The above quotation is a conclusion of how the Nordic countries rank in global comparisons of economic and social prosperity. Nordic countriesâIceland, Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Swedenâare small and remotely located European countries (Fellman et al. 2008), yet they rank disproportionally high in terms of their corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance in global comparison (Midttun 2018; Strand and Freeman 2015; Strand et al. 2015). Furthermore, the Nordic countries routinely land top positions when measuring competitiveness (World Economic Forum 2018a), trust (Eurobarometer 2017), transparency (Transparency International 2018)âand happiness (Helliwell et al. 2018). The Nordics are also well known for their welfare state systemsâthe âNordic formulaââthat include joint promotion of social responsibility by the state, businesses, and civil society, and characteristics such as a vibrant civil society and culturally strong traditions for collaboration (Midttun 2018, p. 193). Furthermore, the Nordics are celebrated for their structures and policies that support equality between genders and social groups, as well as their top-performing public education systems (OECD 2016; European Institute for Gender Equality 2017; World Economic Forum 2018b). For these reasons and more, the Nordic countries serve as examples and inspiration for many.
Finland, the focus of this book, is a country with a population of 5.5 million. The neighboring countries are Sweden, Norway, and Russia, of which especially Sweden has influenced the institutional and cultural history. Finland is scarcely populated, as the population density is only about a half of the OECD average, with approximately 30% of people living in the capital area in the South (OECD 2016; Statistics Finland 2018). The level of education is high and the average yearly salary is approximately 43,000 EURâwith tax rates that are among the highest in the world, the total tax revenue being 43,3% in 2017 (OECD 2018). Typically, for Nordic countries, the income distribution is among the fairest in the world, as indicated by a low Gini coefficient (OECD 2016).
Since gaining independence in 1917, Finland started to establish welfare policies and structures, especially through the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. These structures include progressive taxing, public education, universal health care, and generous parental leaves, as well as economic policies that were steered to support innovation and globalization (Karisto et al. 1999; OECD 2017). Especially due to the welfare tradition, business organizations have been well involved in social issues for a long period of time in Finland, significantly longer than the clashes over environmental issues around the 1980s that are often referred to as a starting point for a broader global CSR discussion. However, as in many other countries, early practices of social responsibility date even to the beginning of the industrial era. In Finland, the first acts of social responsibility emerged as the first industrial companies, especially in rural Finland, took active roles in building the local communities, educating the citizens of the emerging nation state, and offering a wide array of social benefits to secure a viable workforce for their expanding operations (e.g., Juholin 2004a; MĂ€kinen and Kourula 2014; Karonen 2004).
The early industrial history sets the background for CSR in Finland, which is addressed in the first part of the book, along with a broader background of CSR and stakeholder thinking in the Nordic welfare states. The second part explores the country-specific context of âdoingâ CSR in Finlandâthe public sector and institutional infrastructures that set the hard laws and influence soft law regulation, the private sector where several traditional industries still reign but newer startup activities and the digitalization boom shape the game for CSR, the nonprofit sector and civil society, which confront as well as collaborate with companies around CSR issues, and the media and communication environment where CSR is communicated and publicly scrutinized. The third part focuses on trends and challenges of CSR in Finland, as it discusses the current state of Finnish CSR performance, diffusion of global trends, increasing professionalism of CSR in Finland, and the most pressing CSR challenges for Finnish companies now and in the future. To map the terrain of trends and challenges, the third part draws on recent analyses and reports, most importantly the yearly survey of FIBS (Finnish Business & Society), a leading CSR network with over 300 member organizations. Since 2013, FIBS has surveyed roughly 200 Finnish companies yearly, focusing particularly on practices, challenges, and future trends related to CSR. The respondents, consisting of CEOs, CSR directors, and managers, represent mainly large and medium-sized companies, from different industrial sectors (FIBS 2018).
While Finland and Finnish companies are parts of global (CSR and other) initiatives, networks and systems, this book aims to identify and address some of the characteristics that are distinctive specifically for the Finnish context. While we readily explore the intersections of Finnish, Nordic, and international CSR, it is worth noticing that CSR can mean different things to individuals and organizational actors operating in different cultural, political, and industrial settings (Matten and Moon 2008). In principle, the book follows the definition of corporate social responsibility as âthe responsibility of enterprises for their impacts on societyâ (European Commission 2011). However, these impacts can be understood as both negative and positive, and they can vary depending on the industry or even depending on an organization. The cultural and political context can further influence what is acknowledged as an impactâhow far-reaching those impacts can beâand what kind of policies, regulations, guidelines, and expectations there are for companies to address those impacts. Moreover, companies often actively influence the composition and understanding of what CSR entails by making their own interpretations of CSR (cf. Czarniawska and SevĂłn 1996).
The Finnish term for CSR has traditionally been yhteiskuntavastuu (e.g., Juholin 2004b), which translates to âsocietal responsibilityâ as yhteiskunta means society and vastuu means responsibility. This choice of words is perhaps not surprising, especially from the perspective of the welfare state tradition, where business is expected to take part in societal development in active interaction with the public sector and the civil society. Interestingly, the term yhteiskuntavastuu does not entail the word âcorporationâ or âcompanyâ, although it is quite commonplace to see the term extended to yritysten yhteiskuntavastuuâcompaniesâ societal responsibility. Notably, however, the Finnish term yhteiskuntavastuu is not limited to business actors, as it is not unusual to see the term attached to actors such as public sector organizations, nonprofit organization, and even individuals (e.g., Karonen 2004). Again, this use of the term can be considered logical from the perspective of the Nordic traditions of collaboration and joint responsibilities (Midttun 2018; Midttun et al. 2015). Although the use of CSR terms has varied over the years (e.g., Timonen and Luoma-aho 2010), Finnish companies currently tend to talk less about yhteiskuntavastuu and more about yritysvastuu (corporate responsibility), vastuullisuus (responsibili...