A,Study,on,the,Evaluation,System,and,Mechanism,of,CSR,Stakeholder,in,Food,Enterprises

Li Ke

Sichuan Academy of Social Sciences

Abstract: The establishment of the evaluation system of corporate social responsibility (CSR) stakeholder in food enterprises includes the determination of evaluation objects, the selection of evaluation subjects, the formulation of evaluation standards, and the establishment of evaluation institutions. The establishment of the stakeholder evaluation system is a static institutional design, while the establishment of the stakeholder evaluation mechanism is a dynamic institutional arrangement based on the stakeholder evaluation system. The establishment of the stakeholder evaluation mechanism requires the government to guide and promote enterprises to undertake social responsibilities, establish a moral evaluation system of CSR, and create a cultural atmosphere for enterprises to undertake social responsibilities. Establishing a CSR labeling system in food enterprises can be an effective solution to reflect the interests of stakeholders in the supervision and evaluation system and to systematize the stakeholders’ supervision and evaluations of CSR in food enterprises.

Keywords: food enterprises, CSR, stakeholders

As an “economic man,” an enterprise needs to obtain material resources, human resources, and management resources from society and apply them to the whole process of production, operation, and management to maximize economic benefits. As a “social man,” an enterprise needs to maintain a benign interactive relationship with its environment and other related social subjects (such as creditors, consumers, shareholders, communities, etc.), and give back the wealth created by the enterprise (including material wealth and spiritual wealth) to society, that is, to undertake social responsibility.

CSR mainly covers the responsibility of enterprises to protect the environment and prevent pollution, the responsibility to provide quality assurance products and services to consumers, the responsibility for employee development and labor rights protection, and the responsibility for community development. Enterprises with different industry attributes provide different types of products and services for society, which determines that the social responsibilities undertaken by enterprises in various industries are different. The social responsibility of food enterprises is very special because the food produced and distributed by food enterprises is directly related to people’s lives and health, and the target consumer groups are huge. Once there are problems and hidden dangers in food, they can easily lead to a wide range of food safety crises and public health problems. Therefore, in addition to the CSR in the general case, the social responsibility of food enterprise should also strengthen the moral responsibility, information disclosure responsibility, food quality and safety responsibility, food traceability responsibility, partner audit responsibility, and legal responsibility.

In the process of fulfilling social responsibility, enterprises are driven and influenced by the profit maximization mechanism, so they tend to have opportunistic tendencies which affect the effectiveness and quality of social responsibility implementation. Therefore, the realization of enterprise social responsibility cannot rely solely on enterprise self-regulation. A check and balance mechanism for stakeholders should also be introduced. The diverse participation and supervision of stakeholders is the driving force for the sustainable development of CSR management. Public participation is an effective supplement to government supervision, and an effective public participation mechanism is conducive to preventing and reducing food safety risks. To improve food safety, both the supervision of government management departments and the social supervision of stakeholders should be strengthened. Multiple forces should be utilized to realize social co-governance of food safety. The food safety legislation and supervision experience in developed countries have taught us that food safety management needs a gradual transition from the supervision and management of government administration departments to the joint management of social forces such as consumers, industry organizations, and special thirdparty institutions.

The current legislation and management of CSR in food enterprises lack effective transmission and application of CSR information transmission mechanism among government administration departments, food industry organizations, and stakeholders. The social responsibility information transmission mechanism of food enterprises includes two two-way processes, information disclosure of CSR in food enterprises and stakeholders’ evaluations and feedback. In these two dynamic processes, we urgently need to integrate stakeholders’ evaluations of food enterprises’ social responsibility into the government regulatory process and construct the evaluation system and evaluation mechanisms.

The establishment of a evaluation system of CSR stakeholder in food enterprises includes the determination of evaluation objects, the selection of evaluation subjects, the formulation of evaluation standards, and the establishment of evaluation institutions.

At present, there only exists the food enterprises’ CSR standards formulated by special research institutions. It has been suggested that the government should guide the establishment of the CSR evaluation mechanisms in food enterprises, clarify the evaluation subjects, evaluation institutions, and evaluation objects, and promote the construction of the CSR evaluation system from the aspects of institutional settings, rulemaking, and institutional construction.

Evaluation Subjects

With the establishment and development of China’s market economy system, China’s capital market has gradually improved. The diversification of capital composition is the main feature of China’s modern enterprises. Every modern enterprise must fully pay attention to issues such as protecting the rights and interests of stakeholders including enterprise investors, satisfying the reasonable demands of stakeholders, pursuing the development of the enterprise itself, and reaching a “win-win” contractual agreement with stakeholders. To strengthen the supervision of enterprise investments, the investor evaluates the operation and management performance of the enterprise. Based on the evaluation, the investor influences and motivates the enterprise to adjust strategic management objectives and improve the management level, thereby maximizing the corporate value and achieving a win-win situation between the investor and the enterprise. This evaluation method can cause enterprises to blindly pursue economic benefits while ignoring the social responsibilities, environmental responsibilities, and even the legal responsibilities that they should undertake. In the process of integrating into economic globalization and internationalization management, Chinese enterprises required a brandnew enterprise performance evaluation method. The evaluation subject has changed from a single enterprise owner to various stakeholders of the enterprise. The evaluation object has changed from the past financial performance to the social responsibility evaluation that combines financial performance with social performance.

The Code of Corporate Governance for Listed Companies in China emphasizes that listed companies should respect the rights of stakeholders, pay attention to issues such as environmental protection and public welfare, and undertake social responsibility. This regulation introduces the “stakeholder theory of corporate governance.” Under the condition of modern market economy, a company is essentially a set of contracts between various stakeholders, and the company’s development depends on the long-term cooperation and interactions between the various stakeholders. Corporate governance institutional arrangements need to fully consider the interest of each stakeholder before establishing a corporate governance structure involving stakeholders such as shareholders, creditors, employees, and the government (Ding, 2007, p. 134). In the process of transforming the food enterprises’ social responsibility into the optimization of the corporate governance structure, the evaluation model of corporate governance has changed from a simple performance evaluation of shareholders or managers to an evaluation based on the investment returns of multiple stakeholders and a corporate governance evaluation indicator system based on the value orientation of stakeholders.

According to the stakeholder theory, the stakeholders of an enterprise are the individuals or groups who can influence the realization of the enterprise’s objectives or be affected by the realization of the enterprise’s objectives (Freeman, 1984). Only when an individual or organization has invested certain resources into the enterprise and can influence or be affected by the business activities of the enterprise, such an individual or organization can be regarded as a stakeholder in CSR and can truly own and exercise the right to evaluate such CSR. Therefore, the media and the environment are excluded. Considering the empirical analysis of relevant domestic and foreign theoretical literature on the impact of stakeholders on CSR behavior, there are seven types of stakeholders who can greatly influence food enterprises’ CSR behaviors. The seven types of stakeholders are the government, consumers, shareholders, employees, creditors, communities, and food industry organizations. Therefore, these seven types of stakeholders are listed as the evaluation subjects of food enterprises’ social responsibility.

Evaluation Institutions

In general, the construction of food enterprises’ CSR evaluation institutions can be divided into three stages. In the first stage, under the uniform guidance of the government administration department, relevant departments such as industry associations and consumer organizations act as the evaluation institutions to participate in the evaluation of food enterprises’ social responsibility, and actively cultivate and promote the construction of special third-party evaluation institutions. In the second stage, the evaluation and certification of food enterprises’ social responsibility are performed by third-party institutions under the guidance and supervision of the government. In the third stage, special third-party evaluation institutions that are independent of government administration institutions and enterprises are guided and established to evaluate food enterprises’ social responsibility.

Government evaluation institution for CSR.

In recent years, the central and local governments in China have established CSR promotion institutions. In May 2012, the State-Owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council (SASAC) established the Central Corporate Social Responsibility Steering Committee to promote central enterprises to actively fulfill CSR. Under the guidance of the Central Corporate Social Responsibility Steering Committee, most central enterprises have clarified that the management department should be primary in fulfilling CSR and should set up a special social responsibility department to identify and coordinate activities. Some local governments in China have also successively established CSR promotion institutions. For example, Hebei province, Hangzhou, and other regions have respectively established guidelines on the promotion of CSR, established special CSR leading institutions, and established joint meeting systems for CSR.

The author suggests that the government evaluation institution for CSR should take the following explicit actions. First, the government evaluation institution should establish a national CSR leading institution as soon as possible. Second, based on the establishment of CSR promotion institutions by local governments, the government evaluation institution should improve the work functions of CSR promotion institutions, incorporate the evaluation function of CSR into their work functions, or establish a government management evaluation department specifically for CSR. Third, local governments can cooperate with relevant institutions such as the Administration for Market Regulation and Health Administration Department to establish a joint meeting system for food enterprises’ social responsibility and conduct regular official evaluations of social responsibility fulfillment by food enterprises. Fourth, government management departments should actively cooperate with food industry organizations, consumer organizations, and special intermediary institutions to establish a stakeholder evaluation organization of food enterprises’ social responsibility.

Special third-party evaluation institution.

The Third Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee of the CPC emphasizes that it is necessary to transform government functions and exercise government administration in an innovative way, and build a law-based and service-oriented government. The endogenous law of the market economy states that “the market plays a decisive role in resource allocations,” and thus the government must change its past administrative management functions. The government’s market management functions need to transform into a sound and comprehensive function in which the government gives way to the market and promotes market functions, that is, to establish a management pattern of “big market, small government.” After the government takes the lead in building the evaluation system framework of CSR stakeholder, evaluation affairs of CSR stakeholder will gradually be separated from government functions, and eventually transition to professional evaluation by market intermediary organizations. In this process, it is necessary for the government to actively cultivate intermediary market organizations such as special third-party evaluation institutions.

A third-party evaluation institution for CSR refers to a third-party subject other than the government, enterprises, and stakeholders, which specializes in CSR evaluation, and it is also an authoritative special organization. Special third-party evaluation institutions mainly include third-party specialized audit institutions for CSR reports, and third-party specialized evaluation institutions for CSR.

In general, there are four main types of institutions that evaluate CSR in China, namely industry organizations, experts, consulting institutions, and certified public accountants. But at this stage, China’s CSR is mainly evaluated by industry associations and experts. For example, in recent years, the China Federation of Industrial Economics has formulated a series of industry internal normative documents on CSR and established a star rating system to evaluate the social responsibility fulfillment by Chinese industrial enterprises. Since 2010, the Corporate Social Responsibility Research Center of the School of Economics of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences has formulated and published the “China Corporate Social Responsibility Report Rating Standards” every year and established the “China Corporate Social Responsibility Report Rating Expert Committee” to rate the CSR reports that participate in the evaluation. In China, CSR reports still lack third-party evaluations by consulting institutions and certified public accountants. In developed countries, professional consulting institutions and certified public accountants have played an important role in the evaluation and audit of CSR reports. There is still a big gap between China and developed countries in the professionalism and overall level of CSR audit evaluations.

Some regions in China have explored and attempted to conduct third-party evaluations of CSR. In 2012, Changsha formulated the “Changsha Corporate Social Responsibility Evaluation System,” and the third-party institution conducted an evaluation of CSR every two years. In 2015, the Shenzhen Social Work Committee planned to openly select third-party administration institutions for CSR evaluations, and these institutions were required to have dedicated staff, expert teams, management systems, and direct or related experience in conducting CSR evaluations.

The author suggests that the establishment of a special third-party evaluation institution for CSR can follow the three steps of government entrustment, market incubation, and independent thirdparty evaluation. The first step is the government entrustment stage. The government employs a special third-party institution to evaluate CSR in the form of purchasing services. The second step is the market incubation stage. The government actively cultivates special third-party institutions such as certified public accountants, consulting institutions, and audit institutions. The third step is the independent evaluation stage of special third-party institutions. In a more mature condition, a special third-party institution can form an independent supervision and evaluation mechanism for CSR, such as conducting third-party independent verification and evaluations of CSR reports.

Design of Evaluation Indicator Systems

Evaluation principles.

The first principle is to combine quantitative evaluations with qualitative evaluations. When designing evaluation indicators, it is first necessary to design qualitative evaluation indicators based on the social responsibility fulfillment by food enterprises. On this basis, stakeholders’ evaluations of the social responsibility fulfillment by food enterprises are quantified to ensure the strong practicability of the designed evaluation indicators and facilitate real and effective stakeholder evaluations of the social responsibility fulfillment by food enterprises.

The second principle is to combine financial indicators with non-financial indicators. CSR includes not only economic responsibility, but also legal responsibility and environmental responsibility. Stakeholders’ evaluation of CSR should be comprehensive and multifaceted. It should not only evaluate the economic performance of the enterprise but also comprehensively evaluate the social performance and environmental performance. The financial indicator is an important indicator to measure the performance of business management. In addition, stakeholders’ evaluations of CSR also involves several non-financial indicators such as food quality and safety, environmental protection, and the protection of employees’ rights and interests. When designing non-financial indicators of CSR, it is necessary to facilitate stakeholders to quantitatively evaluate CSR. For example, when designing corporate reputation evaluation indicators, we can consider quantitative factors such as customer complaint rates, return rates, bank overdue debt repayment rates, etc.

The third principle is to combine daily indicator designs with expected indicator designs. The evaluation indicators should not only evaluate and intuitively reflect the stage management performance of the enterprise but also be predictable and motivating. Stakeholders can urge the enterprise to incorporate social responsibility into the implementation of enterprise development strategy through the evaluation of CSR. Daily indicators refer to the indicators that can timely measure and reflect various specific features of the social responsibility fulfillment by enterprises in the process of daily operation and management. Expected indicators are strategic, holistic, and forward-looking indicators that focus on the long-term development of the enterprise.

Fourth, the evaluation indicators should be able to measure the sustainable development ability of the enterprise. The evaluation indicators should not only reflect the economic benefits of the enterprise but also reflect the environmental and social benefits of the enterprise. It is necessary to consider not only the contribution of food enterprises to society but also the size of the burden they bring to society. For example, we can design evaluation indicators such as market share, rate of qualified products, customer satisfaction, environmental pollution, and governance.

The fifth principle is to balance the interests of stakeholders. A modern enterprise is an aggregation of various interests formed by the economic and social interests of multiple stakeholders such as shareholders, creditors, employees, and the government. The evaluation indicators we design should not only satisfy the interests of one or certain types of stakeholders but also reflect the expected interests of various stakeholders for the social responsibility fulfillment by food enterprises. Only the evaluation indicators that can balance the expected interests of all stakeholders can improve the self-management level of food enterprises’ social responsibility with the joint effort of the interests of all stakeholders and promote the active fulfillment of social responsibility by food enterprises. Therefore, a balance can be reached between the economic interests and social interests of the ternary relationship between the managers, owners, and stakeholders of enterprises.

Evaluation standards.

The CSR standard is a reference scale for measuring the fulfillment of CSR. At present, China’s CSR standards mainly include national and local standards for social responsibility. The social responsibility standards in the food industry mainly include the food enterprises’ CSR evaluation standards formulated by special institutions.

National standards for social responsibility.

The national standards for CSR in China refer to the three national standards for social responsibility officially approved and issued by the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine and the Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China (now the State Administration for Market Regulation) in 2015, namely the “Guidance on Social Responsibility,” “Guidance on Social Responsibility Reporting,” and “Guidance on Classifying Social Responsibility Performance.” In general, the national standards for social responsibility provide framework guidelines for enterprises to conduct social responsibility activities, and various industries can formulate and improve their social responsibility guidelines and performance evaluation standards based on the national standards.

Local standards for social responsibility.

In recent years, some local governments have actively promoted CSR strategic practice, formulated local standards and evaluation systems of CSR, and produced some valuable experience.

In 2015, Shenzhen issued the “Opinions on Further Promoting the Construction of Corporate Social Responsibility” and took the lead in launching the local standards for CSR in China, namely “Corporate Social Responsibility Requirements” and “Guidance on Corporate Social Responsibility Evaluation,” which specified an implementation plan with strong operability to further promote local enterprises to actively fulfill their social responsibility. These two standardization guidance documents were formulated based on the international standard ISO26000 “Guidance on Social Responsibility.” They are the first guidance documents on social responsibility evaluation published in the form of local standards, and they have a leading role in China. Shenzhen emphasizes the participation of various social forces, implements the rating evaluation of CSR by specialized third-party institutions through the qualification management system, improves the information standardization management mechanism of CSR, and establishes a special corporate social responsibility information disclosure and release platform.

Evaluation standards for food enterprises’ social responsibilities formulated by special institutions.

In September 2015, the China Food Newspaper and the Beijing Institute of Technology jointly formulated an evaluation standard for Chinese food enterprises’ social responsibilities. The release of this industry standard for food enterprises’ social responsibilities had an important role in guiding us to formulate food enterprises’ CSR evaluation standards from the perspective of stakeholders. The indicator system of China’s food enterprises’ CSR evaluation standards is based on the Guidance on Social Responsibility issued by the International Organization for Standardization and the Guidance on Social Responsibility officially issued by the Standardization Administration of China. The indicator system uses industry units to design CSR evaluation indicators. Based on the establishment of evaluation indicators such as consumers, environments, community participation, and development, the indicator system also sets up some unique indicators of the food industry according to the particularity of the food industry.

Establishment of stakeholder evaluation standards for food enterprises’ social responsibilities.

The three national standards for social responsibility officially approved and released by the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of China (now the State Administration for Market Regulation) and the Standardization Administration of China in 2015 can be used as the overall principles and guiding framework to formulate the stakeholder evaluation standards for food enterprises’ social responsibilities. The three national standards are the “Guidance on Social Responsibility,” “Guidance on Classifying Social Responsibility Performance,” and “Guidance on Social Responsibility Reporting.” The evaluation standards also refer to the practical experience of the local standards and evaluation systems of CSR in Shenzhen and other cities. From the perspective of stakeholder evaluation, the evaluation standards learned from the Chinese food enterprises’ CSR evaluation standards formulated by special institutions in 2015 incorporate consumers, the environment, community participation, development, and food quality and safety into the stakeholder evaluation indicator system of food enterprises’ social responsibilities.

Evaluation indicators.

Selection of evaluation indicators.

In general, the indicators for stakeholders to evaluate CSR mainly include legal compliance management and legal liability, staff training and development and benefit protections, consumer services and protection of rights and interests, environmental protections and pollution control, community participation and job creation, stakeholder communication, and information feedback. The most basic social responsibility of food enterprises is food safety. The selection of stakeholder evaluation indicators of food enterprises’ social responsibilities should not only consider the characteristics of food enterprises different from other enterprises but also consider the particularities of different types of enterprises in the food industry. We can classify food enterprises based on the risk levels①Since December 1st, 2016, China Food and Drug Administration Department (now the State Administration for Market Regulation) has begun to determine the risk level of food production enterprises and implement classified supervision, and divided food production enterprises into four levels of ABCD in the order of low risk to high risk and implemented classified management according to the four risk levels of ABCD.of food production enterprises defined by the Food and Drug Administrative Department of China (now the State Administration for Market Regulation), and design corresponding social responsibility evaluation indicators for food production enterprises with different risk levels.

Basic evaluation indicators of food enterprises’ social responsibilities.

CSR mainly includes the responsibility of enterprises to protect the environment and prevent pollution, the responsibility to provide quality assurance products and services to consumers, the responsibility for employee development and labor rights protection, and the responsibility for community development. Specifically, enterprises with different industry attributes provide different types of products and services for society, so the social responsibilities undertaken by enterprises in various industries are different. The social responsibility of food enterprises is very special because the food produced by food enterprises is directly related to people’s lives and health, and the target consumer groups are huge. Once there are problems and hidden dangers in food, poor quality control will easily lead to a wide range of food safety crises and public health problems. Therefore, in addition to the CSR evaluation indicators in the general case, the CSR evaluation indicators of food enterprises should also strengthen the moral responsibility, information disclosure responsibility, food quality and safety responsibility, food traceability responsibility, partner audit responsibility, and legal responsibility.

First, moral responsibility is the responsibility to guarantee that the life, health, and safety of consumers are not violated by the food produced by the enterprise. “Food is the first necessity of the people.” Food is essential for survival, and food is directly related to people’s life and health. Food enterprises mass-produce food, so once food safety problems occur, it will affect a huge number of consumers and pose a threat and damage to public health. Therefore, the most basic social responsibility of food enterprises is to make food that meets standards, to provide consumers with safe, healthy, and nutritious food, and to ensure that the food produced by the enterprise does not cause any threat or damage to the life and health of consumers.

Second, information disclosure responsibility is the responsibility to label the true condition of the food. To let stakeholders such as consumers know the true condition of the food, food details such as nutrition, additives, country of origin, production date, and shelf life are clearly labeled on the food packaging. Therefore, consumers can know the true condition of the purchased food, compare, and select the food. When a food safety problem occurs, it is also convenient for administration institutions and consumers to find the source of the problem.

Third, food quality and safety responsibility are the responsibilities to ensure food quality and safety. In the process of food production, food enterprises shall not sell seconds at the best quality-price, combine or adulterate food products, produce or sell fake, low-quality, shoddy, spoiled, or expired food.

Fourth, food traceability responsibility is the responsibility to trace back to the source of the food when food safety problems occur. In general, food production and operation need to go through many steps, including the purchase of raw material, cleaning, processing, warehousing, logistics, and many others. If a food quality problem occurs in one of the steps, it will affect the food quality and safety of the entire food production and operation chain. When a problem food is found on the market, we need to find out the cause of the problem food as soon as possible to prevent the continued expansion of the damage. At this point, it is necessary to activate the food traceability mechanism, and trace back at what step the problem occurred. Therefore, food enterprises should establish a food traceability mechanism, and keep food traceability records on purchase, production, processing, warehousing, and other steps, thus making it convenient to trace the source and find the responsible person if a food safety problem occurs.

Fifth, partner audit responsibility is the food supply chain responsibility. Technically, this belongs to the extended part of food enterprises’ social responsibilities, and in a broad sense, it is the food traceability responsibility. It includes procurement in all steps of the food industry chain and quality and safety checks of food raw materials to ensure the quality and safety of food raw materials and food products in the upstream and downstream of the food industry chain.

Sixth, legal responsibility is the responsibility to penalize food production enterprises that violate food safety laws.

Evaluation methods.

The balanced scorecard method is a commonly-used method of enterprise performance evaluation in the world. The characteristic and advantage of the balanced scorecard method are its balance of multiple aspects, namely, the balance between corporate strategic indicators and daily indicators, the balance between the internal management and the external supervision of the enterprise, and the balance between different stakeholders. The balanced scorecard method provides a unique perspective for us to establish a stakeholder evaluation mechanism of food enterprises’ social responsibilities.

Based on the balanced scorecard method, we can establish a “multi-dimensional integration” stakeholder evaluation system and use the government, creditors, consumers, shareholders, employees, communities, and food industry organizations as the seven dimensions of a comprehensive evaluation of food enterprises’ social responsibilities. From the perspective of stakeholders, we can establish a comprehensive and multi-dimensional stakeholder evaluation mechanism of food enterprises’ social responsibilities. In this balanced framework system of the evaluation mechanisms, the realization of the interests of various stakeholders and the maturity of CSR complement each other. Only when the interests of these seven types of stakeholders are realized does the strategic management practice of social responsibility of food enterprises achieve an optimal state.

The establishment of the stakeholder evaluation system is a static institutional design, while the establishment of a stakeholder evaluation mechanism is a dynamic institutional arrangement based on the stakeholder evaluation system.

Moral Evaluation

The establishment of the stakeholder evaluation mechanism requires the government to guide and promote enterprises to undertake social responsibility, establish a moral evaluation system of CSR, and create a cultural atmosphere for enterprises to undertake social responsibility.

The enterprises’ subjective consciousness of taking the initiative to undertake social responsibility in economic activities is what we usually call business ethics. Traditional Chinese business ethics emphasizes the proper attitude toward benefit and duty, which has commonality with the CSR we advocate now. Benefit means commercial profits and economic interests. Duty means morality and responsibility. In ancient times, the morality of business was mostly used to refer to the businessman’s behavior and conscience. In addition to promoting integrity, modern CSR also pursues deeper value goals such as environmental protection and social welfare. Based on traditional business ethics, modern CSR is endowed with broader content and deeper meaning.

To continue traditional Chinese business ethics, advocate enterprises to actively fulfill their social responsibility, and establish a moral evaluation system of CSR, The author proposes the following suggestions.

First, the government actively guides enterprises, combines the idea of CSR with the country’s overall development strategy, and gradually establishes a social evaluation system for CSR.

Second, the government’s guidance and promotion of CSR require both the gradual improvement of CSR legislation and the establishment of a business ethics system that is compatible with commercial law at the conceptual and institutional levels.

Third, the enterprise itself actively advocates and fulfills social responsibility. The enterprise itself should also integrate the fulfillment of social responsibility into the modern corporate culture of integrity and harmony and internalize it into the optimization of the internal corporate governance model. This is also the specific behavior of enterprises to form their own business ethics standards and fulfill social responsibilities according to their own characteristics. Updating the concept of “integrating CSR into corporate culture” is not enough to face the practical problems of how enterprises should undertake social responsibilities and how to realize various interests of stakeholders. We need to incorporate the corporate culture covering CSR into the enterprise (corporate) governance mechanism and institutionalize it through explicit provisions in legislation and articles of association.

Evaluation Methods

At this stage, the government department can establish a special CSR administration institution to be responsible for the stakeholder evaluation of food enterprises’ social responsibilities. On this basis, third-party intermediary organizations are gradually cultivated. The government takes the form of purchasing services to entrust a special third-party service institution to evaluate CSR. When the condition is mature, it will eventually transition to the independent evaluation by special third-party institutions.

First, government management departments, food industry organizations, and food enterprises need to set up special CSR administration institutions. Government administrative departments such as administration for market regulation in each region shall set up special administration institutions to be responsible for collecting, sorting, and aggregating the social responsibility information disclosure report information released by various food enterprises and the stakeholders’ evaluation information of food enterprises’ social responsibilities. Each food enterprise should also set up an internal CSR administration department, which is responsible for collecting and arranging the information records of the enterprise’s social responsibility fulfillment, regularly issuing CSR reports, collecting information feedback related to stakeholders’ demands for CSR, and timely report the relevant information of the enterprise’s social responsibility fulfillment and the evaluation information of stakeholders to the food industry association. Food industry associations in various regions should also set up corresponding CSR administration institutions to establish CSR standards, action guidelines and guidance on CSR reporting for food enterprises, guide food enterprises to actively fulfill their social responsibility, collect information from stakeholders on the supervision and evaluation of social responsibility fulfillment by food enterprises, and regularly report this relevant information to government administration departments.

Second, each region can establish an information integrated management system that integrates information disclosure, evaluation, feedback, and management of food enterprises’ social responsibilities to connect government administration departments, food industry organizations, food enterprises, and stakeholders. Food enterprises can use this information management system to release CSR reports and communicate with stakeholders. Stakeholders can use this platform to give feedback on social responsibility evaluation information to the enterprise. Food industry organizations can use this platform to understand the performance of social responsibility fulfillment by food enterprises and provide active guidance. Government administration departments can use the information on this platform to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of social responsibility fulfillment by food enterprises, and regularly select social responsibility star-rated enterprises. The government can award a CSR star label to the food enterprise that reaches a certain star rating.

Third, the evaluation methods of stakeholders include two types of evaluations, which are the evaluation of external stakeholders, and the evaluation of internal stakeholders of the enterprise.

Evaluation methods of external stakeholders of the enterprise.

Government evaluation methods include legal evaluation, moral evaluation, as well as the CSR star rating system discussed above, which awards social responsibility star labels to enterprises. Creditors, such as banks and other financial institutions, can evaluate the financial credit rating of food enterprises based on their credit performance and credit status of investments and financing, and include the evaluation information in the credit management system. The credit management system of the banking industry can be networked with the CSR evaluation system of the government administration department. The relevant data of financial credit rating evaluation can be used as an evaluation indicator for the final selection of social responsibility star-rated enterprises by government administration departments. The environmental protection department can provide real-time monitoring and evaluation data related to environmental protection and pollution control of food enterprises. Food industry organizations and food administration departments can integrate the data and use it as an important reference for the final evaluation of social responsibility star-rated enterprises. The community can regularly organize community residents to evaluate the performance of social responsibility fulfillment by food enterprises. The evaluation content includes the quality and safety of food produced by food enterprises, and the contribution to providing jobs for the community, helping families in need, caring for elderly and disabled persons, charitable donations, etc. The community administration institution can timely send the collected evaluation information to local administration for market regulation. Industry organizations can conduct CSR evaluations within the industry, set up star rating evaluations, and award social responsibility star labels to enterprises. We should pay attention to consumers’ feedback on food quality and safety evaluation information and implement consumers’ supervision and evaluation of food quality and safety into a certification and labeling system. For example, food enterprises that have achieved a certain evaluation rating can use labels such as “brand with high customer satisfaction on food enterprises’ social responsibilities,” which can become a major influencing factor for potential consumers to decide whether to purchase such food or catering services. Therefore, we can extensively absorb consumers’ first-hand evaluation information on the quality of food industry brands, further influence the purchase or investment intentions of potential consumers and other stakeholders, and ultimately generate positive incentives or negative reductions for the long-term economic interests of food enterprises.

Evaluation methods of internal stakeholders of the enterprise.

A social responsibility administration institution can be set up within the enterprise, that is, the internal social responsibility audit institution, which is called the corporate ethics department in Europe and the US. It is responsible for CSR strategic planning, information disclosure of CSR, internal audit of CSR reports, communication with, and coordination of, stakeholders, and daily management of CSR. The functions and authority of the corporate ethics committee that is responsible for reviewing the performance of corporate social responsibility fulfillment are mainly derived from the company’s board of supervisors (Supervisors). The audit power of the corporate ethics committee on CSR should not be controlled by the resolution of shareholders. Only on the premise that the function of the company’s board of supervisors (Supervisors) is positioned to supervise the management team on behalf of the company’s stakeholders, the position and specific function of the corporate ethics committee in the corporate governance structure and social responsibility management can be precisely located. Therefore, the “Company Law of the People’s Republic of China” or the company’s articles of association should separately clarify the relatively independent nature and functions of the corporate ethics committee and modify the functions of the board of supervisors accordingly.

In view of the scale effect and demonstration effect of listed enterprises, it is recommended that all listed food enterprises establish a special internal social responsibility administration institution, regularly announce the information about CSR fulfillment and receive feedback from stakeholders on CSR behavior.

The government work report of the State Council in 2014 clearly pointed out that it is necessary to establish a whole-process supervision mechanism from production and processing to circulation and consumption, a social co-governance system and a traceability system, and improve the food and drug safety supervision system from the central and the local level to the grassroots level. It can be found that management has raised the social co-governance of food safety to a new level.

Public participation is an effective supplement to government supervision, and a carefully developed public participation mechanism is conducive to preventing and reducing food safety risks. Food safety cannot rely solely on government supervision. To achieve social co-governance of food safety, the participation of more stakeholders is also required. It is recommended to implement the stakeholder evaluation of food enterprises’ social responsibilities into the establishment of a food enterprises’ social responsibilities labeling system so that the social responsibility label can effectively affect the recognition and behavioral choices of food enterprises by potential stakeholder groups including consumers.

CSR Labeling System

The CSR label is a method to evaluate CSR, and it is also a kind of proof and recognition of CSR fulfillment. The CSR label is the evaluation of an enterprise by a special certification institution. The certification institution is a third-party certification institution independent of government administration institutions and the public. As a special identification symbol, the CSR label connects enterprises, certification institutions, consumers, and government administration departments. On the one hand, the CSR label is a certification of the maturity of CSR fulfillment. On the other hand, it can convey to consumers and other stakeholders the information about whether an enterprise is qualified to fulfill its social responsibilities. Therefore, consumers and other stakeholders can realize their right to know the performance of CSR fulfillment, and the label can guide business stakeholders to make reasonable choices.

In some countries, the CSR label has been in use for several years and has received relatively good results. Since 2001, Belgium has been awarding social responsibility labels to enterprises that fulfill social responsibilities. Some European countries, such as the UK, adopted the Eco-label, which focused on the supervision, and evaluation of environmental protection. The French government actively cooperated with enterprises and non-profit organizations and participated in the development of the CSR label. A customer call center for social responsibility labels was established with cooperation between the French Council for Employment, Income, and Social Cohesion, the French Association of Customer Relations (AFRC), and the French Trade Union of Contact Centers (SP2C). In addition, France has also set up an Eco-label related to CSR and sustainable development. The Association Française de Normalisation (AFNOR) launched Eco-label management in 1989, aiming to identify and reward enterprises that protect the environment throughout the life cycle of products and provide guidance to consumers. Any organization can voluntarily apply for an Eco-label. The management organization of the French Eco-label is composed of multiple stakeholders, including 18 representatives of manufacturers, traders, consumers, and other interested groups (Xiao, 2015, p. 87).

At present, China does not have a national CSR, nor a recognized certification institution or certification program for CSR labels. Only some local governments have explored and established responsibility evaluations and certification systems, but these responsibility certifications are mostly concentrated in the field of environmental protection. For example, in August 2009, the Department of Ecology and Environment of Zhejiang Province, the Shanghai Municipal Bureau of Ecology and Environment, and the Department of Ecology and Environment of Jiangsu Province jointly formulated the “Evaluation Standard for Enterprise Environmental Behavior Information in the Yangtze River Delta Region,” established the evaluation standard for corporate environmental behavior information and classified corporate environmental behavior into five levels which are green, blue, yellow, red, and black (Zhong, 2010, p. 88).

Establishment of the Food Enterprises’ Social Responsibilities Labeling System

Establishing a food enterprises’ social responsibilities labeling system can be an effective solution to reflect the interests of stakeholders in the supervision and evaluation system of food enterprises’ social responsibilities and to systematize the stakeholders’ supervision and evaluation of food enterprises’ social responsibilities. It is recommended to implement the stakeholder evaluation of food enterprises’ social responsibilities into the establishment of a food enterprises’ social responsibilities labeling system so that the social responsibility label can effectively affect the recognition and behavioral choices such as investments and consumption of enterprises’ food products by potential stakeholder groups including consumers.

The government should play a leading role in promoting the establishment of a framework system of food enterprises’ social responsibilities labels. The ultimate purpose of establishing the food enterprises’ social responsibilities labeling system is to enable all stakeholders to participate in the supervision and evaluation of food enterprises’ social responsibilities so that the interests of stakeholders for food enterprises’ social responsibilities can be reflected and implemented in the dynamic mechanism of food enterprises’ social responsibilities labeling system.

At this stage, the establishment of a food enterprises’ social responsibilities labeling system in China requires the following essential elements.

The first is to set up a special food enterprises’ social responsibilities label administration institution. It can be divided into two steps. In the first step, the government takes a leading role and cooperates with industry organizations, stakeholders, and special evaluation and certification institutions to establish a food enterprises’ social responsibilities certification and labeling system. The second step is to establish a food enterprises’ social responsibilities label management organization composed of food industry organizations, communities, consumers, and other stakeholders.

The second is to improve relevant legislation, including the trademark certification and management system of CSR labels, the supervision and evaluation system for consumers and other stakeholders on CSR, and the legal systems in the fields of CSR internal control management and external supervision.

The third is the implementation of the idea of food enterprises’ social responsibilities, which involves the attention and advocacy of government departments, publicity and popularization through the media, improvement in the awareness of stakeholders, and extensive discussions and influence in academia.

The fourth is to connect with the current system. For example, connections between the food enterprises’ social responsibilities labeling system and the current food production license, food and agricultural products certification, food safety management system certification, and other appropriate government and public entities.