企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任論文企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任的法律探析.doc

企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任論文：企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任的法律探析【中文摘要】本文首先運(yùn)用法規(guī)范學(xué)的方法對(duì)Corporate Social Responsibility(簡(jiǎn)稱CSR)進(jìn)行辭源考查,分析“企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任”概念,接著引述了該理論在經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)上的爭(zhēng)論,從社會(huì)利益產(chǎn)生的根源上分析企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任存在的合理性,并著重從法學(xué)的角度分析企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任的性質(zhì)屬性,討論了企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任中法律責(zé)任的范疇,進(jìn)而對(duì)企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任的構(gòu)成提出了四要件設(shè)想。在考察其他國(guó)家與地區(qū)企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任活動(dòng)的基礎(chǔ)上對(duì)比中國(guó)企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任發(fā)展中的進(jìn)步與不足,以探討我國(guó)企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任法治化的路徑。本文從法學(xué)的角度回答了關(guān)于企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任的三個(gè)問題：企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任是什么?企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任為什么存在?以及中國(guó)企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任建設(shè)應(yīng)當(dāng)怎樣做?圍繞這三個(gè)問題,筆者進(jìn)行了探析。首先,企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任是什么?關(guān)于企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任的涵義,我國(guó)現(xiàn)行法律沒有界定,理論上也沒有統(tǒng)一的觀點(diǎn),筆者在對(duì)CSR進(jìn)行直譯的基礎(chǔ)上,運(yùn)用邏輯對(duì)比的方法分析出CSR應(yīng)解釋為“公司社會(huì)義務(wù)”,同樣,我國(guó)“社會(huì)責(zé)任”的成文法表述最早亦出現(xiàn)在新公司法中,為公司“社會(huì)責(zé)任”。而我們通常意義上理解的“企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任”應(yīng)該為“企業(yè)社會(huì)義務(wù)”,是在“公司社會(huì)責(zé)任”基礎(chǔ)上發(fā)展而來的,它至少包含法律責(zé)任、經(jīng)濟(jì)責(zé)任、道德責(zé)任,應(yīng)該是責(zé)任綜合體；其次,為什么企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任會(huì)存在?關(guān)于企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任存在的合理性,筆者認(rèn)為這個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)上爭(zhēng)論的出現(xiàn)恰恰反映了社會(huì)法學(xué)興起的根源社會(huì)利益的產(chǎn)生以及社會(huì)本位思想對(duì)個(gè)人本位思想的挑戰(zhàn)；再次,中國(guó)企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任建設(shè)應(yīng)該怎樣做?這是中國(guó)企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任法治化的問題,這也是本文寫作的最終。對(duì)此,筆者在前輩們研究的基礎(chǔ)上總結(jié)了我國(guó)企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任法治化途徑：關(guān)于企業(yè)法律責(zé)任法治化,我們需要考慮它實(shí)現(xiàn)的方式,是選擇分散式立法模式,還是選擇集中式立法模式?并由此展開對(duì)中國(guó)企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任法的設(shè)想；關(guān)于企業(yè)道德責(zé)任法治化,我們應(yīng)該區(qū)別對(duì)待：對(duì)于那些當(dāng)前為人們普遍遵守且急需通過國(guó)家強(qiáng)制力予以保護(hù)的道德,通過立法預(yù)測(cè),將其上升為法律強(qiáng)制規(guī)范；對(duì)現(xiàn)階段人們普遍認(rèn)可和接受但并不需要國(guó)家強(qiáng)制力予以特別保護(hù)的道德,適用行業(yè)自律規(guī)范等軟法予以控制；其他的繼續(xù)由純粹的道德等非強(qiáng)制性手段予以調(diào)控?！居⑽恼縄n this thesis, the author first analysis the conception of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), then quotes the argument in Economics theoretically to demonstrate the rationality of the existence of CSR, and analysis the nature of CSR form the standpoint of jurisprudence to discuss the category of Corporate Legal Responsibility among CSR, then puts forward the four-factors assumption about CSR. On the basis of the exploration of the CSR development in other countries and areas worldly, the author compares the advantages and disadvantages of the development of CSR in China to probe the way into legal construction of CSR in China.The author answers three questions about CSR from the view of jurisprudence, there are what is CSR? Why it exists? And how to do in the construction of Chinese CSR development? For the first question, there is no unified definition about CSR in Chinese legal theory horizon, so the author translates CSR literally. Logically speaking, CSR is Enterprise Social Obligation in Chinese, which comes form Corporate Social Responsibility in Corporate Law. It is the synthesis which contents Corporate Legal Responsibility (CLR), Corporate Financial Responsibility (CFR) and Corporate Moral Obligation (CMO). For the second question, the author thinks the reason about the development of CSR is the rise of social law, that is the rise of social benefit and the challenge for standard of society to personalism. And the third question is about the legal construction of Chinese CSR, which is the final purpose of this paper. Based on other scholarsresearch findings, the author summarizes the approaches about development of CRS in China. Firstly, as to the legal construction of Corporate Legal Responsibility, we should consider the way how to make it true, that is to say, which kind of legislation model shall we choose? the centralized one? or the decentralized one? According to these, the author gives the assumption of Chinese CSR Law. Secondly, as to legal construction of corporate financial responsibility, we should take measures as follows, for the morals which observed by people and needs to be legislated, we should legislate morality, for the others which need not to be legislated, we should regulate them through the soft law such as business ethics and so on.【關(guān)鍵詞】企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任 道德責(zé)任法治化 中國(guó)企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任法【英文關(guān)鍵詞】CSR Corporate legal Responsibility Chinese CSR Law【目錄】企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任的法律探析摘要8-9Abstract9-10引論11-13第一章 企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任概念分析13-18一、”企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任”辭源考13-14(一) “Corporate”的直譯13-14(二) “Responsibility”英文語境下的涵義14二、經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)視角下的企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任14-18(一) 經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)對(duì)”企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任”理解14-15(二) “企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任”存在合理性15-18第二章 企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任的性質(zhì)18-23一、法學(xué)上的爭(zhēng)論道德責(zé)任抑或法律責(zé)任?18-19(一) 企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任是義務(wù),包含狹義上的法律責(zé)任18-19(二) 企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任為責(zé)任綜合體19二、公司社會(huì)責(zé)任中的法律責(zé)任范疇19-23(一) 企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任中經(jīng)濟(jì)責(zé)任與法律責(zé)任的關(guān)系20-21(二) 企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任中道德責(zé)任與法律責(zé)任的關(guān)系21(三) 企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任中法律責(zé)任的界定21-23第三章 企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任的構(gòu)成要件23-28一、傳統(tǒng)的法律責(zé)任構(gòu)成要件23二、企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任要件設(shè)想23-28第四章 企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任的實(shí)踐與發(fā)展28-35一、企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任在北美的發(fā)展28-30二、企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任在歐洲的發(fā)展30-32三、企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任在亞洲的發(fā)展32-33四、非政府組織的國(guó)際運(yùn)動(dòng)33-35第五章 中國(guó)企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任建設(shè)35-41一、企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任理念在中國(guó)的發(fā)展現(xiàn)狀35-37(一) 我國(guó)企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任建設(shè)的進(jìn)步35-37(二) 我國(guó)企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任建設(shè)的不足37二、全方位推進(jìn)我國(guó)企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任建設(shè)37-41(一) 加強(qiáng)政府引導(dǎo)37-38(二) 完善企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任立法38(三) 強(qiáng)化企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任的實(shí)施38-41第六章 企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任法治化41-49一、企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任法治化的必要性41-43(一) 社會(huì)利益訴求與社會(huì)法的興起