporate managers trustees? Harvard Law Review 1932; 45(7): 1145-1163.
12. Domdom A, Abiad V, Pasimio H. Rural Electrification Benefit Assessment Study: The Case of the Philippines, ESMAP Draft Report, World Bank, Washington DC. 1999.
13. Eberhard A, Van Horen C. Poverty and Power: Energy and the South African State, Pluto Press, East Haven, Connecticut. 1995.
14. Elhauge E. Corporate managers operational discretion to sacrifice corporate profits in the public interest. In: Environmental Protection and the Social Responsibility of Firms-Bruce Hay, Stavins Robert, Vietor Richard, eds. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future. 2005.
15. Fanto JA. The role of corporate law in French corporate governance. Cornell International Law Journal 1998; 31: 31.
16. Foster V, Jean Philippe T. Measuring the impact of energy intervention on the poor-an illustration from Guatemala. Infrastructure for Development. UK: Private Solution. 2000.
17. Graff Z, Joshua, Small A. A Modigliani–Miller theory of altruistic corporate social responsibility. BE Journals in Economic Analysis and Policy: Topics in Economic Analysis and Policy 2005; 5(1): 1-19.
18. Griffin RW. Management 5th edition New Delhi: A.I.T.B.S. 1998
19. Lynch-Fannon I. The corporate social responsibility movement and law’s empire: Is there a conflict?” Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly 2007; 58(1).
20. Marinov B, Heiman B. Company law and corporate governance renewal in transition economies: The Bulgarian dilemma. European Journal of Law and Economics 1998; 6: 231-61.
21. Ministry of Finance (MoF) (2018) Economic Survey. Kathmandu: MoF.
22. Miwa Y. CSR: Dangerous and harmful, though maybe not irrelevant. Cornell Law Review 1999; 84: 1227-1254. 23. Portney P. Corporate social responsibility: An economic and public policy perspective. In: Environmental Protection and the Social Responsibility of Firms-Hay Bruce, Stavins Robert, Vietor Richard, eds. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future. 2005.
24. Reinhardt F. Environmental protection and the social responsibility of firms: Perspectives from the business literature.” In: Environmental Protection and the Social Responsibility of Firms-Hay Bruce, Stavins Robert, Vietor Richard, eds. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future. 2005.
25. Reputation Institute. CSR Ranking Report. USA: Reputation Institute. 2017.
26. UK Parliament. Energy Security, Research Paper. UK: UK parliament (URL: http://www.parliament.uk). 2007. 27. Usaid (2008). Energy Security Quarterly. January New Delhi: USAID SARI/ENERGY.
Published
Issue
Section
We, the undersigned, give an undertaking to the following effect with regard to our article entitled
“_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________” submitted for publication in (Journal title)________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________Vol.________, Year _________:-
1. The article mentioned above has not been published or submitted to or accepted for publication in any form, in any other journal.
2. We also vouchsafe that the authorship of this article will not be contested by anyone whose name(s) is/are not listed by us here.
3. I/We declare that I/We contributed significantly towards the research study i.e., (a) conception, design and/or analysis and interpretation of data and to (b) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content and on (c) final approval of the version to be published.
4. I/We hereby acknowledge ADRs conflict of interest policy requirement to scrupulously avoid direct and indirect conflicts of interest and, accordingly, hereby agree to promptly inform the editor or editor's designee of any business, commercial, or other proprietary support, relationships, or interests that I/We may have which relate directly or indirectly to the subject of the work.
5. I/We also agree to the authorship of the article in the following sequence:-
Authors' Names (in sequence) Signature of Authors
1. _____________________________________ _____________________________________
2. _____________________________________ _____________________________________
3. _____________________________________ _____________________________________
4. _____________________________________ _____________________________________
5. _____________________________________ _____________________________________
6. _____________________________________ _____________________________________
7. _____________________________________ _____________________________________
8. _____________________________________ _____________________________________
Important
(I). All the authors are required to sign independently in this form in the sequence given above. In case an author has left the institution/ country and whose whereabouts are not known, the senior author may sign on his/ her behalf taking the responsibility.
(ii). No addition/ deletion/ or any change in the sequence of the authorship will be permissible at a later stage, without valid reasons and permission of the Editor.
(iii). If the authorship is contested at any stage, the article will be either returned or will not be
processed for publication till the issue is solved.