The main purpose of the research is to expand and contribute to the improvement of the ways in which people interact with the environment. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a field that focuses on social responsibilities in the corporate world. There are changes that can be made to mitigate the damage that occurs in the relationship between people and the environment.
This shift was a significant part of the growing concern for urban environmental justice in the 1980s. Many of these communities were communities of color, leading to the development of the term environmental racism. In the United States, justice and race have a close history, and the environmental field appeared to be no exception.
According to Glavas (2016), more than half of the peer-reviewed articles on CSR were published in the past ten years. The emphasis here is specifically on environmental inequality between women and men. However, it seems to be more focused on women's political, economic and social inequality and on the importance of the natural environment.
Within the ecofeminist argument, the interest of women and that of the natural environment seems to be the same.
RESEARCH DESIGN
Regarding the latter, there is a natural path for exploration in the events of the corporate sector not respecting the environment, and in this case, not respecting the values of social responsibility that they have presented to the world. As research on environmental justice and corporate social responsibility expanded, gender discourses seemed to fit in as a third party experiencing some of the same symptoms of growth in the environmental sector as the other two. An overview of the processes applied in each area is presented in the table below.
When corporate entities disrupt nature, they also disrupt the environment in which people live. Gendered discourses are recognized in theory as part of the definition of environmental justice, but are less recognized in practice. As long as women, especially women in poverty, are marginalized from the public sector when trying to speak out about environmental issues, a culture of neglect will continue from their perspective.
Inequality, an integral part of gender discourse, was one reason for the development of the women's movement. For gender discourses it is useful to think of the outside of the house as the private sphere and the inside as being the public sphere. Mihaylov and Perkins (2015) help with this by defining environmental justice from the perspective of the community.
When it comes to the environment, women increasingly bear the brunt in poor communities. This does not mean that those who are not affected by environmental damage are not part of the groups that cause environmental damage. There is a lot of talk about the issues facing our society today, especially in the area of the environment.
At the time, Coca-Cola denied most allegations that such pollution was actually taking place. There has been a breakdown in power from the real influencers in the larger domains of environmental movements to the smaller grassroots movements that women seem to be a part of. Until denial is turned into acceptance and ultimately into action, a gap will remain in the outsider's reality.
For the purposes of gendered discourses, it is useful to think of the private sphere as external and the public sphere as internal. As long as women, especially women in poverty, are marginalized outside the public sector when they try to speak out about environmental concerns, there will continue to be a culture of neglect from their perspective.
Discussion
A culture of internal recognition is one that can hopefully develop a respect that the issues in these areas are realistic and deserve to be recognized externally by actors other than those directly affected. The many serious injustices that have occurred and make this a widely known phrase are alarming. The combination of the issues of environmental justice, corporate social responsibility and gender discourses is relevant because there is power in it.
There must be an understanding of not only one area, but also the areas involved in it. Concerns should be raised about the gap between stated responsibility and the apparent failure to carry out that responsibility. Recognizing and recognizing that there is a difference between action and reality is at the heart of the debate on corporate social responsibility.
Processes expand our understanding of the ways in which people interact with the environment because they are continually verified through three different fields of study. Which means it is likely to be present in more areas as well. The social expectation for each of these areas must change for the subjects of the areas to be able to change their place.
This research is practical in that it can help those who have recognized that these problems are real to achieve confirmation, but then also present to those who have not achieved this realization to understand. There needs to be more open dialogue between corporate power and those who create regulations. Corporations that will have CSR statements must be held accountable by their shareholders and the appropriate government institution if their responsibility fails.
If a corporation does not want to be held accountable for its poorly expressed responsibility, a simple solution would be for it to remove any talk of environmental responsibility, sustainability or inclusion from its mantra. Then the corporation could be recognized by its actual actions and instead of offering a facade of responsibility. In order for people to be able to interact better with the environment and, consequently, with themselves, problems must be brought to the surface, acknowledged internally and then acknowledged externally by society.
Realizing that lack of recognition and marginalization is common allows us to create change. Part of the solution to creating change comes from the ability to recognize the way different people relate to the environment.
