ABSTRACT
This conclusion presents some closing thoughts on key concepts discussed in the preceding chapters of this book. The book demonstrates that there is conceptual homogeneity in the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) discourse. Buhr and Grafstrom analyzed how the concept of CSR was given meaning in and by the Financial Times; Windell how and why consultants contributed to the translation of CSR into the Swedish business context; and de Bakker, Ohlsson, den Hond, Tengblad and Turcotte how Swedish, Canadian and Dutch firms represented themselves in their annual reports on issues related to CSR. The book discusses the different settings and the different roles of the actors involved, business press, management consultants, firms, there are striking similarities in the findings. It continues by highlighting these similarities, and closes with an explanation for the observed conceptual homogeneity. The book explores the homogeneity and heterogeneity in CSR, as well as the role of measurement of CSR, at different levels of analysis.
