Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Community Development in
Bayelsa State
ANITA EYERINEBI-EBI ORUAZE DICKSON, MAY NWOYE, CROSS OGOHI DANIEL
Department of Business Administration,
Nile University of Nigeria,
Cadastral Zone C-OO, Research & Institution Area, Airport Rd, Jabi 900001, Abuja,
NIGERIA
Abstract: – The main essence of Corporate Social Responsibility is to improve the welfare of the members of the
society. The proper implementation of CSR initiatives entail that organizations are not just driven by the quest for
economic gain or a good reputation, but that they are deliberate with positively affecting the lives of the members
of their host communities. The main objective of the study is to determine the impact of corporate social
responsibility on host community development in Bayelsa state, Nigeria. The work adopts a survey design method
and a structured questionnaire was used to collect data from respondents. The population of the study was three
thousand four hundred and sixty-two (3,462) youth leaders from oil producing communities in the state. The
questionnaires were distributed to four hundred and fifteen (415) respondents out of which three hundred and sixty-
seven were duly returned. The data were analysed with SPSS v.23.The results indicated that the economic,
social and environmental CSR provided by IOCs have no positive effect on community development.
Therefore, there is the need for a re-evaluation of IOCs’ CSR projects to be in line with the core development
challenges of the host communities.
Key-words: Community Development, Corporate Social Responsibility, International Oil Company, Host
Community, socially-oriented, environmentally-oriented.
Received: April 28, 2022. Revised: September 16, 2022. Accepted: October 19, 2022. Available online: November 10, 2022.
1 Introduction
The concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR)
is not a new phenomenon. While the idea itself may
have burgeoned in management and corporate
relations literature in the last few decades, its
application and practice have spanned more than two
centuries, [1], [2]. Thus, the concept has received
prodigious attention among researchers, entrepreneurs,
managers, and policymakers. Apart from being a long-
standing practice, the imperative for CSR lies in the
fact that it affords the organization the legitimacy to
function in an environment so that they can continue
to receive the resource inputs with which to expedite
their operations and remain afloat, [3], [4], [5].
The concept of CSR suggests that companies are not
meant to be aloof, careless, or insensitive about their
activities as they relate to other persons not directly
involved in the running of the firm. The negative
consequences of the operations of many organizations
have drawn the attention of stakeholders and calls
have been made for firms to become responsible for
members of the communities that host their functions,
[3]. In [6] the CSR is also referred to as corporate
citizenship; ensure that firms remain aware of the
effect of their activities on every aspect of societal
living including the social, environmental, and
economic dimensions.
In [7] the CSR is conceptualized as the business
model adopted by organizations that enables them to
conduct their operations in such a way that adds value
to their environment rather than harms it. In [8] we
have a business strategy that ensures that firms are not
only self-regulated but are also accountable to their
stakeholders – customers/clients, employees,
shareholders, suppliers, middlemen/distributors, the
host community, and the general public. While
various studies have examined CSR as a uni-
dimensional construct, recent works have investigated
its multidimensionality including the complex
interconnections that exist among them, [9], [10],
[11]. Hence, CSR can be classified as economic CSR,
social CSR, environmental CSR, and generic CSR,
[12].
In [13] the authors delineated five main dimensions
which are the stakeholder dimension, social
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2023.20.21
Anita Eyerinebi-ebi Oruaze Dickson,
May Nwoye, Cross Ogohi Daniel
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
214
Volume 20, 2023
dimension, economic dimension, voluntariness
dimension, and environmental dimension. With these
dimensions, the organization has more capacity to
remain proactive and specific as they strive for
sustainability in their social responsibilities towards
society. The main rationale for engaging in CSR
programs is that organizations believe that CSR
should be a vital component of their corporate image
([14]) because there is the view that customers are
more likely to patronize brands that are perceived to
adhere to ethical practices in their activities.
Specifically, Sustainability entails that the firm is
expected to imbibe stewardship of the community and
the environment where it operates. They are expected
to conduct their activities in such a way that they
satisfy present needs without obfuscating the chances
that future needs would also be met, [15].
This study is anchored on three main dimensions of
CSR which are the economic, social, and
environmental dimensions. The economic dimension
suggests that CSR initiatives should be imbibed by
firms as an investment that has an expected rate of
return through the firm’s product safety, sustainable
relationships with suppliers, and socially responsible
supply chain management, [16], [17].
The social dimension entails the integration of social
concerns of the society in the operations of the
business and the consideration of the full effect or
impact of their activities on the lives of the people in
the society, [18]. The environmental dimension dwells
on the notion that every organization has a
responsibility to preserve its natural environment by
ensuring that the impact of its activity on the
surroundings is not harmful to people or the
ecosystem, [19], [23]. It is basically the consideration
of environmental sustainability and management
while formulating and implementing the strategic
goals of the organization. Aside from the business
objectives of these corporate goals, business
organizations also place a certain degree of concern on
the development of the operational environment.
Community development involves the coming
together of a group of people in a community planning
and acting together to bring about the satisfaction of
their needs with a view to achieving desired change in
the lives of the people through their cooperative
efforts and by actively taking part in measures
designed to improve their conditions of living, [20].
The community development process provides the
opportunity of involving and motivating people in the
community to define, identify, analyze and solve
problems that they feel are important. It, therefore,
involves strengthening the capacity of individuals
within the community to accomplish the community’s
set goals.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
The main essence of CSR is the improvement of the
welfare of the members of society as well as the
fostering of environmental sustainability. The proper
implementation of CSR initiatives entails that
organizations are not just driven by the quest for
economic gain or a good reputation, but that they are
deliberate in positively affecting the lives of the
members of the host community, [18]. Apart from
investing in charities, firms are expected to allocate
resources to infrastructure, basic amenities, cultural
activities, and social cohesion in their host
communities. This is done by involving community
stakeholders who would help the firm to identify those
areas or aspects of the society that requires urgent
interventions. Such interventions would be reflected in
the economic status of individuals and families as a
result of increased income, [21].
Unfortunately, in Nigeria, multinationals in the Niger
Delta region have a reputation for flagrantly
disregarding their environments. Despite calls for
more responsibility and accountability from
stakeholders, their exploitation of the region continues
to deepen. CSR activities are only implemented to the
extent that the firm feels obligated to or believes that
they would benefit from it too, and most of the
infrastructural and socio-economic projects
purportedly designed to impact the community are
uncompleted for years. Those projects are façades that
portray CSR in the media but fall short of anything
worthwhile in reality.
The degradation of land, pollution of water (which is
the main means of livelihood for people in the region),
and the contamination of air have worsened the
quality of the health of the people as well as the
sustainability of the natural ecosystem. Regrettably,
this is fostered by some corrupt members of the
community who secretly receive backhanders from
these multinationals so as to silence any activist
moves that may raise awareness. Multinationals
scarcely adhere to environmental, public health, or
human rights standards in their relationships with host
communities. They continue to distort development by
setting communities against each other instead of
fostering collective development and peaceful
coexistence using their resources and network, [22].
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2023.20.21
Anita Eyerinebi-ebi Oruaze Dickson,
May Nwoye, Cross Ogohi Daniel
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
215
Volume 20, 2023
If this continues in Nigeria, the non-implementation of
CSR initiatives would lead to a threat to the livelihood
of communities due to a lack of environmental
sustainability. People would not be able to meet their
basic needs of food and water through farming and
fishing because oil-induced environmental pollution
would make it difficult to do so. Other socioeconomic
issues such as poverty, property losses, price inflation,
irresponsible parenting, vandalization, and prostitution
would worsen. Despite the large oil deposits in
Bayelsa, for instance, there are still low socio-
economic developments, especially in those
communities believed to be hosting this oil
multinationals.
1.3 Objectives of the Study
The main objective of the study is to determine the
impact of corporate social responsibility on host
community development in Bayelsa state, Nigeria.
Specifically, the study seeks to:
i. To establish the main effect of economic-
oriented CSR on development of host
communities in Bayelsa State.
ii. To determine the main effect of socially-
oriented CSR on development of host
communities in Bayelsa State.
iii. To ascertain the main effect of
environmentally-oriented CSR on
development of host
2 Reviews of Related Literatures
The Concept of Corporate Social Responsibility
There are varied conceptualizations of corporate social
responsibility and scholars are yet to agree on an
acceptable definition of the term. This invariably
affects it practical application as well, that is, the lack
of a consensus definition of the term may lead to
different understandings of the subject and thus mar
the quality of engagements that are supposed to occur
among stakeholders. If stakeholders do not view CSR
the same way, then there may be no agreed yardstick
with which to measure the impact of corporate-
community relations [18].
Apparently, business and society are now intricately
interwoven, to the extent that the activities of
organizations affect various sectors of the economy,
whether or not the firm realizes it. If this is so, then
businesses should have social responsibilities towards
those sectors that are been impacted by their
operations. Although these responsibilities may vary
depending on the firm, industry, or country, CSR still
remains corporate social responsibility everywhere
and is aptly defined as “the continuing commitment by
business to behave ethically and contribute to
economic development while improving the quality of
life of the workforce and their families as well as of
the local community and society at large”, [23].
2.1 Community Development
Community development is the combined processes,
programs, strategies, and activities that make a
community sustainable as compared to economic
development, [22].
There are two dimensions of community development
(1) basic development and (2) collective development.
The former entails the improvement experienced by
an individual in meeting his basic needs that is the
immediate needs that guarantee the survival of the
individual in society [18]. This means that they are
needs that the individual cannot do without this, basic
development is said to have occurred when these
needs are been met by the individual. For instance, the
provision and availability of food, clothing, and
shelter epitomize basic or primary development.
These need to an extent form part of the bedrock of
societal development. They determine the economic
and social status of the people. Thus, in facilitating
social CSR activities such as the provision of
scholarships, beneficiaries who are usually
excluded in poor communities would be able to save
more money to afford better food and water. [22],
found that social CSR would improve both the
functional and social values of the community
members because it is not influenced by the economic
and environmental dimensions of CSR.
On the other hand, collective development is societal-
focused. It occurs when the individuals in a
community look beyond their basic needs to
collectively pool resources together to meet the
demands of society, [23].
This means that every individual is to embrace the
responsibility of providing for the whole and the
complexity of society requires him to acquire a certain
degree of competence and skills to meet up this
collective demand. There will be no collective
development without the collaborative efforts of these
competencies and skills. This is because it is their
unified efforts that will birth collective development,
[19]. In Bayelsa State, as corporate citizens, IOCs are
also directly or indirectly involved in this collective
process.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2023.20.21
Anita Eyerinebi-ebi Oruaze Dickson,
May Nwoye, Cross Ogohi Daniel
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
216
Volume 20, 2023
2.2 Dimension of CSR
This study is anchored on three dimensions of CSR
that are visible in the relationship between IOCs and
their host communities in Bayelsa State. They include
the economic, social and environmental dimensions,
[21].
Economic Dimension
The economic dimension suggests that CSR initiatives
should be imbibed by firms as an investment that has
an expected rate of return through the firm’s product
safety, sustainable relationships with suppliers, and
socially responsible supply chain management, [14],
[21]. The idea here is that every resource that is
invested in CSR has the potential to return to the
company in economic terms whether in the short run
or in the long run. Basically, most CSR activities
carried out in host communities by IOCs are geared
towards creating a business-friendly environment that
will positively impact their profitability in the long
run. Managers and organizations that view CSR as an
economic investment also believe that whatever
resources are committed to social programs would
also translate to the economic development of
society, [22].
Social Dimension
The social dimension of CSR focuses on the ability of
firms to engage in activities aimed at fostering social
linkages, cultural unity, and human development in
the host communities. As corporate citizens, business
organizations are seen as an integral part of a larger
community. This entails that their operations
transcend the business motive such that they concern
themselves with the needs of society. It is, therefore,
the integration of social concerns of the society in the
operations of the business and the consideration of the
full effect or impact of their activities on the lives of
the people in the society, [7], [20]. This aspect of CSR
encompasses community issues, social justice,
workplace safety, education and job training, public
health, and equal opportunities which are been
provided by business organizations [13].
Social CSR can be attained by developing social
capital that transcends the socially driven initiatives
that usually emanate from the firm’s relationships
with the community. In order words, beyond just
meeting the needs of the community, firms should
focus on building relationships that would sustain
whatever social initiatives they implement in the
community.
Environmental Dimension
The environmental dimension is based on the notion
that every organization has a responsibility to preserve
its natural environment by ensuring that the impact of
its activity on the surroundings is not harmful to
people or the ecosystem, [14], [15]. It is basically the
consideration of environmental sustainability and
management while formulating and implementing the
strategic goals of the organization. Environmental
CSR is implemented through consistent focus on the
improvement of the environment through
environmentally driven policies, procedures, and
programs, employing training, processes,
measurements, and targets which are founded on a
system of environmental management. Thus, firms
that intend to foster environmental CSR need to
establish a system that ensures that environmental
issues are not ignored as the organization goes about
its normal business operations.
2.3 Theoretical Framework: The Legitimacy
Theory
This study adopted four min theories which are
legitimacy theory, institutional theory, relational view
theory, and stakeholder theory. The legitimacy theory
constitutes the anchor theory of the study and is
explained as the idea that organizations that intend to
function effectively and receive approval from actors
in an environment should ensure that their activities
portray those social values and beliefs that align with
that of the society. This means that the firm must
disclose its CSR activities to society in the most
transparent manner, [13]. Thus, the legitimacy theory
is more advantageous than the other three theories
used in this study in explaining CSR because it helps
organizations to adopt disclosing strategies that would
legitimize their operations in the community and
improve their performance. However, not all
organizations want to practice full disclosures because
they may reveal certain patterns that may boomerang
on the firm, [16]. For instance, if community members
discover that the percentage of the firm’s profits
invested in CSR does not at least account for the
resources obtained from the environment, there may
be vituperations from the community towards the
firm.
Institutions are necessary for delineating the social
values and norms within which CSR initiatives should
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2023.20.21
Anita Eyerinebi-ebi Oruaze Dickson,
May Nwoye, Cross Ogohi Daniel
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
217
Volume 20, 2023
be implemented. But these values and norms are
constantly evolving, and aligning the firm’s operations
with these changing values may be irksome. Also, the
institutional theory does not take into cognizance
those internal structures and dynamics that are
required for organizational change, and it also ignores
the inevitable role of self-interests and power play
within the host community as well as the organization,
[22]. While the relational view theory is crucial for
harnessing vital resources and generating economic
rents for the firm, it may stifle competition. By the
way, not every organization within the networks may
provide shared resources and thus there may be
imbalances in resource distribution within the
networks which may pitch one organization at an
advantage over the other. [24], Finally, the stakeholder
theory is one of the foremost theories that help to
explain CSR in organizations and how they can fully
exert themselves in their host communities by
ensuring that their activities and performance have no
negative implications for their stakeholders. It
proposes that this should be done concurrently and
without any trade-offs. But this is hardly the case as
firm resources are limited and the needs of the various
stakeholders of the firm may vary over time, [25].
Implementing CSR with a stakeholder perspective
may entail trade-offs, especially in contexts where
stakeholder demands may oscillate at various peaks
and lows; and the firm is expected to concentrate on
meeting those stakeholder demands at their peaks,
[26].
3 Methodology
The population comprised 3462 community leaders in
areas where International Oil Companies (IOCs) are
situated in Bayelsa state Nigeria. This number was
provided by the office of the Niger Delta
Development Commission (NDDC), as the strength of
attendance during the last stakeholder’s engagement
event held at Yenegoa in December 2019, [27].
As a result of the finite nature of the population, the
study applied the, [28], formula which is widely
accepted for broad finite sample determination.
The formula is stated as thus;

󰇛󰇜 (1)
Where n = sample size
z= Standard Error of the mean (usually 95%,
corresponding to1.96 in the distribution table;
p= Proportion of the population likely to be
included in the sample (50% or 0.5 is
assumed.
q=proportion of the population that is unlikely
to be included in the sample (50% or
0.5 is assumed
e = Tolerable Error Margin (5% or 0.05)
N = Population Size
To apply this formula,
 
󰇛 󰇜 󰇛󰇜

󰇛󰇜 󰇛󰇜

  
 
≈ 346
However, it was necessary to allow space for attritions
(i.e. 20%attrition rate).
n = 346 + (20% of 346)
= 346 + 69
= 415 community leaders
The regression analysis technique was used to test the
hypothesized model. The confidence level was
specified at 95%. The decision rule on the statistical
significance of the results obtained was based on the
probability values of the t-statistic. The decision rule
is to accept the alternate hypothesis and reject the null
hypothesis if the P-value is less than the level of
significance (0.05) or to accept the null hypothesis and
reject the alternate hypothesis if the P-value is greater
than 0.05. The software used for the analyses was
Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) v. 23
and Analysis of Moments Structures (AMOS).
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2023.20.21
Anita Eyerinebi-ebi Oruaze Dickson,
May Nwoye, Cross Ogohi Daniel
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
218
Volume 20, 2023
Table 1. Results of Hypotheses with Basic Development as an outcome (dependent) variable
Basic Development
Model 1
Model 4
Model 5
Model 6
Constant:
C
14.02***
4.12***
6.54***
16.14**
*
Controls:
Gender
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.008
Literacy
-0.54***
-0.799**
-0.619***
-
0.511**
*
Age
0.15**
0.54**
0.44**
0.54**
Main
Effects:
Economic
CSR(eCSR)
Social
CSR(sCSR)
0.773***
Environment
al
CSR(envCS
R)
0.116*
Economic
status(fES)
0.092
0.041
0.031
Interaction
Effects:
eCSR x fES
sCSR x fES
0.549**
envCSR x
fES
0.211*
R=0.451
R2=0.203
R=0.348;
R2=0.121
R=0.327;
R2=0.107
R=0.328
;
R2=0.10
8
F(3,363)=5
84.8;p<0.05
F(6,360)=5
75.7; P <
0.05
F(6,360)=
575.4; P <
0.05
F(6,360)
=553.11;
P < 0.05
*= p<0.05; **= p<0.01; ***= p<0.001
Table 2. Results of Hypotheses with Collective Development as an outcome(dependent) variable
Collective Development
Model 1
Model 2
Model 3
Model 4
Model 5
Model 6
Constant:
C
7.07***
5.24***
8.17***
7.17***
9.09***
5.17***
Controls:
Gender
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.014
0.04
0.017
Literacy
-0.04
0.009
-0.014
0.058
-0.48**
-0.010
Age
0.03
0.54**
0.017
0.087
0.12*
0.019
Main Effects:
Economic
CSR(eCSR)
0.071
0.011
Social CSR(sCSR)
0.013
0.079
Environmental
CSR(envCSR)
0.019
0.095
Economic
status(fES)
0.037
0.027
0.007
0.014
0.018
Interaction
Effects:
eCSR x fES
0.007
sCSR x fES
0.004
envCSR x fES
0.033
R=0.117
R2=0.013
7
R= 0.114;
R2= 0.013
R=0.108
;
R2=0.01
2
R=0.101
;
R2=0.01
0
R=0.119
;
R2=0.01
4
R=0.104;
R2=0.011
F(3,363)=
379.05;
p<0.05
F(8,358)=
342.11;
P<0.05
F(6,360)
=374; P
< 0.05
F(6,360)
=279.4;
P < 0.05
F(6,360)
=388.7;
P < 0.05
F(6,360)=3
11.8; P <
0.05
*= p<0.05; **= p<0.01; ***= p<0.001
3.1 Model Specification
Tables 1 and 2 simply show the results of
the hypothesis test using the simultaneous entry
moderated regression method proposed by Hayes’.
Model 1 depicts the effect of control variables
(gender, literacy, and age) on the outcome variables
(basic and collective development). Model 2 shows
the effect of control variables combined with the
predictor or independent variables (eCSR, sCSR, and
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2023.20.21
Anita Eyerinebi-ebi Oruaze Dickson,
May Nwoye, Cross Ogohi Daniel
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
219
Volume 20, 2023
envCSR and the moderating variable (fES) on the
outcome variables. Model 3 shows the combined
effect of the control variables, the first predictor
(eCSR), moderating variable (fES), and the interaction
variable (eCSR x fES) on the outcome variables.
Model 4 shows the combined effect of the control
variables, the second predictor (sCSR), moderating
variable (fES), and the interaction variable (sCSR x
fES) on the outcome variables. Model 5 shows the
combined effect of the control variables, the third
predictor (envCSR), moderating variable (fES), and
the interaction variable (envCSR x fES) on the
outcome variables.
4 Results
Test of Hypotheses
The results in Tables 1 and 2 were used to test the
hypotheses of the study.
H1a1: There is a statistically significant main effect of
economic-oriented CSR on the basic development of
host communities in Bayelsa State. (Accepted)-
BDβeCSR= 0.461, p<0.05, n=367
H1a0: There is no statistically significant main effect
of economic-oriented CSR on the basic development
of host communities in Bayelsa State.(Rejected)
H1b1: There is a statistically significant main effect of
economic-oriented CSR on the collective development
of host communities in Bayelsa State. (Rejected)
H1b0: There is no statistically significant main effect
of economic-oriented CSR on the collective
development of host communities in Bayelsa
State.(Accepted)- CDβeCSR= 0.071, p>0.05, n=367
Result Summary: An increase in economic-oriented
CSR leads to a corresponding increase in basic
development, but NOT collective development.
H2a1: There is a statistically significant main effect of
socially-oriented CSR on the basic development of
host communities in Bayelsa State. (Accepted)-
BDβsCSR= 0.342, p<0.05, n=367
H2a0: There is no statistically significant main effect
of socially-oriented CSR on the basic development of
host communities in Bayelsa State. (Rejected)
H2b1: There is a statistically significant main effect of
socially-oriented CSR on the collective development
of host communities in Bayelsa State. (Rejected)
H2b0: There is no statistically significant main effect
of socially-oriented CSR on the collective
development of host communities in Bayelsa State.
(Accepted)- CDβsCSR= 0.013, p>0.05; n=367
Result Summary: An increase in socially-oriented
CSR leads to a corresponding increase in basic
development, but NOT collective development.
H3a1: There is a statistically significant main effect of
environmentally-oriented CSR on the basic
development of host communities in Bayelsa State.
(Accepted)- BDβenvCSR= 0.843, p<0.05, n=367
H3a0: There is no statistically significant main effect
of environmentally-oriented CSR on the basic
development of host communities in Bayelsa State.
(Rejected)
H3b1: There is a statistically significant main effect of
environmentally-oriented CSR on collective
development of host communities in Bayelsa State.
(Rejected)
H3b0: There is no statistically significant main effect
of environmentally-oriented CSR on collective
development of host communities in Bayelsa State.
(Accepted)- CDβenvCSR= 0.019, p>0.05, n=367
Result Summary: An increase in environmentally-
oriented CSR leads to a corresponding increase in
basic development, but NOT collective development.
H4ia1: There is a statistically significant interaction
effect of economic status on the effect economic-
oriented CSR has on basic development of host
communities in Bayelsa State. (Accepted)-
BDβeCSRfES= 0.133, p<0.05, n=367
H4ia0: There is no statistically significant interaction
effect of economic status on the effect economic-
oriented CSR has on basic development of host
communities in Bayelsa State. (Rejected)
H4ib1: There is a statistically significant interaction
effect of economic status on the effect of economic-
oriented CSR has on collective development of host
communities in Bayelsa State. (Rejected)
H4ib0: There is no statistically significant interaction
effect of economic status on the effect economic-
oriented CSR has on the collective development of
host communities in Bayelsa State. (Accepted)-
CDβeCSRfES= 0.007, p>0.05, n=367
Result Summary: Higher economic status of a
community combined with economic-oriented CSR
improves basic development, but not collective
development.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2023.20.21
Anita Eyerinebi-ebi Oruaze Dickson,
May Nwoye, Cross Ogohi Daniel
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
220
Volume 20, 2023
H4iia1: There is a statistically significant interaction
effect of economic status on the effect
socially-oriented CSR has the basic development of
host communities in Bayelsa State. (Accepted)-
BDβsCSRfES= 0.549, p<0.05, n=367
H4iia0: There is no statistically significant interaction
effect of economic status on the effect socially-
oriented CSR has on the basic development of host
communities in Bayelsa State. (Rejected)
H4iib1: There is a statistically significant interaction
effect of economic status on the effect socially-
oriented CSR has on the collective development of
host communities in Bayelsa State. (Rejected)
H4iib0: There is a statistically significant interaction
effect of economic status on the effect socially-
oriented CSR has on the collective development of
host communities in Bayelsa State. (Accepted)-
CDβsCSRfES= 0.004, p>0.05; n=367.
Result Summary: Higher economic status of a
community combined with socially-oriented CSR
improves basic development, but not collective
development.
H4iiia1: There is a statistically significant interaction
effect of economic status on the effect
environmentally-oriented CSR has on the basic
development of host communities in Bayelsa State.
(Accepted)- BDβenvCSRfES= 0.211, p<0.05, n=367
H4iiia0: There is no statistically significant interaction
effect of economic status on the effect
environmentally-oriented CSR has on the basic
development of host communities in Bayelsa State.
(Rejected)
H4iiib1: There is a statistically significant interaction
effect of economic status on the effect
environmentally-oriented CSR has on the collective
development of host communities in Bayelsa State.
(Rejected)
H4iiib0: There is no statistically significant interaction
effect of economic status on the effect
environmentally-oriented CSR has on collective
development of host communities in Bayelsa State.
(Accepted)- CDβenvCSRfES= 0.033, p>0.05, n=367
Result Summary: Higher economic status of a
community combined with environmentally-oriented
CSR improves basic development, but not collective
development.
Discussion of Findings
The result from the test of the hypotheses was based
on the data in Table 2. The summative values of
corporate social responsibility were used as predictive
values of community development. The result of the
first hypothesis tested shows that the alternate or main
hypotheses were rejected while the null hypotheses
were accepted. This is because there was no
statistically significant effect of economic CSR on
collective development (CDβeCSR= 0.017, p>0.05,
n=367). This means that there is a need for more
collaborative work by all stakeholders to make
economic investments by organizations within the
community play a meaningful role.
For the second hypothesis, the summative values of
social CSR were used as predictive values of
community development. Results showed that there
was no statistically positive effect of social CSR on
community development given that: CDβsCSR=
0.013, p>0.05; n=367. This means that collective
development requires a more aggregate investment
outlook beyond just the implementation of social CSR
initiatives by organizations operating in a community.
The results from the analysis of the third hypothesis
show that there was no statistically significant effect
of environmental CSR on collective development as
indicated by the summative values of environmental
CSR: CDβenvCSR= 0.019, p>0.05, n=367. It is
important to note that most environmental-oriented
CSR projects have long-term effects rather than
immediate benefits. This means that the effect of
environmental CSR on community development
would be felt in the long term rather than the short
term.
The final hypothesis was centered on establishing the
moderating role of family economic status on the
effect of CSR on community development. The
findings revealed that there was a statistically
significant positive moderating effect of family
economic status on community development given
that: (CDβeCSRfES= 0.007, p>0.05, n=367),
(CDβsCSRfES= 0.004, p>0.05; n=367),
and (CDβenvCSRfES= 0.033, p>0.05, n=367). This
result is influenced by two factors (1) the level of a
family’s income and (2) the willingness of the family
to contribute to community development. This entails
that the meagre the family income, the little it
contributes to community development. On the other
hand, the lack of collaborative spirit also turns into
negative community development results.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2023.20.21
Anita Eyerinebi-ebi Oruaze Dickson,
May Nwoye, Cross Ogohi Daniel
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
221
Volume 20, 2023
5 Conclusion
The focus of this study was to investigate the impact
of CSR on the community development of the host
community in Bayelsa state, Nigeria. The main effects
of the CSR dimensions on community development
showed no statistically significant relationship. On the
interaction effects, family economic status interacted
with economic CSR, social CSR, and environmental
CSR to influence community development, but the
interaction showed no positive effect on community
development due to certain factors. These findings
were tested and confirmed with statistical tools and
existing works of literature. The study concludes that
unless collective development strides are perceived to
benefit individuals, they may not be involved in it
irrespective of the CSR incentives of host
communities to do so.
6 Recommendations
Based on the findings of the study, the following
recommendations are given:
1. It is recommended that economic CSR programs
by organizations should be focused on making a
definite impact on the way that members of the
community live their lives. The tangibility of such
strides should translate to improved standards of
living and alleviation of poverty, rather than ‘white
elephant’ projects that have no impact on people’s
lives.
2. Since social CSR affects basic development but
not collective development, it is recommended that
social programs of the organization are channeled
towards empowering the community members with
the skills, knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors to
improve the status of their family.
3. It is recommended that organizations should
conduct their businesses in such a way that the safety,
health, and sustenance of the community are not
jeopardized. It is only by greening their operations
that the community's health, as well as their
reputation, would be preserved.
4. Since family economic status influences basic
development and not collective development, it means
that improvement of living standards constitutes a
major problem in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria.
CSR programs of firms should be reflected in the
quality of lives of community members in terms of
income. More community members should be
employed and more offered benefits that would allow
them to set up various income sources using the
natural resources at their disposal and also develop a
strong sense of collaborative spirit.
References:
[1] Adedokun, M., Adeyemo, W.C and Olorunsola
E. O. (2010). The Impact of Communication on
Community Development. Journal of
Communication 1(2),101-102. DOI:
10.1080/0976691X.2010.11884775.Retrievefro
mhttps://www.researchgate.net/publication/268
419953.
[2] Dragu, I., & Tiron-tudor, A. (2014). Integrating
best reporting practices for enhancing corporate.
In Corporate Social Responsibility in the Global
Business World (pp. 27–47).
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37620-7
accessed on 2/4/2022
[3] Prasetio, J. E., Sabihaini, Bintarto, B., Susanto,
A. A., Rahmanda, G. A., Rusdiyanto, Rochman,
A. S. ur, & Kalbuana, N. (2021). Corporate
social responsibility, community development
and empowerment program in Indonesia.
Journal of Management Information and
Decision Sciences, 24(1), 1–11.
[4] Yuan, Y., Lu, L. Y., Tian, G., & Yu, Y. (2020).
Business strategy and corporate social
responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics,
162(2), 359–377.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3952-9
[5] Nie, P. yan, Wang, C., & Meng, Y. (2019). An
analysis of environmental corporate social
responsibility. Managerial and Decision
Economics, 40(4), 384–393.
https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.3009
[6] Dahlsrud, A. (2008). How corporate social
responsibility is defined: An analysis of 37
definitions. Corporate Social Responsibility and
Environmental Management, 15(1), 1–13.
https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.132
[7] Currás-Pérez, R., Dolz-Dolz, C., Miquel-
Romero, M. J., & Sánchez-García, I. (2018).
How social, environmental, and economic CSR
affects consumer-perceived value: Does
perceived consumer effectiveness make a
difference? Corporate Social Responsibility and
Environmental Management, 25(5), 733–747.
https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1490
[8] Guenther, E., Hoppe, H., & Poser, C. (2007).
Environmental corporate social responsibility of
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2023.20.21
Anita Eyerinebi-ebi Oruaze Dickson,
May Nwoye, Cross Ogohi Daniel
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
222
Volume 20, 2023
firms in the mining and oil and gas industries:
Current status quo of reporting following GRI
guidelines. Greener Management International,
53, 7–25.
[9] Da Silva, P. G. D. (2021). Powering corporate
citizenship: assessing corporate social
responsibility of hydroelectric companies in
Canada. Impact Assessment and Project
Appraisal, 39(2), 127–137.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2021.1893927
[10] Cavaco, S., & Crifo, P. (2014). CSR and
financial performance: complementarity
between environmental, social and business
behaviours. Applied Economics, 46(27), 3323–
3338.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2014.927572
[11] Eisingerich, A. B., Rubera, G., Seifert, M., &
Bhardwaj, G. (2011). Doing good and doing
better despite negative information?: The role of
corporate social responsibility in consumer
resistance to negative information. Journal of
Service Research, 14(1), 60–75.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670510389164
[12] Stekelorum, R., Laguir, I., & Elbaz, J. (2020).
Cooperation with international NGOs and
supplier assessment: Investigating the multiple
mediating role of CSR activities in SMEs.
Industrial Marketing Management, 84(August
2018), 50–62.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.04.00
1
[13] Jamali, D., Toufie, M. and Hiba, B. (2006),
Corporate Social Responsibility and the
Challenge of Triple Bottom Line Integration:
Insight from the Lebanese Context,
International Journal of Environment and
Sustainable Development, 5(4), 395-414.
[14] Kamran, H. W., Pantamee, A. A., Patwary, A.
K., Ghauri, T. A., Long, P. D., & Nga, D. Q.
(2021). Measuring the association of
environmental, corporate, financial, and social
CSR: evidence from fuzzy TOPSIS nexus in
emerging economies. Environmental Science
and Pollution Research, 28(9), 10749–10762.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11336-4.
[15] Nie, P. yan, Wang, C., & Meng, Y. (2019). An
analysis of environmental corporate social
responsibility. Managerial and Decision
Economics, 40(4), 384–393.
https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.3009
[16] McLennan, S., & Banks, G. (2019). Reversing
the lens: Why corporate social responsibility is
not community development. Corporate Social
Responsibility and Environmental Management,
26(1), 117–126. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1664 on 23/3/2022.
[17] Porter, & Kramer. (2006). Strategy and society:
The link between competitive advantage and
corporate social responsibility. Harvard
Business Review, 1–13. www.fsg-impact.org
[18] European Commission (2011). Communication
from the commission to the European
parliament, the council, the European economic
and social committee and the committee of the
regions: A renewed EU strategy 2011–14 for
corporate social responsibility.
[19] Ansari, N. Y., Farrukh, M., & Raza, A. (2021).
Green human resource management and
employees pro-environmental behaviours:
Examining the underlying mechanism.
Corporate Social Responsibility and
Environmental Management, 28(1), 229–238.
https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2044
[20] Dragu, I., & Tiron-tudor, A. (2014). Integrating
best reporting practices for enhancing corporate.
In Corporate Social Responsibility in the Global
Business World (pp. 27–47).
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37620-7
accessed on 2/4/2022
[21] Peet, R., & Hartwick, E. (2009). Theories of
development: Contentions, arguments,
alternatives (Second). The Guilford Press.
https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.46-6931
[22] Robertson, D. C. (2009). Corporate social
responsibility and different stages of economic
development: Singapore, Turkey, and Ethiopia.
Journal of Business Ethics, 88(SUPPL. 4), 617–
633. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0311-x
[23] Watts, P. and Holme, R. (1999). Corporate
Social Responsibility: Meeting Changing
Expectations. WBCSD: Geneva. p3.
[24] Benabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2010). Individual and
corporate social responsibility. Economica,
77(305), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-
0335.2009.00843.
[25] Zhang D., Kambhampati, U. and Morse, S.
(2017). Overview of Corporate Social
Responsibility. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/33632
7454. on 6/4/2022. DOI:
10.4324/9781315749495-2.
[26] Suddaby, R. and Foster, W.M (2017). History
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2023.20.21
Anita Eyerinebi-ebi Oruaze Dickson,
May Nwoye, Cross Ogohi Daniel
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
223
Volume 20, 2023
and Organizational Change, Journal of
Management, 43(1), 19-38
[27] The Guardian (2022). Niger Delta stakeholders
demand board for NDDC.
https://guardian.ng/news/niger-delta-
stakeholders-demand-board-for-nddc/
[28] Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970).
Determining sample size for research activities.
Educational and psychological measurement,
30(3), 607-610.
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0013164470030003
08
Conflict of Interests
The Authors have no conflict of interests to declare.
Contribution of Individual Authors to the Creation
of a Scientific Article (Ghostwriting Policy)
-Anita Eyerinebi-Ebi Oruaze Dickson carried out the
conceptualization and the manuscript preparation.
-Cross Ogohi Daniel supervised the entire study.
-May Nwoye was responsible for the Statistics.
Sources of Funding for Research Presented in a
Scientific Article or Scientific Article Itself
This research received no specific grant from any
funding agency in the public, commercial, or non-for-
profit organisations.
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
(Attribution 4.0 International, CC BY 4.0)
This article is published under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en_
US
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2023.20.21
Anita Eyerinebi-ebi Oruaze Dickson,
May Nwoye, Cross Ogohi Daniel
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
224
Volume 20, 2023