In the context of Uzbekistan, one very important thing to study first is their religious beliefs and values. As you mentioned, they tie up CSR with religiosity (an important significant research gap on CSR orientation, CSR perspectives, and CSR viewpoints). And yes, they may be true in their approach by not following the fundamentals of CSR determined by the whole world.

Sitara Karim, thank you for your comment. I have included Religion and Religiosity as part of my study. In the religiosity aspect, I am discovering the extent to which people use religious beliefs in their daily lives and decision-making as part of this study. And overall, I just see that whatever is written about CSR in developed countries is so different from what it is like here; therefore, planning to write an article that will include multiple variables such as knowledge, trust, preference as well as religiosity. As you said, might dedicate one study specifically to religion.

Exactly Zamira Ataniyazova CSR is a very broad terminology that needs to be investigated from different aspects. For some firms/companies/countries, it holds a very different perspective, while for the others it may be different. Consistency will only be obtained if you focus on GRI-based indicators, ESG indicators, or any other pre-specified standards of CSR.

Thank you Sitara Karim , honestly, it is my first time hearing about these indicators that could signal CSR standards, if possible can you share some link that explains it shortly? I am asking google, but getting lots of ads. and is it open data that is tracked by international organizations?

Dear, you can read my publications here on CSR and GRI standards. These standards are developed by international organizations for others to comply with and get their certification.

Article Re-configuring ownership structure, board characteristics an...

Article Sustainable corporate governance and gender diversity on cor...

Article Examining the role of gender diversity on ownership structur...

Article Do women on corporate boardrooms influence remuneration patt...

Article The dynamic impact of board composition on CSR practices and...

For standards please see the links below:

https://www.globalreporting.org/

https://www.sasb.org/

Sitara Karim Thanks) You have an impressive list of publications.

In as much as CSR helps to boost company's long-term relationships with stakeholders that promotes brand loyalty and finally profitability, it helps to provide the much needed services to the poorer communities. The issue now relating to who gains or who looses more between the society and the company out of the CSR initiatives requires to be established by researchers.

Nabulya Jesca makes an interesting point, but I would guess that is so hard to measure, as there could be short term and long term gains that would be almost impossible to measure.

In my opinion, awareness of CSR is one thing, and positive attitude toward CSR is another. I think most if not all of humanity is aware of doing things for social reasons (like caring for children, who don't directly pay you for the service). But I think our attitude towards that kind of socially oriented action is going to be context dependent, and the overly positive attitude toward CSR in more developed countries might easily be the anomaly.

Hypothesis: It could be that once one gets past a certain standard of living, one is removed enough from true economic need that one has more room to do things that have less direct economic benefit, such as pursuing signalled virtue in your work and purchasing decisions.

This hypothesis could be tested by comparing CSR attitudes *within* developed and developing countries, comparing poorer and richer populations within that country. Rich people in a developing country might have positive attitudes toward CSR and poor people in a developed country might have negative (or ambivalent) attitudes toward CSR.

In short, the question "Is this almond milk locally sourced?" sounds like a first-world problem.

Best of luck!

Brian D. Knox interesting thoughts! I have gathered some data in this field and the results that I have so far show that the richest people have the lowest interest in CSR brands and the lowest purchase intention. Whereas the middle-class people have comparatively higher interest (inclination toward buying CSR brands).

Moreover, regarding your second hypothesis my assumption regarding comparing developed and developing countries - could be vice versa of what you say. It is not my first research in the area of CSR, and the previous research also showed that people with lower income were more inclined towards CSR brands in comparison to people with higher income, but I guess it is really worth exploring it more - it sounds very interesting.

Interesting! Perhaps a modification to my hypothesis is that CSR attitudes might take an inverted U shape. I still think that the poorer strata of people seem unlikely, to me, to pay CSR premiums for products or jobs given the opportunity cost. The middle class is not the poorer strata, and they likely have economic means that are sufficiently comfortable so they can pay those premiums for the promised indirect benefits of CSR with relatively less opportunity cost.

Also this might depend on the measure. The poorest strata may "view" CSR firms positively because these firms might directly benefit the poorest strata, while not necessarily viewing them positively in terms of buying more from them or working more for them.

If the richest strata don't care as much for CSR (that is, the right-hand downward slope on the inverted U), I wonder if that could be due to (1) the richest strata might consist more of people who value economic returns per se and have relatively less utility from the promised CSR type benefits (i.e. the richer strata self-selects based on placing direct economic returns at a higher priority) or (2) the richest strata might have already satiated their CSR interests and be a point of diminishing returns from additional CSR investment.

I'm just trying to think out loud.

Brian D. Knox yes, now what you are saying is very close, as I have U shapes for Income and Education but they look kind of flipped, if 'do not wish to respond' group eliminated

Caroll (1991) gave a conceptual framework for describing the key aspect of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). These are economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic responsibility. However, must organizations and researchers limit the concept to a philanthropic and public relation tool. To get the essence of the CSR theory, it has to be looked at from the ethical standard incorporating the GRI framework.

I think the GRI framework involves disclosures by individual firms to show the magnitude of their damage to mother earth which involves the issue of accountability and therefore firms are required to clear their own mess which is quite different from CSR where firms offers services to the poor society which are not directly connected to the nature of the company's business or operations.

I agree with Tamunokonbia when he states that firms should be ethical enough and they clear their dangers to the environment not under the disguise of CSR.