Socially Responsible Firms and Endogenous Choice of Strategic Incentives

241 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Incentives, performance and desirability of socially responsible firms in a Cournot oligopoly (2015, result): “Finally, Kopel and Brand (2012) found similar results to ours (the CSR firm may achieve a higher market share and profit) in a quantity-setting duopoly where competition occurs between a profit-maximising and a CSR firm.”
Supplier Encroachment with a Dual‐Purpose Retailer (2021, unknown): “…suggests that the presence of such a dual-purpose ﬁrm changes the competitive dynamics and alters other critical decision-making such as R&D and information disclosure (e.g., Arya et al. 2019, Bova and Yang 2018, Ishibashi and Mat-sumura 2006, Ji et al. 2019, Kopel and Brand 2012, Matsumura 1998).”
Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: A non-linear and disaggregated approach (2016, background): “This enhances the positive demand effects from socially conscious consumers and therefore the financial performance of the firm (See for instance, Lambertini, L. and Tampieri, 2015; Becchetti et al. 2014; Manasakis et al., 2014; Kopel and Brand, 2012).”
Evolutionary Competition in a Mixed Market with Socially Concerned Firms (2014, unknown): “Three recent papers, Chirco et al. (2013), Kopel and Szidarovszky (2013), and Lambertini and Tampieri (2011) consider endogenous heterogeneity in objectives of firms, but their setups are static in nature since they study deviation-proof equilibria based on the concept of cartel stability.”