Corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the service industry: a systematic review

Abstract

The objective of the current study is to perform a systematic review to the published articles upon the advancement of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the service sector. This article analyzes the bibliometric information of the CSR-related articles linked to the service sector. The existing literature on CSR in the service industry were derived from the online WOS indexing dataset. Through completing a systematic review on existing academic articles, the current paper identifies the nations, universities/institutions, prolific researchers, high-profile journal that contributed to the advancement of CSR theory and practical applications. Moreover, the analytical graphs and bibliometric coupling shown the keyword co-occurrence to depict the academic relationship on the CSR advancement in the service industry. The systematic review adds to an in-depth knowledge of the progression behind CSR in the corporate environment and extends the CSR nexus researches.

Introduction

Corporate social responsibility, (CSR) has emerged as a vibrant subject of theoretical progression and academic scholarship, and its rigorous humanity-based basis has thus garnered the attention of both academics and professionals (Abbas et al., 2018; Moyeen et al., 2019; Chen & Lin, 2020). CSR scholars have tried to find the outcomes of CSR participation in terms of increasing service quality in the service industries over the previous few decades (Casado-DÃaz et al., 2014; Andrew & Baker, 2020; Antonetti et al., 2021). In recent decades, the inquiry on corporate social responsibility (CSR) has grown exponentially. The existing studies aimed to address particular concerns relating to CSR, such as the financial performance (Atmeh et al., 2020; Okafor et al., 2021), the banking system (Ahmad et al., 2022), environmental issues, enterprise development, and its positive/negative consequences (Fukuda & Ouchida, 2020).

Due to the many characteristics of the service industry, CSR practices differ tremendously (Batool et al., 2016). Even though the examination of the production, fiscal employment, the economy and the strategies of CSR receives significant interest (Sadik-Zada et al., 2021), the analysis of the impact on the service sector obtains somewhat less. There is no universal agreement among businesses over the definition of sustainable development through the application of CSR concept (Freeman & Hasnaoui, 2011). As a result, there are still a significant number of research gaps in the investigation about the connection between CSR and the service industry (Moyeen et al., 2019; Wut et al., 2022). Therefore, it is essential to perform a panoramic investigation on the relationship between corporate social responsibility and its effect on the qualitative improvement of the service business (Perrini et al., 2006; Husted & Allen, 2007; Rodrigues & Mendes, 2018; Gallardo-Vázquez et al., 2019). Throughout this paper, we want to provide contributions to the intellectual framework of CSR, one of the most important types of methods that would help facilitate environmental sustainability and managerial advancement, via a systematic review of the existing intellectual literature indexed in Web of Science (WOS) over the past decades.

This research explores the existing literature about impact CSR on the service industry and intends to be deepening researching the mechanism of how CSR researches progressed over the past 3 decades. The research objectives are as follows: 1) To make a systematic review to the relevant research on CSR to remark on the dearth of prior researches in related topics and give appropriate theoretical basis to the advancement of the service sector. 2) To identify the current progress of the CSR concept in the service industry from the perspectives of economic obligations, legal responsibilities, ethical responsibilities, and philanthropic responsibilities. 3) To identify and visualize the publishing years, prolific regions/nations, dedicated journals, supporting universities/institutions, the authors, as well as the CSR keywords in the service sector and the co-occurrence analysis. And 4) To examine the nuances of CSR concept in the future research agenda while presenting the overall systematic review during the implementation process of the current study. Through examining the WOS database, this systematic review intends to contribute to a consideration of the important effects of the service industry, the central influence of principle of corporate social responsibility.

In accordance with this line of thought, the structure of this study is set as follows: First, the next phase of the current research focuses on the research methodology elaboration. Next, to examine the impact that corporate social responsibility has on contemporary academic research via a systematic literature review to the relevant published articles. The current study identifies the countries, universities/institutions, prolific researchers, and high-profile journals that have contributed to the development of CSR theory and practical applications by completing a systematic review on existing academic articles. Furthermore, a thematic review was carried out in order to determine the keyword co-occurrence and keywords frequency for identifying the advancement of CSR theory and practical applications. The conclusion section includes a summary, a further elaboration on theoretical and practical contributions, as well as its exiting limitations.

Research methodology: a systematic review approach

In accordance with the Meta-Analysis methodology described by Liberati et al., in 2009 (Liberati et al., 2009), a complete evaluation of the literature is then performed. The authors carried out a comprehensive investigation for research articles conducted by scholars from around the world as well as blind-peer-reviewed papers in social sciences, business, decision sciences, economic management and accounting, as well as psychology disciplines (Oduro et al., 2021; Arici & Uysal, 2022). Adopting a database created from Web of Science for a concise systematic review effort (Baig et al., 2019), this study evaluated the dependability research articles with empirical data collected. In line with Liberati et al. (2009) and Adeyinka-Ojo et al., 2021 and Galeazzi et al., 2008, the current study discusses and expounds upon PRISMA statement checklists (Moher et al., 2011; Page et al., 2021), which are extensively utilized to conduct systematic review methodology in the field of social sciences and decision sciences.

To document the analytical procedure and inclusion criteria for the major databases, trustworthy research methods were developed prior to actual resources search. The authors conducted their research using WOS data since it provides the most accurate depiction of relevant articles. The academic world considers that WOS covers the most significant international publications. Thus, the authors are obligated to analyze this dataset using the WOS dataset. WOS was employed to discover publications approved for production in five disciplines that were included in the WOS indexing journals with titles/abstracts/keywords including the keywords selected for the current research. The published papers in different five disciplines are then exemplified in Table 1 for emphasizing the topic domains of major publications. The spectrum of publishing date is without restriction, since the current study was done in early 2023. The extracted and downloaded articles only extended to English-written papers.

A MS spreadsheets file was created to record the issued research paper data of the associated periodicals. The authors then completed the assessment of the papers that were chosen beforehand, which is also called screening in the PRISMA checklist (Moher et al., 2011; Nawijn et al., 2019). The remaining publications complete texts were revisited and downloaded in accordance with the paper selection criteria (Zabavnik & Verbič, 2021). The selected papers were then incorporated in accordance with a transparent, reproducible, and a prior presumption-free methods (Popay et al., 2006; Pickering & Byrne, 2014; Alsamil et al., 2020). The bibliographic data in such chosen publications and the PRISMA checklist were input into Microsoft Excel spreadsheets for further data-analysis procedure (see Figure 1 below). Finally, 687 selected papers were subjected to a data collection procedure in order to improve the collected components and subsequent categorization. Then, these selected papers were examined attentively to extract and categorize in accordance with the current study.

FIGURE 1

Only for purposes of the current research, the authors input the following keywords into the WOS system to explore the title/abstracts/keywords of the published papers, yielding 1,665 results. In the meantime, the search criteria for the WOS database are shown as follows:

corporate social responsibility (Topic) and service (All Fields) and Article (Document Types) and Business or Management or Economics or Sociology or Hospitality Leisure Sport Tourism (Web of Science Categories) and English (Languages) and 6.3 Management or 6.10 Economics or 6.223 Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism or 6.115 Sustainability Science (Citation Topics Meso)

The titles of the choose articles reflect their production status. Even though database search resulted in the retrieval of 1,665 records, 85 papers were disqualified to be reviewed in the current research because they are conference proceedings, review articles, other than peer-viewed articles. Those retrieved papers were reviewed further within the scope of the five fields, namely, Business or Management or Economics or Sociology or Hospitality Leisure Sport Tourism (Web of Science Categories). In the meantime, some of these irrelevant studies were omitted from further examination in the present research, and 944 papers remained, excluding 636 published papers. Furthermore, there were 13 papers excluded since they were not English-medium peer-viewed papers. Following this, the authors selected another four criteria under the Citation Topics Meso section, namely, 6.3 Management or 6.10 Economics or 6.223 Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism or 6.115 Sustainability Science, which led to a number of 803 papers remaining. Some of these entries were removed because they did not meet the eligibility standards and the entire text could not be extracted. As a result, the search result indicates that 687 articles have been published with the topic of the current study in the WOS system, which are closely connected to the five research areas that are the subject of the present study. Then, the current systematic review included empirical full-texted papers in total. The research procedure following the PRISMA checklist for assessing precedential research is then shown in Figure 1 above. The following analysis are further done through the facilitations of VOSviewer (a software application for establishing and displaying bibliometric connectivity structures) and Zotero (an open-sourced application for managing bibliographic information and pertaining to the research resources).

Research findings

The published years of CSR and service industry-related articles

Since the turn of the 20th century, expectations of businesses in the service sector have expanded, and the notion of corporate social responsibility (see Table 1 below), frequently abbreviated as CSR, has evolved throughout time to address these growing demands (Esen, 2013; Moyeen et al., 2019). Society’s organizational structure has had a role in the evolution of the notion of corporate social responsibility (Dahlsrud, 2008). Previous study has compiled a compendium of the CSR literature in regard to the growth of the service sector in accordance with the concept of corporate social responsibility (e.g., Coles et al., 2014; Aragon-Correa et al., 2015; Farrington et al., 2017). The study of CSR ethics in the discipline of decision science may be used for a variety of purposes, including increasing commercial profitability, improving political performance, or improving stakeholder responsibility (Esen, 2013; Shin et al., 2021). There has been a significant amount of focus placed on corporate social responsibility (CSR) as a mechanism for enhancing the legitimacy of firms and the financial returns they generate (Carroll & Shabana, 2010; Wang & Sarkis, 2017; Xu et al., 2019). According to the findings of the precedential study, CSR has the potential to not only enhance the image and reputation of a service business but also to raise the motivation of its workforce. In addition, a greater awareness of the environment encourages businesses to accept responsibility for the consequences of their operations and to make a contribution toward environmentally responsible growth (Sadik-Zada, 2021). Therefore, corporate social responsibility is of utmost importance for the service businesses.

According to the findings of the previous studies, CSR has the potential to not only enhance the image and reputation of a service business (Sheldon & Park, 2011; González-Torres et al., 2021), but also to raise the motivation of its workforce (Aminudin, 2013; Zhang et al., 2021). The very first piece of inquiry examined the amount of papers on corporate social responsibility and the effect that it has on the service industry. Over the last several decades, there has emerged a significant focus in gaining a deeper comprehension of the occurrences of papers presented in Table 1. Despite the fact the very first piece of CSR issues was not publicly released until 2002, from 2015 there have been more than 50 pieces of content released per year. In the year 2020, there were over 104 articles published on the subject of the impact of CSR on the service sector. This conclusion demonstrates that the issue is novel and justifies the increasing emphasis that management/decision science scholars have been paying to it. In addition, the rise in ecological consciousness necessitates that businesses accept responsibility for the consequences of the activities and make contributions to the advancement of sustainable practices (Luo et al., 2020). In a similar vein, the enterprises’ long-term commitment to charitable giving necessitates the deployment of CSR (Shin et al., 2021).

CSR academic researches in the top prolific and productive regions/nations

Multiple nations make substantial contributions to the topic of CSR researches in the service industry. The following dimension is based upon these top prolific nations among the years 2001 and 2023. The findings of these highest volume of publication in these twelve nations releasing CSR research are shown in Table 2 below. The position is determined by the quantity of periodicals.

The United States is the one of the most prolific nations, with 192 papers, demonstrating that United States scholars devote the widespread media coverage to CSR research among all academia. China is in second place with 128 articles, followed by the United Kingdom with 89 articles. In the meanwhile, Spain, Australia, South Korea, France, Germany, Canada, Netherlands, India and Italy are gaining a substantial place in CSR studies in the service sector and are leading the world ranking list, among others.

A bibliometric coupling is being developed in order to improve our understanding of connectivity across the nations that publish CSR topics. The process of bibliographic coupling takes place when two different papers extensively cite another publication. Regarding nations, it takes place when a manuscript from two different nations, each located in a different country, refers another paper within their respective articles. This demonstrates how the authors from different regions utilize linked material in their published papers. The results of the bibliometric connection are shown in Figure 2. Every sphere is a representation of a nation, and therefore the diameter reflects the amount contributed by that country. The bigger the size of the circle, greater significant of their academic contributions. According to Table 2, which can be seen above, the United States of America ranks as the country that published highest number of articles in the whole globe. In addition, the United States of America has the greatest bibliometric linkages to other nations, followed by China, the United Kingdom, South Korea, Australia and Spain.

FIGURE 2

The statistics of the most productive journals centering in the issue of CSR in the service industry

A further essential component of the quantitative evaluation is identifying the most prolific efforts among the journals that publishing CSR issues in the service sector. The top 12 academic publications are presented hereunder, as seen in Table 3 below. Statistics indicate that Journal of Business Ethics is the most productive journal, having produced 105 publications during the course of its existence. The Social Responsibility Journal and Journal of Business Research are ranking the second and the third place. Furthermore, International Journal of Hospitality Management, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Service Industry Journal, Journal of Services Marketing, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Business Strategy and the Environment, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Sustainability Accounting Manamgenet6 and Policy Journal and Service Business are some of the journals that have published over ten articles on CSR issues in the service industry.

CSR researches among the top publications made by different universities/institutions

One further essential component of the quantitative study is to identify the journals that produces the most scientific understanding about CSR in the service industry. According to the findings shown in Table 4, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth System of Higher Education (PCSHE) emerged as the most frequently cited institution, with 19 mentions, followed closely by Pennsylvania State University with 18 mentions. The State University System of Florida and Pennsylvania State University University Park also garnered significant attention with 17 and 15 mentions, respectively. Universidad de Cantabria, Universitat Ramon Llull, and the University System of Ohio exhibited notable presence with counts ranging from 12 to 14. Additionally, institutions such as Escuela Superior de Administracion y Direccion de Empresas (ESADE), Universitat de Valencia, Bucharest University of Economic Studies, California State University System, and Inha University/Nanyang Technological University were mentioned with frequencies ranging from 8 to 10. These findings provide insights into the scholarly discourse and research landscape, showcasing the institutions that have attracted substantial academic attention within the scope of the systematic review.

The authors that produced the highest number of articles about CSR in the service sector in the WOS index system

Refer to Table 5 to review the statistics regarding on these authors who published the most regularly on CSR literature pertaining to the service industry. It has been discovered that Pérez, A. has produced or co-authored an aggregate of eleven papers. Mattila, A.S. has authored nine papers, while Ignacio, R has written ten articles. In addition, Yuen, K. F., Su, L. J., Hur, W. M., Wong, Y. D., Peloza, J., Ana, Z. G., Garcia-Benau, M. A., Lee, S., Thai, V. V. each have published more than four publications to their names.

CSR academic researches keywords in the service sector and the co-occurrence analysis

The following part provides a more in-depth examination to the material in categories of research themes, which is a beneficial method for summarizing the characteristics of publications from the field of the CSR researches in the service industry, particularly in the tourism and hospitality sector. It is considered that the text elements of publications serve as the foundation for those key phrases analyzed in the current paper. In this investigation, keywords analytics are used to identify subject-related patterns throughout the chronology generated by the VOSviewer, a reference management application.

Consumers’ choices to buy are heavily influenced by a variety of factors. Product quality (Kang & Hustvedt, 2014), the market price (Tsai et al., 2012), and cooperate responsibility (Merz et al., 2018; Ahn et al., 2019) may be differentiated from one another when seen from the perspective of the enterprise’s internal variables. When seen from the outside, they represent the reputation of the company (Hardeck & Hertl, 2014) and the image of the corporation (Srivastava & Wagh, 2020). In a highly competitive market environment where the number and quality of goods continue to increase, business operators are paying more attention to external issues. Thematic analysis is a research technique that scholars now use, and it may be used to find previously unknown topics and areas in the existing literature. It should come as no surprise that it is challenging to speculate on the kinds of subjects that will be of increasing interest in the years to come. The co-occurrences of the thematic keywords, on the other hand, encourages us to believe that the ongoing development pattern will not change in the near future.

Using the WOS database and VOSviewer, the co-occurrence density map of CSR investigations published between 2001 and 2022 is shown below. Throughout the graph, terms with stronger scientific keyword linkages are depicted as linking nearer together, whereas the keywords of weaker correlations are further apart. In addition, the occurrence of a term in the central circle of the co-occurrence map showed the significance of that node in the keyword’s shared platform. In addition, the most frequent terms used in CSR papers are displayed in the following diagram. As seen, the size of the circle indicates further applications of the idea or keyword. As indicated in the graph, the most often used terms were CSR (shown with responsibility), impact, connection, customer, influence, sustainability, community environment, and management (see Figure 3 below). A more interesting judgement to such findings is to centralize the concept of “sustainability”, in which Pazienza et al. (2022) defined as corporate sustainability.

FIGURE 3

To further elaborate the detailed keywords frequency, the authors then collected the filter by keyword panel data in the following table. Frequencies that are included in a percentage up to a specified measurement range are added together to get the cumulative frequency (Winkler, 2021). The statistics are shown in the form of a table above (See Table 6), within which the occurrences are broken up into several sections based on the categorical variables. In the process of keyword selection, there are 2,854 keywords shown in the VOSviewer software. The authors selected the minimum number of occurrences of a keyword is 15 times of frequency. Then, the authors set number of keywords to be selected as 25, of which the total strength of the co-occurrence links with other keywords can be calculated. Finally, the verified selected keywords shown as follows. Afterwards, the authors merged the duplicated phrases or keywords. For instance, the keywords “stakeholder (23)”, “stakeholder theory (19)” and the “stakeholders (16)” are merged together as occurrence = 58, because they identified the same meaning. Furthermore, if corporate social responsibility, CSR, corporate social responsibility (CSR) are shown, the latter two phrases are merged into the first phrase.

Discussions

How has studies on CSR in the service industry grown during the past 3 decades? To address such issue, the prominent publications were summarized with unique time periods-based groups in the following Table 7. Using MS Excel software, top of the finest articles is then selected and presented in the statistics below. The assessment of the publications revealed an increasing importance to the conceptualization, perspectives and methods over the CSR strategy in the service sector between 2001 and 2023. CSR has made significant progress throughout business communities, cooperate orientations and governance (Gull et al., 2022). Ecologic assertiveness and advancements (Araujo da Costa et al., 2020), providing environmentally-friendly services and responsible commodities (Latapí Agudelo et al., 2020), emissions (Fukuda & Ouchida, 2020), service with virtues of humanity (Rhou & Singal, 2020), and customer-friendly operational processes (Cha et al., 2016), have been highly referenced during the aforementioned time period. Consequently, some of the finest studies written during this time period addressed the determinants, consequences and benefits of CSR in the service industry in a metaphorical sense (Boubakri et al., 2021).

The service industry, including tourism and hospitality enterprises, is subject to the identical repercussions that CSR has on the subject of customer choice. Through the current systematic review in service businesses such as travel agencies and hotels, it has been shown that the fundamental variables that influence customers’ behavior, which include consumer loyalty (as shown above in the keyword occurrence), purchase intent, intrinsic motivation, and confidence in tourism companies (Bagga & Bhatt, 2013; Meitiana et al., 2019; Rodríguez et al., 2022). In addition, customer identification of the firm will facilitate the development of a strong consumer-business connection and encourage consumers to make purchases (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2004). As a consequence of this, it is essential to improve the reputation and image of a service business by formulating relevant CSR initiatives (Esen, 2013; Kim et al., 2020).

Therefore, corporate social responsibility is of utmost importance for service businesses in the current social circumstances. Even if there are a great number of other studies that investigate CSR and the service sector these papers are characterized by having an inadequate scope, and as a result, they are unable to give a thorough knowledge of CSR and the role of CSR stakeholders (Camilleri, 2015; Estol et al., 2018). Bravo et al. (Bravo et al., 2012) describe CSR as the whole of a company’s responsible customer-focused actions. CSR encompasses the services and attitudes a business delivers to its consumers in their thoughts, its connection with its customers, its code of ethics, and the fulfillment of its pledges to its customers (Carroll & Shabana, 2010).

Brand loyalty was one of the criteria that determined an consumer’s purchase intention, which demonstrated that customers’ faith in a company’s overall image could be affected by the business’s dedication to CSR (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2004). A company’s corporate social responsibility (CSR) is, in point of fact, beneficial to the enhancement of the company’s brand value, and the company’s brand may affect the behavior and attitudes of consumers. At the current time, the notion of trust in a brand has become more prevalent in the hospitality sector (Khanlari et al., 2016; 2016; Thao, 2018; Wang, 2022; Xu et al., 2022). Trust in a destination’s brand has been demonstrated in a number of studies to be an important factor in increasing visitor loyalty and fostering long-term, solid connections with travelers (Aliffianto & Candraningrat, 2018). Trust in a brand, which is the core of the value that a brand delivers to its customers, may have an effect on the attitudes of those customers.

More than ever before, companies engage in CSR initiatives to make a positive contribution to society or support their strategic goals (Skarmeas & Leonidou, 2013). Furthermore, they further illustrate the technique by using the empirical dataset in study on consumer skepticism about corporate social responsibility (CSR) (Skarmeas et al., 2014). Although consumer skepticism about corporate social responsibility (CSR) is on the increase, research on the psychological dynamics of skepticism is limited, especially when CSR communication acts as a company’s crisis response plan. Thus, the current study proposes that Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) practices may influence consumers’ pro-social behavior. Mantovani et al. (2017) propose that this influence depends on the firm’s motivation for CSR, and is moderated by the consumer-brand social distance. Lee examine the impact of Twitter followers and consumer skepticism on issue support behavior advocated in Twitter-based corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication (Lee et al., 2018). The purpose of Arli’s study is to investigate the impact of corporate hypocrisy and customer skepticism on the perception of company reputation (Arli et al., 2019). Newman attempts to explain how to lessen consumer CSR skepticism by evaluating the gender and gender-related aspects of a corporate spokesman (Newman et al., 2019). Using two between-subjects design studies, Ham and Kim (2020) examine the effect of consumer CSR skepticism in consumer responses to CSR messaging during various kinds of crises.

The research of Shankar et al. examines the effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) domain on brand relationship quality (BRQ) among millennials (Shankar & Yadav, 2021). Thus, the research of Dalal describes the causes and effects of CSR skepticism (Dalal, 2020). Lasarov et al. (2021) add to the CSR literature by presenting an overlooked but significant variable that helps explain why consumers sometimes respond favorably and sometimes adversely to CSR communication. So much of this literature helps me to comprehend the academic community’s present research development, enabling me to seek a better degree of research outcomes in the coming years.

Conclusion

This article is intended to outline the most important issues in the field of CSR in the service industry through a systematic review approach in light of the material offered in the WOS debate platforms from as early as 2001 to the most updated year of 2023. According to the research findings, the managerial enlightenment offered to the service businesses by this study has been proposed and categorized. Concluding comments and recommendations are further proposed. The following sections identify the theoretical significance, practical contributions and the existing limitations of the current investigation.

Theoretical significance

Service businesses should make use of their corporate social responsibility programs to encourage the growth of sustainable development as an essential component of service industry development. This research contributes to the expansion of the research viewpoint of corporate social responsibility from the point of view of both CSR and researchers. In addition to the above, the study develops a more methodical theoretical model within the framework of branding, and it makes use of brand trust as an intermediate variable in order to broaden the theoretical research on CSR approach.

Practical significance

The service industry is often regarded as having several detrimental effects on the natural environment (de Grosbois, 2012; 2016). A crisis of confidence posited by the COVID-19 pandemic in the travel sector has resulted from the unfavorable hot search of travel businesses. As the notion of sustainable tourism grows and customers become more environmentally conscious, it has become a challenge for travel businesses to attract these client groups and satisfy their environmental demands (Moyeen et al., 2019). By analyzing the CSR initiatives, the operators and management of the service company may reappreciate the significance of CSR, allowing them to proactively engage in CSR. In addition, the utilization of CSR concept to gain consumer support offers the service firms with a fresh marketing viewpoint for achieving economic rewards.

Future research agenda

The existing research gaps are then fulfilled through the current systematic review, which may be interpreted as an encouragement for further study. After comparing it to past findings, we are able to determine a future research agenda, which is also another way to identify the limitations. This must be investigated into a broader scope of disciplines, for instance, in decision sciences and other areas. Corporate Social Responsibility has proved both its high worth and rapidly expanding importance in the global service industry. Firstly, provided that CSR is primarily is an environmental, business and enterprise subject, there exists an obvious necessity to investigate the difficulties in the strategy-oriented perspective and a practical implication. Second, comprehensive study via the perspectives of a comprehensive manner, challenges will help regulators and decision-makers combine varied policy agendas and establish well-defined policy objectives. Third, it is important to recognize that a striking difficult to address the challenges of CSR and regular strategic choice through a cost-benefit input by the enterprises. Last but not list, ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) and (Corporate) Sustainability are new proposals or acronyms that span the CSR domain that have emerged in recent years, mostly from a management viewpoint. The study of this article indicates the ESG or Corporate Sustainability as one of the most often occurring terms we may be able to explore this convergence in the course of further studies Thus, as the worldwide monetary and policy environment continues to evolve, it is anticipated that new difficulties may emerge to the service sector. In addition, to the best of our knowledge, no comprehensive study of relevant literature is currently accessible. It is undoubtedly worthwhile to investigate and compare the results of the current bibliometric investigation.

References

• 1

  Abbas M. Gao Y. Shah S. S. H. (2018). CSR and customer outcomes: The mediating role of customer engagement. Sustain. Switz.10 (11), 4243. https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85056701929&doi=10.3390%2fsu10114243&partnerID=40&md5=57ab8d61ba325b0fd13d574ce53eb0d7.

  • Google Scholar

• 2

  Adeyinka-Ojo S. (2021). PRISMA statement and thematic analysis framework in hospitality and tourism research. Adv. Glob. Serv. retail Manag.5, 9. 10.5038/9781955833035

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 3

  Ahmad N. Ullah Z. AlDhaen E. Han H. Scholz M. (2022). A CSR perspective to foster employee creativity in the banking sector: The role of work engagement and psychological safety. J. Retail. Consumer Serv.67. https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85125877206&doi=10.1016%2fj.jretconser.2022.102968&partnerID=40&md5=94d0a373711dc9f93e745898644ff09f.

  • Google Scholar

• 4

  Ahn J. Lee C.-K. Back K.-J. Schmitt A. (2019). Brand experiential value for creating integrated resort customers’ co-creation behavior. Int. J. Hosp. Manag.81, 104–112. 10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.03.009

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 5

  Aliffianto A. Y. Candraningrat C. (2018). The influence of destination brand communication and destination brand trust toward visitor loyalty of marine tourism in east java, Indonesia. Int. J. Civ. Eng. Technol. (IJCIET)9 (8).

  • Google Scholar

• 6

  Alsamil A. M. Giezen T. J. Egberts T. C. Leufkens H. G. Vulto A. G. van der Plas M. R. et al (2020). Reporting of quality attributes in scientific publications presenting biosimilarity assessments of (intended) biosimilars: A systematic literature review. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci.154, 105501. 10.1016/j.ejps.2020.105501

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 7

  Aminudin N. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and employee retention of ‘green’ hotels. Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci.105, 763–771. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.11.079

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 8

  Andrew J. Baker M. (2020). Corporate social responsibility reporting: The last 40 Years and a path to sharing future insights. Abacus56 (1), 35–65. 10.1111/abac.12181

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 9

  Antonetti P. Crisafulli B. Maklan S. (2021). When doing good will not save us: Revisiting the buffering effect of CSR following service failures. Psychol. Mark.38 (9), 1608–1627. 10.1002/mar.21531

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 10

  Aragon-Correa J. A. Martin-Tapia I. de la Torre-Ruiz J. (2015). Sustainability issues and hospitality and tourism firmsâ€^TM strategies. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag.27 (3), 498–522. 10.1108/IJCHM-11-2014-0564

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 11

  Araujo da Costa H. de J. Gurgel E. S. C. Amaral D. D. do Vasconcelos L. V. Rebelo L. G. B. Teodoro G. S. (2020). CSR ecological strategies, functional traits and trade-offs of woody species in Amazon sandplain forest. Flora273, 151710. 10.1016/j.flora.2020.151710

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 12

  Arici H. E. Uysal M. (2022). Leadership, green innovation, and green creativity: A systematic review. Serv. Industries J.42 (5–6), 280–320. 10.1080/02642069.2021.1964482

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 13

  Arli D. van Esch P. Northey G. Lee M. S. W. Dimitriu R. (2019). Hypocrisy, skepticism, and reputation: The mediating role of corporate social responsibility. Mark. Intell. Plan.37 (6), 706–720. 10.1108/MIP-10-2018-0434

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 14

  Atmeh M. Shaban M. Alsharairi M. (2020). Corporate social responsibility: Motives and financial performance. Int. J. Financial Stud.8 (4), 76–17. 10.3390/ijfs8040076

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 15

  Bagga T. Bhatt M. (2013). A study of intrinsic and extrinsic factors influencing consumer buying behaviour online. Asia-Pacific J. Manag. Res. Innovation9 (1), 77–90. 10.1177/2319510X13483515

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 16

  Baig M. I. Shuib L. Yadegaridehkordi E. (2019). Big data adoption: State of the art and research challenges. Inf. Process. Manag.56 (6), 102095. 10.1016/j.ipm.2019.102095

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 17

  Batool S. Butt A. Niazi B. (2016). Types of corporate social responsibility practices across the industry in Pakistan and their effectiveness. Corp. Responsib. Stakeholding10, 225–246. 10.1108/S2043-052320160000010015

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 18

  Bhattacharya C. B. Sen S. (2004). Doing better at doing good: When, why, and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. Calif. Manag. Rev.47 (1), 9–24. 10.2307/41166284

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 19

  Boubakri N. El Ghoul S. Guedhami O. Wang H. Helen ). (2021). Corporate social responsibility in emerging market economies: Determinants, consequences, and future research directions. Emerg. Mark. Rev.46, 100758. 10.1016/j.ememar.2020.100758

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 20

  Bravo R. Matute J. Pina J. M. (2012). Corporate social responsibility as a vehicle to reveal the corporate identity: A study focused on the websites of Spanish financial entities. J. Bus. Ethics107 (2), 129–146. 10.1007/s10551-011-1027-2

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 21

  Camilleri M. A. (2015). Environmental, social and governance disclosures in Europe. Sustain. Account. Manag. Policy J.6 (2), 224–242. 10.1108/SAMPJ-10-2014-0065

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 22

  Carroll A. B. Shabana K. M. (2010). The business case for corporate social responsibility: A review of concepts, research and practice. Int. J. Manag. Rev.12 (1), 85–105. 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00275.x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 23

  Casado-Dãaz A. B. Nicolau-Gonzálbez J. L. Ruiz-Moreno F. Sellers-Rubio R. (2014). The differentiated effects of CSR actions in the service industry. J. Serv. Mark.28 (7), 558–565. 10.1108/jsm-07-2013-0205

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 24

  Cha M.-K. Yi Y. Bagozzi R. P. (2016). Effects of customer participation in corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs on the CSR-brand fit and brand loyalty. Cornell Hosp. Q.57 (3), 235–249. 10.1177/1938965515620679

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 25

  Chen C.-Y. Lin Y.-H. (2020). Persuasion effect of corporate social responsibility initiatives in professional sport franchise: Moderating effect analysis. PLOS ONE15 (12), e0243579. 10.1371/journal.pone.0243579

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 26

  Coles T. Fenclova E. Dinan C. (2014). Corporate social responsibility reporting among European low-fares airlines: Challenges for the examination and development of sustainable mobilities. J. Sustain. Tour.22 (1), 69–88. 10.1080/09669582.2013.790391

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 27

  Dahlsrud A. (2008). How corporate social responsibility is defined: An analysis of 37 definitions. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag.15 (1), 1–13. 10.1002/csr.132

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 28

  Dalal B. (2020). The antecedents and consequences of CSR skepticism: An integrated framwork. J. Sustain. Mark.1 (1), 1–9. 10.51300/josm-2020-18

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 29

  de Grosbois D. (2012). Corporate social responsibility reporting by the global hotel industry: Commitment, initiatives and performance. Int. J. Hosp. Manag.31 (3), 896–905. 10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.10.008

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 30

  De Grosbois D. (2016). Corporate social responsibility reporting in the cruise tourism industry: A performance evaluation using a new institutional theory based model. J. Sustain. Tour.24 (2), 245–269. 10.1080/09669582.2015.1076827

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 31

  Esen E. (2013). “The influence of corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities on building corporate reputation,” in International business, sustainability and corporate social responsibility. Editors Alejandra Gonzalez-perezM.LeonardL. (Bingley, United Kingdom: Emerald Group Publishing Limited), 133–150. 10.1108/S2051-5030(2013)0000011010

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 32

  Estol J. Camilleri M. A. Font X. (2018). European Union tourism policy: An institutional theory critical discourse analysis. Tour. Rev.73, 421–431. 10.1108/tr-11-2017-0167

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 33

  Farrington T. Curran R. Gori K. Oâ€Gorman K. D. Queenan C. J. (2017). Corporate social responsibility: Reviewed, rated, revised. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag.29 (1), 30–47. 10.1108/IJCHM-05-2015-0236

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 34

  Freeman I. Hasnaoui A. (2011). The meaning of corporate social responsibility: The vision of four nations. J. Bus. Ethics100 (3), 419–443. 10.1007/s10551-010-0688-6

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 35

  Fukuda K. Ouchida Y. (2020). Corporate social responsibility (CSR) and the environment: Does CSR increase emissions?Energy Econ.92, 104933. 10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104933

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 36

  Galeazzi C. Sacchetti A. Cisbani A. Babini G. (2008). The PRISMA program. IGARSS 2008-2008 IEEE Int. Geoscience Remote Sens. Symposium4, IV–105.

  • Google Scholar

• 37

  Gallardo-Vázquez D. Valdez-Juárez L. E. Castuera-Díaz Á. M. (2019). Corporate social responsibility as an antecedent of innovation, reputation, performance, and competitive success: A multiple mediation analysis. Sustainability11 (20), 5614. 10.3390/su11205614

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 38

  González-Torres T. Rodríguez-Sánchez J.-L. Pelechano-Barahona E. (2021). Managing relationships in the Tourism Supply Chain to overcome epidemic outbreaks: The case of COVID-19 and the hospitality industry in Spain. Int. J. Hosp. Manag.92, 102733. 10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102733

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 39

  Gull A. A. Hussain N. Khan S. A. Khan Z. Saeed A. (2022). Governing corporate social responsibility decoupling: The effect of the governance committee on corporate social responsibility decoupling. J. Bus. Ethics. 10.1007/s10551-022-05181-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 40

  Ham C.-D. Kim J. (2020). The effects of CSR communication in corporate crises: Examining the role of dispositional and situational CSR skepticism in context. Public Relat. Rev.46 (2), 101792. 10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.05.013

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 41

  Hardeck I. Hertl R. (2014). Consumer reactions to corporate tax strategies: Effects on corporate reputation and purchasing behavior. J. Bus. Ethics123 (2), 309–326. 10.1007/s10551-013-1843-7

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 42

  Husted B. W. Allen D. B. (2007). Strategic corporate social responsibility and value creation among large firms: Lessons from the Spanish experience. Long. Range Plan.40 (6), 594–610. 10.1016/j.lrp.2007.07.001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 43

  Kang J. Hustvedt G. (2014). Building trust between consumers and corporations: The role of consumer perceptions of transparency and social responsibility. J. Bus. Ethics125 (2), 253–265. 10.1007/s10551-013-1916-7

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 44

  Khanlari A. Hajiheidari N. Farhang M. (2016). The impact of social media based brand communities on brand trust in tourism industry. Маркетинг і Менеджмент Інновацій2, 94–107.

  • Google Scholar

• 45

  Kim M. Yin X. Lee G. (2020). The effect of CSR on corporate image, customer citizenship behaviors, and customers’ long-term relationship orientation. Int. J. Hosp. Manag.88, 102520. 10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102520

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 46

  Lasarov W. Mai R. Krause J. S. Schmidt U. Hoffmann S. (2021). Too cold to be skeptical: How ambient temperature moderates the effects of CSR communication. Ecol. Econ.183, 106943. 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.106943

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 47

  Latapí Agudelo M. A. Johannsdottir L. Davidsdottir B. (2020). Drivers that motivate energy companies to be responsible. A systematic literature review of Corporate Social Responsibility in the energy sector. J. Clean. Prod.247, 119094. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119094

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 48

  Lee Y. Yoon S. Jung K. (2018). Comparative studies of detecting abusive language on twitter. https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.10245.

  • Google Scholar

• 49

  Liberati A. Altman D. G. Tetzlaff J. Mulrow C. Gøtzsche P. C. Ioannidis J. P. A. et al (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. J. Clin. Epidemiol.62 (10), e1–e34. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 50

  Luo W. Tang P. Jiang L. Su M. M. (2020). Influencing mechanism of tourist social responsibility awareness on environmentally responsible behavior. J. Clean. Prod.271, 122565. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122565

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 51

  Mantovani D. de Andrade L. M. Negrão A. (2017). How motivations for CSR and consumer-brand social distance influence consumers to adopt pro-social behavior. J. Retail. Consumer Serv.36, 156–163. 10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.01.009

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 52

  Meitiana M. Setiawan M. Rohman F. Irawanto D. W. (2019). Factors affecting souvenir purchase behavior: Valuable insight for tourism marketers and industry. J. Bus. Retail Manag. Res.13 (3). 10.24052/jbrmr/v13is03/art-22

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 53

  Merz M. A. Zarantonello L. Grappi S. (2018). How valuable are your customers in the brand value co-creation process? The development of a customer Co-creation value (CCCV) scale. J. Bus. Res.82, 79–89. 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.08.018

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 54

  Moher D. Altman D. G. Liberati A. Tetzlaff J. (2011). PRISMA statement. Epidemiology22 (1), 128. 10.1097/ede.0b013e3181fe7999

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 55

  Moyeen A. Kamal S. Yousuf M. (2019). “A content analysis of CSR research in hotel industry, 2006-2017,” in Responsibility and governance: The twin pillars of sustainability. Editors CrowtherD.SeifiS.WondT. (Singapore: Springer), 163–179. 10.1007/978-981-13-1047-8_10

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 56

  Nawijn F. Ham W. H. Houwert R. M. Groenwold R. H. Hietbrink F. Smeeing D. P. (2019). Quality of reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in emergency medicine based on the PRISMA statement. BMC Emerg. Med.19 (1), 19–28. 10.1186/s12873-019-0233-6

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 57

  Newman A. Obschonka M. Schwarz S. Cohen M. Nielsen I. (2019). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy: A systematic review of the literature on its theoretical foundations, measurement, antecedents, and outcomes, and an agenda for future research. J. Vocat. Behav.110, 403–419. 10.1016/j.jvb.2018.05.012

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 58

  Oduro S. Maccario G. De Nisco A. (2021). Green innovation: A multidomain systematic review. Eur. J. Innovation Manag.25. 10.1108/EJIM-10-2020-0425

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 59

  Okafor A. Adeleye B. N. Adusei M. (2021). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Evidence from U.S tech firms. J. Clean. Prod.292, 126078. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126078

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 60

  Page M. J. McKenzie J. E. Bossuyt P. M. Boutron I. Hoffmann T. C. Mulrow C. D. et al (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ372, n71. 10.1136/bmj.n71

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 61

  Pazienza M. de Jong M. Schoenmaker D. (2022). Clarifying the concept of corporate sustainability and providing convergence for its definition. Sustainability14 (13), 7838. 10.3390/su14137838

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 62

  Perrini F. Pogutz S. Tencati A. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in Italy: State of the art. J. Bus. Strategies23 (1), 65–91. 10.54155/jbs.23.1.65-91

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 63

  Pickering C. Byrne J. (2014). The benefits of publishing systematic quantitative literature reviews for PhD candidates and other early-career researchers. High. Educ. Res. Dev.33 (3), 534–548. 10.1080/07294360.2013.841651

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 64

  Popay J. Roberts H. Sowden A. Petticrew M. Arai L. Rodgers M. et al (2006). Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews. A Prod. ESRC Methods Programme Version1 (1), b92.

  • Google Scholar

• 65

  Rhou Y. Singal M. (2020). A review of the business case for CSR in the hospitality industry. Int. J. Hosp. Manag.84, 102330. 10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.102330

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 66

  Rodrigues M. Mendes L. (2018). Mapping of the literature on social responsibility in the mining industry: A systematic literature review. J. Clean. Prod.181, 88–101. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.163

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 67

  Rodríguez A. Hernández V. Nieto M. J. (2022). International and domestic external knowledge in the innovation performance of firms from transition economies: The role of institutions. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change176, 121442. 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121442

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 68

  Sadik-Zada E. R. (2021). Addressing the growth and employment effects of the extractive industries: White and black box illustrations from Kazakhstan. Post-Communist Econ.33 (4), 402–434. 10.1080/14631377.2020.1745557

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 69

  Sadik-Zada E. R. Loewenstein W. Hasanli Y. (2021). Production linkages and dynamic fiscal employment effects of the extractive industries: Input-output and nonlinear ARDL analyses of Azerbaijani economy. Mineral. Econ.34 (1), 3–18. 10.1007/s13563-019-00202-6

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 70

  Shankar A. Yadav R. (2021). Understanding the impact of CSR domain on brand relationship quality. Mark. Intell. Plan.39 (4), 559–573. 10.1108/MIP-10-2020-0442

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 71

  Sheldon P. J. Park S.-Y. (2011). An exploratory study of corporate social responsibility in the U.S. Travel industry. J. Travel Res.50 (4), 392–407. 10.1177/0047287510371230

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 72

  Shin H. Sharma A. Nicolau J. L. Kang J. (2021). The impact of hotel CSR for strategic philanthropy on booking behavior and hotel performance during the COVID-19 pandemic. Tour. Manag.85, 104322. 10.1016/j.tourman.2021.104322

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 73

  Skarmeas D. Leonidou C. N. Saridakis C. (2014). Examining the role of CSR skepticism using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. J. Bus. Res.67 (9), 1796–1805. 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.12.010

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 74

  Skarmeas D. Leonidou C. N. (2013). When consumers doubt, Watch out! The role of CSR skepticism. J. Bus. Res.66 (10), 1831–1838. 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.02.004

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 75

  Srivastava R. K. Wagh S. (2020). Factors impacting consumer purchase behaviour for pharmaceutical products. Int. J. Healthc. Manag.13 (2), 113–121. 10.1080/20479700.2017.1348004

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 76

  Thao H. T. P. (2018). “Enhancing brand image and brand trust in the Vietnamese tourism industry via e-word of mouth,” in The digitization of business in China: Exploring the transformation from manufacturing to a digital service hub. Editors KimY.-C.ChenP.-C. (Berlin, Germany: Springer International Publishing), 179–198. 10.1007/978-3-319-79048-0_7

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 77

  Tsai H. Tsang N. K. F. Cheng S. K. Y. (2012). Hotel employees’ perceptions on corporate social responsibility: The case of Hong Kong. Int. J. Hosp. Manag.31 (4), 1143–1154. 10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.02.002

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 78

  Wang K.-Y. (2022). Sustainable tourism development based upon visitors’ brand trust: A case of “100 religious attractions. Sustainability14 (4), 1977. 10.3390/su14041977

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 79

  Wang Z. Sarkis J. (2017). Corporate social responsibility governance, outcomes, and financial performance. J. Clean. Prod.162, 1607–1616. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.142

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 80

  Winkler O. W. (2021). Interpreting the cumulative frequency distribution of socio-economic data: A recent study. New Visions Sci. Technol.4, 105–112. 10.9734/bpi/nvst/v4/4236F

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 81

  Wut T. M. Xu B. Wong H. S.-M. (2022). A 15-year review of corporate social responsibility practices research in the hospitality and tourism industry. J. Qual. Assur. Hosp. Tour.23 (1), 240–274. 10.1080/1528008X.2020.1864566

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 82

  Xu J. Wei J. Lu L. (2019). Strategic stakeholder management, environmental corporate social responsibility engagement, and financial performance of stigmatized firms derived from Chinese special environmental policy. Bus. Strategy Environ.28 (6), 1027–1044. 10.1002/bse.2299

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 83

  Xu W. Jung H. Han J. (2022). The influences of experiential marketing factors on brand trust, brand attachment, and behavioral intention: Focused on integrated resort tourists. Sustainability14 (20), 13000. 10.3390/su142013000

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 84

  Zabavnik D. Verbič M. (2021). Relationship between the financial and the real economy: A bibliometric analysis. Int. Rev. Econ. Finance75, 55–75. 10.1016/j.iref.2021.04.014

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 85

  Zhang J. Xie C. Morrison A. M. (2021). The effect of corporate social responsibility on hotel employee safety behavior during COVID-19: The moderation of belief restoration and negative emotions. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag.46, 233–243. 10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.12.011

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar