MIJBR | Vol.

3 | Issue 1 | January-June 2016

A Study on Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility

on Rural Development
Amruth Raj Nippatlapalli1, Dr. Suja S Nair2
1
Research Scholor,Department of Business Management,VSU,Nellore,A.P.
2
Associate Proferssor,Department of Business Management,VSU,Nellore,A.P.
Email: [email protected] 1

Abstract
Corporate Social Responsibility is a key concept in the business world particularly in
developing countries like India. In India many companies or industries have modified their
policies, activities and are engaged into Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) especially on
rural development beyond their financial aspects. India is the first country following and
implementing legally and made a regulation in the constitution under the "companies act.2013,
Section 135, clause VII. The purpose of this research was to address gaps identified in the
literature regarding the implementation of CSR at the social level and the initiatives that influence
this implementation. The study has established that current theorizing fails to provide
satisfactory guidance to the topic as the relevant literature suffers from three significant
shortcomings.
Keywords: Corporate social responsibility,companies,rural development

Introduction Andhra Pradesh the state is in a big financial crisis

Corporate Social Responsibility is a key concept and the govt. of Andhra Pradesh has no sources to
in the business world particularly in developing improve the quality of lives of the rural people.At
countries like India.In India many companies or that time, Govt. of Andhra Pradesh called and
industries have modified their policies, activities and requested companies to adopt villages for
are engaged into Corporate Social Responsibility development. This study is aimed to find out of the
(CSR) especially on rural development beyond their socio-environmental conditions of the rural people
financial aspects. India is the first country following through CSR activities.And finally to find out the
and implementing legally and made a regulation in impact level of corporate social responsibility on
the constitution under the "companies act.2013, rural development.
Section 135, clause VII.Many Review of literature
researchers,economists and authors are focusing According to Bowen "Corporate Social
in the present scenario on corporate social Responsibility of businessmen refers to the
responsibility in India, because it is the raising issue obligations of businessmen to pursue those policies,
for the economic standard of the India. Within the to make those decisions, or to follow those lines of
part of corporate social responsibility, many action which are desirable in terms of the objectives
companies are implementing their CSR activities on and values of our society" In other words, according
rural development. In India, after bifurcation of
MJIBR - MITS International Journal of Business Research 59
 ISSN No: 2349-1701
to Indian Companies Act 2013,section135,clause responsibilities. Companies have started to realise
VII, every company who should have Net worth the importance of CSR and initiating the steps
of 500cr or more or Turnover of 1000cr or more towards it.
or Net profit of 5cr or more should spent 2% from
Theoretical framework of the research
their profits which is preceding by 3years of average
profits towards corporate social responsibility. The review of CSR literature revealed certain
gaps in availed knowledge as discussed already in
Miguel Arato, StijnSpeelman and Guido Van the review of literature. It shows there is an
Huylenbroeck, 2016:Corporate Social Responsibility uncertainty regarding the actual spread of CSR
is regarded as a feasible driver for rural activities; Disagreement on the value of
development. Although focusing on rural implementation on rural areas through CSR
development probably is not relevant for all types activities, and controversy what drives firms to
of companies, managers interested in supporting voluntarily adopt CSR practices. This situation calls
rural development through CSR strategies could use to researchers to investigate certain areas,
the identified strategies as a reference when addressing their companies towards rural
designing their own strategies, considering of development.Based on the literature reviewed, this
course, their particular case and needs. The section is seeking to develop a theoretical framework
challenge for the future is to encourage a higher that will enable this study empirically scrutinize
participation of firms in Rural Development, which theories and produce findings that advance existing
for some cases would represent investing in groups knowledge on this topic. This is achieved on the
that are not-directly linked to their operations, but basis of an inter-disciplinary approach, drawing on
that share common interests in land and society. the diffusion of innovation theory, legitimacy theory,
Pooja Rani, MS Khan, 2015:major problems of CSR Social contractual theory and theory of Stakeholders
implementation are few inters of company & lack theory (theory of conceptualization). Although these
of awareness, knowledge towards CSR among the theories may often overlap, they offer a rich
employees. main benefit through CSR adoption is framework for exploring questions pertaining to the
improving relationship with all stake holders and impact of CSR on rural development. These theories
then build corporate reputation.Yemokhya would give a clarification on "why companies adopt
Fakhay,2015: The concept of CSR has undergone CSR activities", "Why companies maintain CSR as
radical change. It has integrated social as well as a legitimacy for sustainable development", "why
environmental issues into their missions and stakeholder's perception is necessary for CSR
decisions. Companies take keen interest in informing activities" and "How the impact of CSR activities
about their CSR activities to their stakeholders as are useful to rural development".
well. Nithin Kumar,2014:In his study he says that
CSR clearly impacts our corporations, society, and Diffusion of innovation theory
educational organizations. Despite its complexities, 3.1. Why companies adopt Corporate Social
the numerous sustainability initiatives point toward Responsibility (CSR): It involves very different
continued, positive impact. CSR policy should methodologies, types of evidence, and criteria of
function as a built-in, self-regulating mechanism appraisal accordingly, they categorised three
whereby businesses would monitor and ensure their branches of stakeholder literature: descriptive,
adherence to law, ethical standards and international instrumental and normative approaches. Each
norms. In the recent year's corporate business branch is discussed in the following sections and
houses have substantially involved towards societal the common features of the various conceptions of

60 MIJBR - MITS International Journal of Business Research

MIJBR | Vol. 3 | Issue 1 | January-June 2016
stakeholder theory are identified. Diffusion of shareholders and other stakeholders arise from the
innovations theory has been previously used by contracts with them, which should balance the
many CSR scholars (e.g. Corbett &Muthulingam, external and internal regulations of the corporations.
2007; Corbett & Kirsch, 2001; Delmas, 2002; King Therefore, the stakeholder management approach
& Lenox, 2001) in their endeavor to establish of the corporation is grounded in the concept of
whether firms adopt CSR tools, as a means of the social contract.
enhancing their CSR performance or for other
Stakeholder theory:
reasons. The literature on diffusion of innovations
perceives management standards as managerial Stakeholder theory is a theory of Organizations
innovations (Rogers, 2003). According to this management and business ethics that deals with
theory, organizations do not all adopt a managerial principles and values in managing an Organization
innovation simultaneously but in an over-time (Freeman and Phillips 2002; 2003). According to
sequence. The theory suggests that the adoption of this theory, stakeholders are Organization as the
an innovation follows an S-shaped curve over time. group of people interested in the company's activities
During the first years after the introduction of a (Freeman 1984; Friedman 2007). Below Table
managerial innovation only few companies adopt it shows what stakeholders expect from their
each year. Then a critical mass of adopters is organizations.
reached and the cumulative rate of adoption speeds Research Gap
up. The important point is that at this stage the wide The review of literature on CSR revealed certain
adoption of the innovation does not take place due gaps in available knowledge. Thus, there is an
to its technical or managerial effectiveness, but due uncertainty regarding the actual spread of CSR
to pressures from other companies that have already initiative, disagreement on the value of
adopted this innovation (Abrahamson, 1991). implementation of CSR, controversy over what
Legitimacy theory CSR initiatives firms to investigate the actual policies
3.2. Why companies maintain CSR as legitimacy and practices used when addressing their company's
for sustainable development:Legitimacy theory is activities of CSR in the area of livelihood, education,
based upon the notion that the firm activates a social environment, health and infrastructure
contract, where it agrees to perform various socially responsibilities on rural areas (Dr. jitendar&sanjay,
desired actions in return for approval of its 2010)
objectives, other rewards and its ultimate survival.
Social Contract Theory
3.3. How the impact of CSR activities is useful
to rural development:This theory combines
organisational attention with stakeholder
management. Much of the social contract is rooted
in the traditions of society. The theory says that the
social contract is formulated between people and
organisations when exchanging something. Social
contract theory focuses on the relationship between
the business customers and stakeholders. The long-
term economic benefits for organisations,

MJIBR - MITS International Journal of Business Research 61

 ISSN No: 2349-1701
Theoretical framework of Corporate Social Responsibility and its impact on Rural Development

Need for the Research stakeholders about their CSR activities on rural areas
by published on their Annual Reports. But most of
There is a need to address the CSR on Rural
the companies were not followed ethically reporting
Development because many researchers and authors
to their stakeholders viz, employees and
have tried to explain the CSR policies and strategies
beneficiaries. This makes a need to address the
with their views. But most of the researches were
researcher to study on the beneficiaries' satisfaction
relating to developed countries only because the
level by the CSR activities on rural areas of their
companies voluntarily give all their CSR policies and
adopted companies or corporate.
implementations on their annual reports. And the
top level management has also provided all the Research Objectives
information to the researchers with respect to their • To Study and Understand the CSR concepts,
research.Where as in the case of developing theories and evolution on Rural Development.
countries it is hard to gather the information from
the companies. The companies have willing or not • To Study and understanding the CSR initiatives
being taken by the companies for Rural
willing to give their CSR policies and implementation
areas particularly in rural areas to the researchers. Development.
Developing countries like India has more need to • To examine the corporate approach to work and
address the CSR initiatives on Rural Development. mode of implementation for CSR initiatives on
Because the govt. of India has put an act Rural Development.
(companies act 2003) on companies to support the
• To examine the impact level of CSR actions and
development of CSR activities from their profits.In
initiatives on Rural Development
India many companies were followed CSR activities
on Rural Development, companies are report to their • To understand beneficiaries' perception towards
CSR on Rural Development.
62 MIJBR - MITS International Journal of Business Research
MIJBR | Vol. 3 | Issue 1 | January-June 2016
• To find out the requirements of the CSR Where nh= Sample size for stratum h,Nh=
initiatives on Rural Development. Population size for stratum
Data Sources N= Total population size, n= Total
The secondary data were drawn from research sample size
reports and journals from various institutions, books Stratified sampling ensures that at least one
and through internet. The primary data relating to observation is picked from each of the strata, even
employees' perceptions to organisational changes if probability of it being selected is close to zero.
were collected with the help of a questionnaire. The Hence the statistical properties of the population may
questionnaire was formulated based on earlier not be preserved if there are thin strata. A rule of
studies and modified as indicated from the results thumb that is used to ensure this is that the population
of the pilot study should consist of no more than six strata, but
Target Population depending on special cases the rule can change -
The target population of this study was the top for example if there are 100 strata each with 1 million
10 companies from the investment point of view observations, it is perfectly fine to do a 10%
which are doing CSR activities in SPSR Nellore stratified sampling on them.
district rural areas. The companies' data is collected Sampling Design:From the above mentioned
from the District Industries Centre (DIC) of SPSR stratified random sampling method, companies each
Nellore district. The population is beneficiaries of company has at least of one village for implementing
ten villages of CSR companies in SPSR Nellore or adopting their CSR activities. Among those
District. villages each village consists of 500 to 1000
The Sampling Procedure beneficiaries. Among those beneficiaries the
The sampling strategy used in this study was researcher has to select 50 beneficiaries from each
the proportionate stratified random sampling. In village either males or females. Though the
this study researcher used top 10 companies in SPSR beneficiaries are sufficient for the study the
Nellore district based on investment wise researcher has to select 50 beneficiaries only cause
continuously from past three years (2012, 2013, of lack of accuracy, time and cost incurred to collect
2014 & 2015). the data is expensive.

Stratified random Strategies: Proportionate Sample Size:Geographical area or region =

allocation uses a sampling fraction in each of the SPSR Nellore District of Andhra Pradesh.
strata that is proportional to that of the total Deliberate research or Convenience research
population. For instance, if the population consists selected Districts = SPSR Nellore district.
of X total individuals, m of which are male and f
female (and where m + f = X), then the relative size Number of villages selected in selected district
of the two samples (x1 = m/X males, x2 = f/X = Ten*.
females) should reflect this proportion. *(Each company is selected based on top
According to Neyman allocation position from investment amount to CSR activities
through three annual successive reports).
sample size:
Proportionate Stratified Sampling Formula= Total number of villages selected stratified
nh=(Nh/N)*n sampling = 10.

MJIBR - MITS International Journal of Business Research 63

 ISSN No: 2349-1701
Number of villages selected from each company external stakeholders and are they doing or
= One. implementing CSR activities for rural development.
Total number of villages selected for sampling The statistical package for social science (spss,
=10(10 companies*1 village). version 20) was used to analyze the data. The
reliability test has been conducted to verify the
Number of beneficiaries in each village =min
internal consistency of the variables obtained in the
1000-1500 max.
sample. The cronbach's alpha is found to be 0.787
Number of beneficiaries from each village for and all sub scales are above 0.700. Which are higher
sampling analysis = 50 Beneficiaries. than the minimum acceptable level suggested by
Total number of beneficiaries selected for sample Nunally (1978). All questions are Close ended
size = 500(50 Beneficiaries*10 villages). questions were used to prompt responses on the
perceptions of employees towards organizational
Instrument development change.
The researcher used a background structured
Limitations of the research
questionnaire and an adopted standardized scale
(Likert's five points) in collecting data. The main The concept of CSR is very difficult to focus
drive of using the background questionnaire was to on all the areas. It is very vast information contained
obtain awareness information of the respondents and the information gather or identifying on the all
specifically on CSR thematic areas of environment, areas of the CSR, around the world is very time
education, livelihood, health and infrastructure. This consuming, expensive and availability of the
scale was adopted from research study prepared resources are abundant. But the researcher has very
and used by ParamataSatyanarayana for his doctor few resources like time, cost of the research
of philosophy in the department of commerce at information and other expenses.
Andhra University to measure beneficiary awareness With reference to the above mentioned some of
on CSR activities of selected organisations. The the identifying difficulties the researcher has to set
questionnaire contains 66 items. The perceptions some limitations with respect to the research. For
of beneficiaries on CSR activities of companies are the accuracy and reliability of the research the
categorized subscales representing the following researcher has focus only on the particular
constructs of: geographical area only because there is a more
1.Demographic profile, 2. Awareness of difficulty to gather the information around the world.
beneficiaries about CSR 3. Perceptions of The companies may infinite in number which is
beneficiaries on company's activities on CSR 4. followed CSR initiatives on Rural Development
Thematic areas( CSR initiatives) according to their Govt. rules and regulations of
their respective nations. Not only in the world wide
The main goal of adopting this scale was to it is tough to gathered the information from the
understand how individual awareness of the developing countries like India too. The reason is
respondents relating to CSR activities which is
there are thousands of Indian Companies from Large
already discussed in the research gap based on the
to small in size which are followed CSR strategies
stakeholders theory whether the external on Rural Development.
stakeholders have an aware on CSR activities of
companies. Companies are reaching their CSR Data Interpretation:
information successfully or unsuccessfully to the Multiple Correlations between CSR initiatives and
rural development:
64 MIJBR - MITS International Journal of Business Research
MIJBR | Vol. 3 | Issue 1 | January-June 2016
Table No: 5.9.1. Shows that descriptive statistics correlation significance which accepts the alter
between CSR initiatives and Rural development. The hypothesis.
mean values of variables environment is 3.94 with
2. Environment- Health: The correlation between
a standard deviation of 0.503, education is 3.96 with
environment and Health is 0.13 which is a very
a standard deviation of 0.553, health is with a mean
less positive correlation with a significance value
of 4.09 at standard deviation of 0.483, followed by
of .003 at 0.05 level of correlation significance
next initiative livelihood with a mean of 4.02 with
which accepts the alter hypothesis.
standard deviation of 0.405, infrastructure initiative
has a values with mean 4.22 and of standard 3. Environment- Livelihood: The correlation
deviation 0.403, the next initiative of special program between environment and Livelihood is 0.92
for SC, ST is with a mean value of 4.03 at a standard which is a less positive correlation with a
deviation of 0.561, and the finally rural development significance value of .037 at 0.05 level of
with mean of 6.06 and with standard deviation of correlation significance which accepts the alter
0.546. hypothesis.

Table No: 5.9.1: Descriptive Statistics of CSR 4. Environment- Infrastructure: The correlation
initiatives and rural development between environment and Infrastructure is 0.21
Variables Mean Std. Deviation N which is a less positive correlation with a
Environment 3.94 .503 515
significance value of .000 at 0.05 level of
correlation significance which accepts the alter
Education 3.96 .553 515 hypothesis.
Health 4.09 .483 515 5. Environment- Special programs of SC, ST
Livelihood 4.02 .405 515 people: The correlation between environment
and Special programs of SC, ST people is 0.62
Infrastructure 4.22 .403 515
which is a less positive correlation with a
Special programs for SC,ST 4.03 .561 515 significance value of .000 at 0.05 level of
correlation significance which accepts the alter
Rural development 6.06 .546 515
hypothesis.
The table no 5.9.2 shows the overall correlation 6. Environment- Rural Development: The
among the CSR initiatives and rural development correlation between environment and rural
that in the five areas of environment, education, development is 0.62 which is a less positive
health, livelihood, infrastructure and special correlation with a significance value of .000 at
programs relating to SC, ST people. The correlation 0.05 level of correlation significance which
shows different results with respect to all the five accepts the alter hypothesis
areas. The correlation is as with following
Education:
Areas:
1. Education- Environment: The correlation
Environment: between Education and Environment is 0.26
1. Environment- Education: The correlation which is a less positive correlation with a
between environment and education is 0.26 significance value of .000 at 0.05 level of
which is a less positive correlation with a correlation significance which accepts the alter
significance value of .000 at 0.05 level of hypothesis.

MJIBR - MITS International Journal of Business Research 65

 ISSN No: 2349-1701
2. Education- Health: The correlation between correlation significance which accepts the alter
Education and Health is 0.19 which is a less hypothesis.
positive correlation with a significance value of
5. Education- Special programs of SC, ST: The
.000 at 0.05 level of correlation significance
correlation between Education and Special
which accepts the alter hypothesis.
programs of SC, ST is 0.38 which is a less
3. Education- Livelihood: The correlation positive correlation with a significance value of
between Education and Livelihood is 0.92 which .000 at 0.05 level of correlation significance
is a less positive correlation with a significance which accepts the alter hypothesis.
value of .000 at 0.05 level of correlation
6. Education- Rural Development: The
significance which accepts the alter hypothesis.
correlation between Education and Rural
4. Education- Infrastructure: The correlation Development is 0.54 which is a less positive
between Education and Infrastructure is 0.21 correlation with a significance value of .000 at
which is a less positive correlation with a 0.05 level of correlation significance which
significance value of .000 at 0.05 level of accepts the alter hypothesis.

Table No: 5.9.2 Multiple Correlations between CSR initiatives and rural development
Special
Rural
Variables Environment Education health livelihood Infrastructure Programs
development
for SC,ST
Pearson
1 .260** .130** .093 * .170** .626** .677**
Correlation
Environment Sig. (2-
.000 .003 .035 .000 .000 .000
tailed)
N 515 515 515 515 515 515 515
Pearson
.260** 1 .199** .092 * .218** .384** .540**
Correlation
Education Sig. (2-
.000 .000 .037 .000 .000 .000
tailed)
N 515 515 515 515 515 515 515
Pearson
.130** .199** 1 .182 ** .137** .240** .404**
Correlation
Health Sig. (2-
.003 .000 .000 .002 .000 .000
tailed)
N 515 515 515 515 515 515 515
Pearson
.093* .092* .182** 1 .168** .196** .336**
Correlation
Livelihood Sig. (2-
.035 .037 .000 .000 .000 .000
tailed)
N 515 515 515 515 515 515 515
Pearson
.170** .218** .137** .168 ** 1 .336** .457**
Correlation
Infrastructure Sig. (2-
.000 .000 .002 .000 .000 .000
tailed)
N 515 515 515 515 515 515 515
Pearson
.626** .384** .240** .196 ** .336** 1 .946**
Special Correlation
Programs for Sig. (2-
SC,ST .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
tailed)
N 515 515 515 515 515 515 515
Pearson
.677** .540** .404** .336 ** .457** .946** 1
Correlation
Rural
development Sig. (2-
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
tailed)
N 515 515 515 515 515 515 515
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

66 MIJBR - MITS International Journal of Business Research

MIJBR | Vol. 3 | Issue 1 | January-June 2016
Health: 2. Livelihood- Education: The correlation
1. Health- Environment: The correlation between between Livelihood and Education is 0.092
Health and Environment is 0.13 which is a less which is a less positive correlation with a
positive correlation with a significance value of significance value of .037 at 0.05 level of
.003 at 0.05 level of correlation significance correlation significance which accepts the alter
which accepts the alter hypothesis. hypothesis

2. Health- Education: The correlation between 3. Livelihood- Health: The correlation between
Health and Education is 0.19 which is a less Livelihood and Health is 0.18 which is a less
positive correlation with a significance value of positive correlation with a significance value of
.000 at 0.05 level of correlation significance .003 at 0.05 level of correlation significance
which accepts the alter hypothesis. which accepts the alter hypothesis

3. Health- Livelihood: The correlation between 4. Livelihood- Infrastructure: The correlation

Health and Livelihood is 0.18 which is a less between Livelihood and Infrastructure is 0.16
positive correlation with a significance value of which is a less positive correlation with a
.000 at 0.05 level of correlation significance significance value of .003 at 0.05 level of
which accepts the alter hypothesis. correlation significance which accepts the alter
hypothesis
4. Health- Infrastructure: The correlation
between Health and Infrastructure is 0.13 which 5. Livelihood- Special programs of SC,ST
is a less positive correlation with a significance people: Livelihood and Special programs of
value of .002 at 0.05 level of correlation SC,ST people is 0.19 which is a less positive
significance which accepts the alter hypothesis. correlation with a significance value of .003 at
0.05 level of correlation significance which
5. Health-Special programs of SC, ST: The accepts the alter hypothesis
correlation between Health and Special programs
of SC, ST is 0.24 which is a less positive 6. Livelihood- Rural development: The
correlation with a significance value of .000 at correlation between Livelihood and Rural
0.05 level of correlation significance which development is 0.33 which is a less positive
accepts the alter hypothesis. correlation with a significance value of .003 at
0.05 level of correlation significance which
6. Health- Rural development: The correlation accepts the alter hypothesis
between Health and Rural development is 0.40
which is a less positive correlation with a Infrastructure:
significance value of .000 at 0.05 level of 1. Infrastructure- Environment: The correlation
correlation significance which accepts the alter between Infrastructure and Environment is 0.17
hypothesis. which is a less positive correlation with a
significance value of .000 at 0.05 level of
Livelihood:
correlation significance which accepts the alter
1. Livelihood- Environment: The correlation hypothesis
between Livelihood and Environment is 0.09
which is a less positive correlation with a 2. Infrastructure- Education: The correlation
significance value of .035 at 0.05 level of between Infrastructure and Education is 0.21
correlation significance which accepts the alter which is a less positive correlation with a
hypothesis significance value of .000 at 0.05 level of
MJIBR - MITS International Journal of Business Research 67
 ISSN No: 2349-1701
correlation significance which accepts the alter 3. Special programs of SC, ST- Health: The
hypothesis correlation between Special programs of SC, ST-
3. Infrastructure- Health: The correlation Health is 0.24 which is a less positive correlation
with a significance value of .000 at 0.05 level of
between Infrastructure and Health is 0.13 which
correlation significance which accepts the alter
is a less positive correlation with a significance
hypothesis
value of .002 at 0.05 level of correlation
significance which accepts the alter hypothesis 4. Special programs of SC, ST- Livelihood: The
4. Infrastructure- Livelihood: The correlation correlation between Special programs of SC, ST-
Livelihood is 0.19 which is a less positive
between Infrastructure and Livelihood is 0.16
which is a less positive correlation with a correlation with a significance value of .000 at
significance value of .000 at 0.05 level of 0.05 level of correlation significance which
correlation significance which accepts the alter accepts the alter hypothesis
hypothesis 5. Special programs of SC, ST- Infrastructure:
5. Infrastructure- Special programs of SC,ST: The correlation between Special programs of
SC, ST- Infrastructure is 0.94 which is a less
The correlation between Infrastructure and
positive correlation with a significance value of
Special programs of SC,ST is 0.33 which is a
.000 at 0.05 level of correlation significance
less positive correlation with a significance value
which accepts the alter hypothesis
of .000 at 0.05 level of correlation significance
which accepts the alter hypothesis Conclusion:
6. Livelihood- Rural development: The The purpose of this research was to address
correlation between Livelihood and Rural gaps identified in the literature regarding the
development is 0.45 which is a less positive implementation of CSR at the social level and the
correlation with a significance value of .000 at initiatives that influence this implementation. The
0.05 level of correlation significance which study has established that current theorizing fails to
accepts the alter hypothesis provide satisfactory guidance to the topic as the
relevant literature suffers from three significant
Special programs of SC, ST:
shortcomings. First, there is controversy over the
1. Special programs of SC, ST- Environment: actual spread of CSR practices; second, there is
The correlation between Special programs of dissent regarding the awareness of beneficiaries on
SC, ST- Environment is 0.62 which is a less implementing process of CSR in rural areas; and
positive correlation with a significance value of third, there is how CSR is effective on thematic
.000 at 0.05 level of correlation significance areas of livelihood, education, environment, health
which accepts the alter hypothesis and infrastructure. Importantly, many of the
2. Special programs of SC, ST- Education: The different views on CSR are not substantiated by
correlation between Special programs of SC, ST- grass root analysis, as the discourse on the topic
Education is 0.38 which is a less positive evolves mainly in the conceptual domain. The
correlation with a significance value of .000 at awareness of the beneficiaries about the company
0.05 level of correlation significance which CSR activities. Majority of the respondents were
accepts the alter hypothesis moderately familiar with the awareness of company
having CSR structure with a percentage of 32%.
CSR initiatives had known by equally responding
68 MIJBR - MITS International Journal of Business Research
MIJBR | Vol. 3 | Issue 1 | January-June 2016
the percentage of the respondents with a percent rural development is positive but it related to high
of 31.7 responding moderately familiar. that to low correlation. The variables within and between
respondents are extremely familiar with a percentage is effect if one raises and another got down. As a
of 39.6 about the awareness relating to sponsored result the effect of corporate social responsibility
company give regular financial support to their rural on rural development is positive.
areas. That respondents are moderately familiar with
REFERENCES
a percentage of 38.4 about the communicate the
1 . Aravossi, K. G., Panayiotou, N.A. and Tsousi, K. (2006),
companies CSR values to customers to their rural "A proposed methodological framework for the evaluation
areas. Company make an assessment of impact of of corporate social responsibility",
EnvironmentalEconomics and Investment Assessement,
CSR had known by responding the percentage of Vol 98, pp. 145-154.
the respondents with a percent of 43.1 responding 2 . Arora, B. and Puranik, R. (2004), "A review of corporate
moderately familiar and extremely familiar. social responsibility in India",Development, Vol.47 No. 3,
pp.93-1 00.
Awareness of the beneficiaries about the Company
3 . Caroll, A.B.(1999), "Corporate social responsibility:
studies the impact of its CSR activities. Majority of Evolution of a definitional construct", Business and Society,
the respondents were extremely familiar with the Vol.38 No. 3, pp.268-295.

awareness of company having CSR structure with 4 . Davis, K. (1973), "The case for and against business
assumption of social responsibilities", Academy of
a percentage of 51.1%.Multiple correlation analysis Management Journal, Vol.16, pp.312-322.
shows the relation between the CSR thematic areas 5 . Gupta, A.D. (2007), "Social responsibility in India towards
of education, health, environment, livelihood, global compact approach",International Journal of Social
economics, Vol.34, pp. 637-663.
infrastructure and special programs on SC, ST on

MJIBR - MITS International Journal of Business Research 69