In today's commercial market, corporate corporation faces an ever-increasing competitive and societal challenge. Using the mediating functions of corporate governance to determine the effects of businesses' performance on CSR practices is advantageous because this serves as a source of legitimacy for the practice. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has emerged as a workable business strategy over the past few decades, whether as a result of governmental regulations, consumer demand, or market circumstances, all of which continue to be crucial factors in the current global economic downturn.

The paper tries to comprehend how profitability or performance affects business value. Businesses are doing everything they can to stay afloat in today's cutthroat market by reducing costs and boosting profits from their operations. The paper examines the value and legal implications of CSR as it aided in corporate affairs.

Introduction
Companies must put their attention on crucial aspects like performance, governance, and social responsibility under pressure to maintain competitive advantages in today's fiercely competitive market economy. In order to respond to rapidly changing environments, a company must be able to combine, develop, and reconfigure both internal and external expertise. Over the past few decades, corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become a viable corporate strategy, whether as a result of governmental regulation, consumer demand, or market conditions, which continue to be a major factor in the current global economic downturn. Business organizations with a net worth over $5 billion are required to engage in CSR activities by virtue of a special provision in the Indian Companies Act 2013.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is the business practices that integrate social, economic, and environmental concerns into daily operations and interactions with stakeholders. With the aim of promoting the health, welfare, and sustainable development of society, CSR is generally understood to be a mechanism through which businesses accept responsibility for the effects of their choices and actions by holding themselves to a set of ethical, social, and environmental standards.

CSR has been one of the most controversial and crucial issues since the 1950s, and it has only grown since then[1]. Among practitioners and academics, the CSR field is one of the most rigorous research topics. Bowen[2] mentioned CSR for the first time in business history in his important book Social Responsibility of Businessmen in 1953. The key question in his work, he contends, and continues to be discussed, is "what duties to society may business people fairly be expected to assume?" Bowen also emphasizes the need of understanding corporate ethics in order to achieve excellent long-term success.

CSR is broadly defined as a strategy for reducing the negative effects of corporate production, operation, and social welfare, as well as compassionate business practices when owners and shareholders are pressuring companies to increase profitability rather than create or maintain organizations. CSR is a crucial corporate activity that combines social and environmental concerns with business objectives. The businesses that prefer CSR may go above and beyond the minimal legal requirements. Business owners who believe that CSR improves or pays off financially for their organizations will implement CSR initiatives or publicly display their commitment to CSR.

There exist various schools of thought regarding the relationship between corporate social responsibility, corporate governance, and firm performance. One school of thought holds that corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a continuation of corporate governance (CG), which serves as an external mechanism that considers the concerns of broader stakeholders, fulfilling the fundamental objective of businesses, which is to maximize firm performance.

Others claim that corporate governance is a tool that efficiently carries out corporate social responsibility. Both parties agree that effective corporate governance could also signal a firm's commitment to corporate social responsibility to a wide range of stakeholders, enhancing the firm's reputation, to the extent that corporate governance determines organizational systems, and procedures to align the incentives of managers with those of stakeholders and thereby reduce agency problems.

Since April 1, 2014, India has made corporate social responsibility (CSR) mandatory. As a gauge of corporate governance, CSR accounts for spending about 2% of the average net profit over the previous three years as CSR. The 2013 amendments to the Companies Act introduced a mandatory disclosure requirement for CSR, making India the first nation to do so.

A number of changes have been made, and now, under Subsection 1 of Section 135 of the Companies Act of 2013, CSR is required for businesses with a net worth of at least 500 crores, a turnover of at least 1000 crores, or a net profit of at least 5 crores per fiscal year. Additionally, companies are required to form a CSR committee with at least 3 other directors and 1 independent director.

In contrast to private, unlisted, and foreign firms, which must have two directors on board but no independent director, central and state government firms must follow the same set of regulations. Although some researchers believe that CSR is primarily a western phenomenon, it is also becoming more and more popular in developing nations. According to a survey conducted by KPMG for Indian companies, 98 out of the NIFTY 100 Index companies have a CSR strategy and publish reports about CSR in their annual reports.

Moreover, despite receiving less attention, small and privately held businesses have begun to support and allocate resources to CSR. Only a few studies conducted in India have demonstrated the beneficial effects of CSR on business profitability and the ability of managers to make wise CSR decisions (Kapoor & Sandhu, 2010). CSR has a favorable impact on concurrent profitability and stock returns, according to a panel regression analysis of the Bombay Stock Exchange-BSE 100 Index for a nine-year period (2010-2018). Similarly, CSR affects a company's future financial performance, and researchers claim that CSR is significantly and positively impacted by lagged financial performance.

The evolution and development of CSR
The Industrial Revolution served as the foundation for the history of corporate social responsibility. When the perspective of artisan work changed to one of mass production at the end of the 19th century as a result of the industrial revolution, labor conflicts that arose exposed several social issues that compelled businesses to take actions that could be seen as the foundation of CSR. In the 1950s and 1960s, the capitalist model, which encouraged profit maximization and market self-regulation, exposed careless behavior that led to business violations of human and labor rights. As a result of this reality, voices in society have begun to call for more socially progressive business practices.

A severe economic crisis also impacted the 1970s, which sparked the growth of social movements that were crucial in bringing environmental and civil rights issues to the attention of businesses and corporations. Concern over the effects of human behavior on the environment, human and labor issues, and numerous international organization summits started to emerge in the 1980s and 1990s. Companies' CSR policies were employed at this time to promote their social and environmental policies, practices, and performance as well as to boost their reputation and social legitimacy.

A further move toward altering the business model was made possible by the globalization of markets, more firm freedom to operate in the 2000s, and the complexity of corporate relationships with various social or interest groups. CSR, or corporate social responsibility, has generally become a crucial component of how businesses respond to various societal requirements, regarded as the way businesses take on social commitments and responsibilities while considering the effects of their operations on stakeholders.

The growth of CSR in the new millennium shows that sustainability is a concern. CSR has been viewed as an organization's dedication to maximizing long-term beneficial outcomes and reducing detrimental consequences on society. The triple bottom line emphasizes three problems from a development perspective: social responsibilities (people), environmental responsibility (planet), and economic responsibility (profit).

The triple bottom line holds that businesses should focus just as much on social and environmental issues as they do on profitability. A socially conscious business can also be seen as a force for economic growth, social justice, and environmental preservation. Like this, the three CSR pillars of economic, social, and ecological are frequently included in definitions. Thus, in terms of growth, many academics have concluded that the three aspects are connected and that teamwork supports CSR's long-term viability.

Development of corporate social responsibility in India
Up to 1850, during the preindustrial era, wealthy merchants distributed a portion of their income to the wider population by building temples dedicated to a particular religion. Additionally, by giving food from their godown and money, these merchants helped the society overcome periods of famine and epidemics, gaining a position of importance in the community. In India, colonial rule began in the 1850s, and this affected how CSR was approached. The industrial families of the 19th century, including Tata, Godrej, Bajaj, Modi, Birla, and Singhania, were very focused on both social and economic factors. But it has been noted that their initiatives for both social and industrial development were not only driven by selfless and religious motives but also influenced by caste groups and political objectives.

Indian industrialists were put under more pressure to show their commitment to the advancement of society during the independence movement. At this time, Mahatma Gandhi popularised the idea of "trusteeship," which required corporate leaders to handle their wealth in a way that benefited the average person. "I want to abolish capitalism almost as much as the most accomplished socialist, if not exactly. However, our approaches are different. My trusteeship theory is neither improvised nor disguised.

I'm sure it will outlive all competing hypotheses." Gandhi used these terms to emphasize his case for his concept of "trusteeship." Gandhi's influence forced numerous industrialists to act for the nation's construction and socioeconomic growth. Gandhi claimed that Indian businesses should serve as the "temples of new India." Businesses created trusts for universities and colleges under his influence, and they also assisted in establishing training and research institutes. The trusts' operations primarily followed Gandhi's reforms, which aimed to end untouchability, support women's emancipation, and promote rural development.

During 1960�1980) the private sector was compelled to take a back seat during. Development was viewed as being driven mostly by the public sector. The time was referred to as an "age of command and control" because of the strict legislative restrictions placed on private sector activity. Corporate malpractices were caused by the policy of industrial licensing, hefty taxes, and restrictions on the private sector. As a result, laws addressing labor, corporate governance, and environmental issues were passed. PSUs were established by the government to make sure that resources (such as money, food, etc.) were distributed to the needy. However, the public sector's effectiveness was somewhat constrained.

The private sector's active participation in the socio-economic growth of the nation became important as a result of the shift in expectations from the public to the private sector. Indian academics, legislators, and businesspeople organized a national workshop on CSR with the goal of fostering reconciliation in 1965. Transparency, social responsibility, and ongoing stakeholder conversations were prioritized. Despite such efforts, CSR was unable to gain traction.

The relationship between CSR, CG and FP
Corporate Social Responsibility: A Concept
The term "corporate social responsibility" has several interpretations; the discussion over CSR dates to the 1950s, and there is no commonly accepted definition[3]. CSR is regarded as a key concept in the study of the connection between firms' social responsibilities and their business operations. The definition of CSR and the concepts that make up CSR are not generally agreed upon in the literature, but it has been noted that CSR should be defined in light of philosophical, historical, contextual, and practical considerations that are in line with the corporate goal in order to prevent CSR from turning into a liability for the corporation.

CSR is described as legal measures that appear to serve some social good outside the firm's interests and are required by law[4]. CSR is concerned with the interaction between businesses and their stakeholders[5]. Furthermore, CSR refers to firms' relationships with society and their obligation to match their principles with public expectations. Businesses should go beyond their basic economic and legal obligations. CSR is comprehensive and based on an awareness of the company's role in society. It is described as the voluntary incorporation of social and environmental issues into corporate activities, as well as their engagement with stakeholders.

In addition, researchers conducted content analyses of several definitions of CSR and concluded that the term comprises five dimensions: stakeholder, social, economic, voluntariness, and environmental. The environmental component focuses on issues related to the environment, including a clean environment The social component is focused on how businesses interact with social issues to improve societies. The economic component is concerned with money matters and economic growth. The stakeholder dimension puts a focus on how businesses interact with their stakeholders, including clients, workers, suppliers, and communities. The voluntary dimension is CSR participation which is motivated freely by moral and ethical principles.

According to Brinkmann and Peattie[6], CSR is a process that integrates social, environmental, ethical, human rights, and consumer issues into company operations and core strategy in close collaboration with the multi-stakeholders of the firm. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) can refer to the operation of a business, social success, corporate citizenship, or sustainable and responsible business.

CSR requires businesses to maximize their beneficial influence on stakeholders while minimizing their negative social impact. Companies should not restrict their social contributions to humanitarian costs converted into investments in long-term societal contributions, but should also carry out their economic operations; as a result, CSR integration leads to profit maximization allocated to value creation. According to stakeholder theories, CSR was designed to shift the company's attention toward reducing negative operational outcomes and increasing societal well-being[7].

Companies might overstate CSR actions in order to fool customers and build credibility and trust by misrepresenting the environment in order to maximize profits rather than improve society[8]. CSR has a favorable impact on company performance, but social irresponsibility has a negative impact on firm performance.

Furthermore, all of the CSR economic, social, and environmental factors have a favorable impact on corporate performance. CSR from a resource-based standpoint, as well as CSR programme execution, can result in lower operating costs and greater revenue through grants and incentives. Companies that implement environmental measures to decrease waste, reuse materials, recycle, and preserve water and power, for example, are typically eligible for grants and incentives. CSR involvement, on the other hand, builds management capabilities. Social responsibility management competencies may also contribute to better management.

Firms' Performance and CSR
To study the effects and connections between company performance and CSR, numerous research has examined CSR and firm performance using various methodologies. The conceptual approach for this study included the mediation of corporate governance and CSR effects on business performance. The company's vision is positively and profoundly impacted by CSR's aspects[9]. When the performance measures for growth, total assets, corporate soundness, and social contribution are favorable, CSR performance has a positive association with firm performance, which will lead to an increase in the usage of improved CSR[10]. Companies use creativity to inspire and improve corporate social performance through CSR and green business practices.

A strong correlation between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and performance demonstrates that business expenses are not hidden from stakeholders. It demonstrates the beneficial relationship between company performance and CSR. In contrast, the cost of CSR activities utilized by the company will be significantly lower than the CSR benefits if the interests of the stakeholders and their social expectations (the environment, consumers, and employees) are taken into consideration. As a result, if companies take CSR seriously, competition drives up expenses while driving down prices that are hidden from stakeholders.

Companies use creativity to inspire and improve corporate social performance through CSR and green business practices[11]. A strong correlation between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and performance demonstrates that business expenses are not hidden from stakeholders. It demonstrates the beneficial relationship between company performance and CSR. In contrast, the cost of CSR activities utilized by the company will be significantly lower than the CSR benefits if the interests of the stakeholders and their social expectations (the environment, consumers, and employees) are taken into consideration. As a result, if companies take CSR seriously, competition drives up expenses while driving down prices that are hidden from stakeholders.

The relationship between CSR and a firm's performance has also been investigated using accounting-based metrics, such as return on assets (ROA), total assets, and sales growth, and it has been found that there is a positive correlation between the two. The performance of businesses is impacted by return on assets (ROA), return on equity (ROE), and return on sales (ROS). Corporate financial performance improves with more corporate social awareness.

In contrast, Selcuk and Kiymaz investigated a negative association between CSR and financial success, finding that return on assets is lower for businesses that publish more information about their CSR efforts. According to the study's findings, highly leveraged organizations are less lucrative than larger corporations after accounting for debt and size.

The return on an asset was negatively impacted by a business's capital structure, short-term debt, long-term debt, and company leverage. Although the return on equity (ROE) and capital structure variables have a negative association, long-term debt and firm leverage are more important factors to consider. The amount of obligation on the capital structure has a detrimental impact on the company's performance. Enumerating all aspects of the result and predictor variable indicators, this study aimed to evaluate and pinpoint the effects of company performance on CSR.

Corporate Governance and Firm Performance
Corporate governance has got attention and developed as an important mechanism over the last decades. The recent financial crises, the fast growth of privatizations, and financial institutions have reinforced the improvement of corporate governance practices in numerous institutions of different countries. Well-managed corporate governance mechanisms play an important role in improving corporate performance. Good corporate governance is fundamental for a firm in different ways; it improves company image, increases shareholders' confidence, and reduces the risk of fraudulent activities.

Furthermore, good corporate governance develops a number of consistent mechanisms, internal control systems, and external environments that contribute to the business corporations' increase effectively as a whole to bring about good corporate governance. The basic rationale of corporate governance is to increase the performance of firms by structuring and sustaining initiatives that motivate corporate insiders to maximize the firm's operational and market efficiency, and long-term firm growth by limiting insiders' power that can abuse corporate resources.

There are various types of research done on CSR in order to examine the characteristics of CSR and the impact of participating in CSR activities on a company's financial performance. Some emphasize that businesses should be socially responsible because their actions and policies have an impact on the community[12].

Other experts, on the other hand, believe that committing resources to social and environmental goals increases expenses and undermines the firm's profitability and competitive spirit. As a result, the connection between CSR and corporate performance is one of the most heavily debated in the CSR literature, with many theoretical justifications and empirical findings portraying the connection as either positive, negative, or neutral.

CSR's positive effects on business performance
Researchers that support the Corporate social responsibility and Firm performance relationship claim that when a firm undertakes CSR operations, it develops a favorable image in the minds of stakeholders; hence, the more a company satisfies its stakeholders, the better the company's financial performance[13]. Businesses may increase their financial performance by meeting the needs of stakeholders.

For instance, putting the needs of the employees first increases employee productivity, boosts the company's reputation and public trust, and strengthens the firm's competitive edge. As a result, CSR activities increase corporate value by providing advantages that outweigh their costs and contribute to the sustainable development aim[14].

Similarly, other supporters of this relationship argue that serving the interests of stakeholders and being more accountable to them can have a favourable impact on the company's financial success. According to the stakeholder theory and the social impact hypothesis, business commitments to society are what motivate CSR[15]. Thus, these organizations frequently consider both the interests of agents and the advantages of various stakeholders when adopting their plans. The many CSR initiatives and charitable activities that businesses take part in then reflect their principles and have an impact on their reputation with stakeholders. This proves that businesses' commitments to CSR are motivated by their moral, ethical, and social obligations rather than by a need to comply with the law. The businesses through, CSR seeks to create strong ties between businesses and their stakeholders.

To elaborate, one area of research contends that charity has a favorable influence on market return and business profitability. Furthermore, engaging in CSR activities leads in lower financial risk, improved reputation, higher market returns, and competitive advantage. Furthermore, organizations that practice CSR through improving transparency and stakeholder participation have reduced capital restrictions and have stronger financing options.

Several research studies have been conducted on the relationship between CSR and corporate performance. A recent research study[16] looked at the influence of sustainable investments on the performance of G20 firms during COVID-19 and discovered that environmental, social, and governance (ESG) returns improved during a crisis. This outcome, however, was influenced by firm-specific factors, income level, and ESG pillars.

A favorable link, for example, was discovered between ESG and accounting performance measures, whereas an insignificant or negative association was discovered between ESG and market performance measurements. Furthermore, it was stressed that ESG practices are highly dependent on country-level mandatory or voluntary standards, environmental obligations, and integrated sustainability reporting. Broadstock's [17]authors found that during the COVID-19 pandemic, high environmental, social, and governance portfolios outperformed low environmental, social, and governance portfolios as environmental, social, and governance performance reduced financial risk. According to their findings, during the pandemic, environmental, social, and governance performance was favorably associated to short-term stock returns.

Similarly, Albuquerque examined all U.S. stocks on their environmental and social policies using Thomson Reuters' ESG Database. They discovered that companies with high environmental and social ratings had low stock return as well as good operational profit margins and returns. Similarly, during the early months of 2020, Ding[18] did cross-country research of 6700 enterprises from 61 nations to assess the association between CSR efforts and stock prices following the COVID-19 epidemic.

They concluded that enterprises that were heavily involved in CSR prior to the pandemic had a higher stock performance during the pandemic's onset, implying that CSR increases loyalty and stakeholder ties, which results in stakeholders supporting the firm during times of crisis. Furthermore, it was discovered that CSR enterprises were less affected by the pandemic breakout than other industries.

CSR's Negative Impact on Business Performance:

Some believe that engaging in CSR practices directs a firm's attention to environmental activities, employee relations, or societal welfare, and results in a shift of focus toward practices that do not increase shareholder value but increase costs. As a result, CSR has a detrimental influence on business performance and competitive advantage[19]. Others believe that managers participate in CSR to divert attention away from the firm's faults. As a result, the shift of emphasis hypothesis suggests that addressing the requirements of many stakeholders has a detrimental impact on corporate performance.

Furthermore, supporters of the traditionalist viewpoint say that there is a negative association between CSR and company performance because of the significant expenses associated with social and environmental initiatives, which impair competitive advantage and firm profitability. Furthermore, CSR may be included in a company strategy for social legitimacy and control. Part of the empirical research has shown evidence of negative consequences, emphasizing that CSR expenditures impose extra costs and expenses, which have an adverse effect on company performance.

Between 2009 and 2010, 329 publicly traded firms in the United States, Europe, and Asia-Pacific were analyzed to assess the link between CSR and financial success. Using the Granger causality test and linear regression analysis, they discovered that CSR does not result in high financial performance and that financial performance has a negative impact on CSR.

According to Vance's [20]support[21] proposition, being socially responsible has no economic benefits for the corporation; rather, it diminishes corporate stock returns. Furthermore, this has been proven by those who demonstrated that the firm's degree of social responsibility hampers Firms performance when compared to competitors. Similarly, claimed that participation in CSR activities wastes companies' resources that may be used in more profitable opportunities for the firms. Furthermore, they suggest that firm executives may engage in CSR to achieve personal gains rather than improve shareowner value.

Neutral Effects of CSR on Business Performance:

According to practitioners of a neutral relationship, being socially responsible has no impact on firm profitability. In this regard, conducted an empirical research study between 2005 and 2007 to investigate the relationship between CSR and firm financial performance by examining the financial indicators and social responsibility policies of companies listed on the Istanbul Stock Exchange. Although the researchers discovered a link between firm size and CSR, there was no link between CSR and firm financial performance.

Furthermore, after data from 599 companies in 28 countries, it was discovered that there is no direct correlation between CSR and financial performance; only an indirect one that is dependent on the mediating impact of a firm's intangible resources was discovered. During COVID-19, discovered little evidence that highly rated environmental, social, and governance corporations outperform the stock market. In support, investigated the relationship between CSR and market returns in 1750 U.S. firms during COVID-19 and concluded that there was no evidence that CSR influenced stock returns, indicating that CSR prior to the pandemic was ineffective in protecting shareholder wealth from an unanticipated crisis such as COVID-19.

Conclusion
Companies have societal responsibilities based on their location and activity. As a result, corporate social responsibility (CSR) integrates social, economic, and environmental implications into operations and interactions with expected stakeholders. Some analysts believe that CSR improves corporate image and attracts new resources, resulting in improved operational performance.

CSR has a positive impact on a company's value from this vantage point. Other studies, on the other hand, show that CSR increases expenditures while decreasing operational performance, reducing competitiveness and, as a result, firm value. Firms participate in CSR because they believe it will give them a competitive advantage.

As a result, resource-based approaches can help companies understand why they engage in or do not engage in CSR activities and disclosure. CSR can be viewed as generating both internal and external resource benefits. Companies that practice corporate social responsibility strengthen their external stakeholder relationships.

When businesses practice excellent social responsibility, their external stakeholder connections improve, as do their employees' motivation, morale, dedication, and loyalty. Investments in socially responsible activities can help organizations develop new resources and capabilities for internal use. According to this viewpoint, it is difficult to analyze CSR activities involving commercial organizations without also taking firm performance and corporate social responsibility into account.

As a result, corporations must freely engage in CSR activities to address stakeholder concerns about social and environmental issues, thereby improving their corporate image. CSR activities must also legitimize the firm's operations in society in order to ensure the firm's long-term survival. According to the study's findings, the outcome variable CSR is influenced by firm performance, corporate governance influences firm performance, and CSR influences the function of corporate governance.

Board, ownership, audit, and transparency are all indicator variables that have a positive and significant impact on corporate governance. Despite the various effects of CSR on business performance, there is little empirical evidence that corporate image mediates the relationship between CSR and firm performance. Companies have a social responsibility based on their corporate location and activities. As a result, corporate social responsibility (CSR) considers a variety of factors when conducting business and communicating with prospective stakeholders, giving them a competitive advantage.

References:

1. https://fbj.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s43093-021-00075-8
2. https://ijclp.com/the-mediating-role-of-corporate-social-responsibility-csr-in-firm-performance-and-value-creation/
3. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959652622037374
4. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316347087_The_Mediating_Role_of_Corporate_Governance_and_Corporate_Image_on_the_CSR FP_Link_Evidence_from_a_developing_country
5. https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/sustainability/sustainability-13-09717/article_deploy/sustainability-13-09717.pdf
6. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/17/9717/htm
7. https://vdoc.pub/documents/corporate-social-responsibility-in-the-manufacturing-and-services-sectors-56o5j8tgclj0

End-Notes:

1. Carroll AB (2016) Carroll's pyramid of CSR: taking another look. Int J Corp Soc Responsib 1(3):2�8
2. Bowen HR (1953) Social responsibilities of the businessman. Harper, New York
3. Low, M.P. Corporate Social Responsibility and the Evolution of Internal Corporate Social Responsibility in 21st Century. Asian J. Soc. Sci. Manag. Stud. 2016, 3, 56�74.
4. Muriithi, S.G.; Walters, B.A.; McCumber, W.R.; Robles, L.R. Managerial Entrenchment and Corporate Social Responsibility Engagement: The role of economic policy uncertainty. J. Manag. Gov. 2021, 27, 9�27.
5. Dartey-Baah, K.; Amponsah-Tawiah, K. Exploring the limits of Western Corporate Social Responsibility Theories in Africa. Int. J. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2011, 2, 126�137.
6. Brinkmann, J.; Peattie, K. Consumer Ethics Research: Reframing the debate about consumption for good. Electron. J. Bus. Ethics Organ. Stud. 2008, 13, 22�31.
7. Wang, H.; Li, T.; Takeuchi, R.; George, G. Corporate Social Responsibility: An Overview and New Research Directions. Thematic Issue on Corporate Social Responsibility. Acad. Manag. J. 2016, 59, 534�544.
8. Branco, M.C.; Rodrigues, L.L. Corporate social responsibility, and resource-based perspectives. J. Bus. Ethics 2006, 69, 111�132.
9. Yang, M.; Bento, P.; Akbar, A. Does CSR influence firm performance indicators? Evidence from Chinese pharmaceutical enterprises. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5656.
10. Păunescu, C. Current Trends in Social Innovation Research: Social Capital, Corporate Social Responsibility, Impact Measurement. J. Manag. Mark. 2014, 9, 105�118.
11. Porter, M.E. Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance; Harvard Business School: Boston, MA, USA; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 1990; p. 580.
12. Kabir, M.A.; Chowdhury, S.S. Empirical analysis of the corporate social responsibility and financial performance causal nexus: Evidence from the banking sector of Bangladesh. Asia Pac. Manag. Rev. 2022, in press.
13. Esen E (2013) The influence of corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities on building corporate reputation. Int Bus Sustain Corp Soc Responsib 11:133�150
14. Parket, I.R.; Eibert, H. Social Responsibility: The Underlying Factors. Bus. Horiz. 1975, 18, 5�10.
15. Carroll, A.B. Corporate Social Responsibility. Bus. Soc. 1999, 38, 268�295.
16. El Khoury, R.; Nasrallah, N.; Harb, E.; Hussainey, K. Exploring the performance of responsible companies in G20 during the COVID-19 outbreak. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 354, 131693.
17. Broadstock, D.C.; Chan, K.; Cheng, L.T.; Wang, X. The role of ESG performance during times of financial crisis: Evidence from COVID-19 in China. Finance Res. Lett. 2020, 38, 101716.
18. Ding, W.; Levine, R.; Lin, C.; Xie, W. Corporate immunity to the COVID-19 pandemic. J. Financ. Econ. 2021, 141, 802�830
19. Becchetti, L.; Cicirettiand, R.; Hasan, I. Corporate Social Responsibility and Shareholder's Value: An event study analysis, Working paper. In FRB of Atlanta Working Paper No. 2007-6; SSRN: Rochester, NY, USA, 2009
20. Vance SC (1975) Are socially responsible corporations good investment risks. Manag Rev 64(8):19�24
21. Friedman A (1970) The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York times magazine

Written By: Aditi - Semester VII, BBA LLB (Hons.) Corporate Law