SMEs as “transmitters” of CSR requirements

in the supply chain

Silvia Ayuso, Mercè Roca and Rosa Colomé
Escola Superior de Comerç Internacional, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to develop understanding of the role of small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in relation to sustainable
supply chain management, i.e. how corporate social responsibility (CSR) is integrated in their relationship with customers and suppliers.
Design/methodology/approach – Drawing from a survey of CSR requirements among 410 Spanish SMEs, the paper examines the extent to which
SMEs receive social and environmental requirements from diverse customer typologies and the extent to which they pass on such requirements to
different supplier typologies.
Findings – Based on survey results, it is concluded that large businesses are the most demanding customers in terms of the CSR requirements imposed
to their SME suppliers. In turn, SMEs are able to transfer the requests received from their (larger) customers to their own suppliers.
Research limitations/implications – The data are confined to companies located in a particular region (Catalonia in Spain), which questions its
generalizability to other geographical contexts.
Practical implications – The research shows that small and medium companies can be effective in spreading the CSR requirements received from
large companies through the supply chain.
Originality/value – The paper contributes to research on sustainable supply chain management from the SME perspective and offers a systematic
analysis of the CSR activities of SMEs, both as suppliers and buyers. In addition, it proposes a rigorous way to measure the CSR-related supply chain
pressure.

Keywords Small to medium-sized enterprises, Supply chain management, Spain, Corporate social responsibility,
Sustainable supply chain management, Environmental and social standards

Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction responsible for the environmental and social performance of

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become an
increasing area of interest for both the business world and
academic community. Although there does not exist a
universally accepted definition of CSR, the concept
generally refers to “the responsibility of enterprises for their
impacts on society” (European Commission, 2012). It
focuses on the role of companies beyond their traditional
scope of seeking profit, and evolved from emphasizing the
social responsibility of business to incorporating also the
concern for environmental protection (Dahlsrud, 2008; Lee,
2008a). However, CSR refers not only to responsible behavior
within the organization itself but also to ensuring proper social
and environmental conditions throughout its supply chain
(Pedersen and Andersen, 2006; Roberts, 2003).
So far, the debate on how to integrate CSR in the supply
chain management (SCM) has focused primarily on the
practices of large, brand-owning companies which are likely to
come under pressure from consumers, non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) or the media (Andersen and
Skjoett-Larsen, 2009). These firms might be held
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1359-8546.htm
their activities up in their supply chain. However, small and
medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) make up the majority of
suppliers of these large companies and thus play an important
role as vehicles for implementing CSR along the supply chain.
But SMEs will frequently have limited resources and a weak
position in supply chains and, as a result of this, they may face
more difficulties in influencing their own suppliers (Nawrocka
et al., 2009).
Up to date, few studies have dealt with sustainable SCM
from a SME perspective. As stated recently by the European
Expert Group on CSR and SMEs:
[. . .] there is a need for more research across different EU countries
regarding the nature, extent and real impact of CSR buyer requirements on
SME suppliers. There is also a need for more research into when and how
SMEs themselves make CSR requirements on their suppliers, and how this
can best be encouraged bearing in mind the capacities of SMEs (European
Commission, 2007).
Drawing from a survey of CSR requirements among 410
Spanish SMEs, this article examines the extent to which
SMEs receive social and environmental requirements from
customers and the extent to which they pass on such
requirements to their own suppliers. The paper seeks to make
The authors would like to thank the Mango Chair in Corporate Social
Responsibility (ESCI-UPF) for sponsoring this research.

Received 30 April 2012

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
18/5 (2013) 497– 508 Revised 30 October 2012
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 1359-8546] 12 December 2012
[DOI 10.1108/SCM-04-2012-0152] Accepted 13 December 2012

497
 SMEs as “transmitters” of CSR requirements in the supply chain
Silvia Ayuso, Mercè Roca and Rosa Colomé
several contributions to the literature. First, it develops
understanding on the role of SMEs in sustainable SCM as
both buyers and suppliers, and thus possible “transmitters” of
CSR requirements. Second, it offers a systematic analysis of
the influence of size and type of SMEs’ supply chain partners
for exerting CSR-related pressure. Third, it proposes a
methodologically rigorous way to measure the CSR-related
supply chain pressure that improves previous techniques, by
calculating the average number of CSR requests per customer
or supplier.
The article is structured as follows. A literature review
presents previous research on implementing CSR
requirements in the supply chain and describes the
hypotheses to be tested. Then, the methodology of the
study is explained. The results are outlined and discussed in
the context of the literature. Finally, conclusions are drawn,
including limitations of the research and implications for
research and practice.
2. Literature review and hypotheses development
Despite the growing interest in integrating CSR into SCM,
the literature on this topic is still limited, and empirical
research is largely based on case studies or case examples that
aim to illustrate the issues emerging in this field (Seuring and
Müller, 2008). The recent literature review undertaken by
Carter and Easton (2011) shows that during the 1990s supply
chain research paid increasing attention to the range of
environmental and social issues firms are exposed to across
the supply chain, as for example, diversity, safety, and human
rights. Since then, the trend has evolved from treating these
issues in a standalone fashion towards a more holistic
approach, either by explicitly incorporating CSR or
sustainability. Nowadays, sustainable supply chain
management (SSCM) has become established as a wide
research field[1].
2.1 Implementing CSR in the supply chain
There exists a research stream within SSCM that deals with the
implementation of minimum environmental and social
requirements along the supply chain (Seuring and Müller,
2008). Within this line of research, several empirical studies
have investigated companies’ efforts to develop and implement
systems and procedures to ensure that their suppliers comply
with environmental and social standards. Most of these studies
are confined to large multinational corporations and explore
their approaches to work with CSR-related issues in their supply
chains (e.g. Andersen and Skjoett-Larsen, 2009; Mamic, 2005;
Strand, 2009) or the risks and challenges particularly associated
to a given sector (e.g. Lim and Philips, 2008; Maloni and
Brown, 2006; Roberts, 2003). These studies generally adopt
the perspective of the buying firm and analyze how focal
companies complement economically based supplier
evaluation with additional environmental and social criteria.
In practice, SSCM tools differ in their level of ambition to
influence and control supplier performance (Ciliberti et al.
2008; Jorgensen and Knudsen, 2006; Nawrocka et al. 2009).
Buying organizations can formulate CSR requirements to be
included either in their own purchasing specifications or in the
supply contracts in areas such as environmental protection,
human rights, labor rights and anti-corruption. In addition,
companies can monitor supplier performance to verify
compliance with requirements by means of surveys,
498
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 18 · Number 5 · 2013 · 497 –508
inspections or audits. The standpoint of suppliers and how
they deal with the increasing environmental and social requests
has been explored to a much lesser degree by empirical
studies[2].
Moreover, not many empirical studies have addressed
SSCM in SMEs and the specific challenges faced by these
companies (see Table I). Mostly of qualitative nature, these
studies explore customer CSR-related pressure on SMEs
(supplier perspective) or SSCM strategies towards suppliers
(buyer perspective). Only few studies have simultaneously
investigated how SMEs are affected by social and
environmental requirements from buyers and how they pass
on requirements to their own suppliers (Jorgensen and
Knudsen, 2006; Nawrocka, 2008). In order to analyze the
role of SMEs for transmitting sustainability criteria along the
supply chain, our study focuses on SMEs in their double role
as buyers and suppliers.
The diffusion of CSR requirements along the supply chain
is significantly influenced by the power balance in the
relationships between buyers and suppliers (Brammer et al.,
2011). Previous research has identified organizational size as a
factor that enables or hinders SSCM, suggesting that large
organizations – both public and private – are more likely to
engage in these practices due to greater expertise, resource,
and buying power (Walker and Jones, 2012; Walker et al.
2008). By contrast, SMEs are likely to lack the resources and
the bargaining power required to implement sustainability
standards within their own suppliers (Jorgensen and
Knudsen, 2006). However, to our knowledge, the present
study is the first to conduct a systematic analysis of the
influence of organization’s size and type of supply chain
partners for exerting CSR-related pressure.
Furthermore, our study offers a more fine-grained analysis
of the experienced supply chain pressure. Whereas previous
research only considered whether companies have been asked
or have themselves asked to comply with CSR requirements
(e.g. Jorgensen and Knudsen, 2006; Lee, 2008b; Nawrocka
et al. 2009) or tried to determine different frequency levels
(Baden et al., 2009), we measure the average number of
requests actually made. Thus we propose a more rigorous way
to measure the degree of CSR-related external pressure
(Hervani et al., 2005).
Next, we present the state of the art of research on the
influence of customer and supplier typology on the
management of CSR requirements and the propensity to
pass on the imposed requirements from customers to
suppliers. We also describe the hypotheses of our study in
relation to this research.
2.2 CSR requirements from customers
According to the literature, supply chain pressure is one of the
main drivers for SMEs to engage in CSR activities (Baden et al.,
2009; Ciliberti et al., 2009; Lee, 2008b). However, the exerted
pressure significantly depends on the type of customer that
SMEs have. Large-scale business customers and public
authorities usually have sufficient power in order to influence
their suppliers to engage in CSR actions (Ciliberti et al. 2009).
Given that they have control over a large proportion of the
exchanges in the supply chain, they can dictate conditions to
smaller suppliers, e.g. by including environmental and social
criteria in their procurement processes. These sustainable
supply chain practices can motivate SME suppliers to engage in
CSR practices (Baden et al., 2009; Lee, 2008b). The supply
 SMEs as “transmitters” of CSR requirements in the supply chain Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Silvia Ayuso, Mercè Roca and Rosa Colomé Volume 18 · Number 5 · 2013 · 497 –508

Table I Empirical studies on SMEs and sustainable supply chain management

Authors Research aim and perspective Empirical analysis Major findings
Baden et al. (2009) Explore the effect of customer pressure on Semi-structured interviews with Customer pressure acts as an
SMEs’ motivations to engage with CSR (supplier 25 SME owner/managers and incentive for CSR engagement
perspective) survey of 103 SMEs (Southern in the majority of SMEs
England)
Ciliberti et al. (2008) Analyze the practices adopted and difficulties Multiple case study of five SMEs combine a CSR
experienced by SMEs to transfer socially Italian SMEs that have management strategy of
responsible behaviors to suppliers in developing relationships with suppliers in compliance with requirements
countries (buyer perspective) developing countries and capacity building
Ciliberti et al. (2009) Explore how SMEs perceive and respond to Multiple case study of four UK Customer pressure, especially
customer CSR-related pressure, and if such SMEs from large-scale business
pressure is effective (supplier perspective) customers and public
authorities, can be effective in
order to stimulate CSR in SMEs
Jorgensen and Examine to what extent SMEs are affected by Survey to 304 Danish SMEs SMEs face social and
Knudsen (2006) social and environmental requirements from from manufacturing and service environmental requirements
buyers and to0020pwhat extent do SMEs apply industries from their buyers much more
such requirements to their own suppliers (buyer frequently than they apply such
and supplier perspective) requirements to their own
suppliers; many buyer or
supplier requirements are not
enforced
Nawrocka (2008) Investigate environmental requirements faced Interviews with environmental SMEs located further up in the
by SMEs in the electronics supply chain and the and purchasing managers of 21 chain receive limited customer
use of environmental management systems SMEs in the electronics sector pressure and more legal
(buyer and supplier perspective) (Sweden) demands; they pose low
demands to their own suppliers
Pedersen (2009) Identify the characteristics of the SMEs that Survey of 1,071 Danish SMEs SMEs of larger size and with
implement CSR activities in the supply chain multifaceted CSR systems are
(buyer perspective) more likely to manage CSR in
the supply chain

chain pressure that they receive can motivate or even force
SMEs to have a formalized policy to deal with CSR or to obtain a
social or environmental standard certification (Ciliberti et al.,
2009). Moreover, an increasing number of large companies
monitor supplier performance to verify compliance with the set
requirements: 62 percent of Spanish companies with more than
500 employees conduct environmental and social audits of their
suppliers or state that they will conduct them in the nearer
future (Forética, 2008).
Thus, results from previous studies indicate that large companies
are more likely to set CSR requirements along their supply chain
(Pedersen, 2009; The Copenhagen Centre, 2006). As argued
before, the main reason may be a question of negotiating power.
Large organizations are expected to hold more bargaining power in
negotiations with their suppliers, which makes it easier for them to
implement and enforce CSR standards throughout the chain.
Furthermore, larger companies are likely to have more human,
financial and technological resources which can be allocated to
CSR activities (Elsayed, 2006). Finally, larger companies are more
visible in the marketplace and may therefore have a stronger
incentive to adopt CSR as a means of reducing risk (Andersen and
Skjoett-Larsen, 2009).
Public authorities also show an increasing tendency to
incorporate CSR criteria in their public procurement processes
with the aim of “leading by example” and facilitating
responsible behavior of companies (McCrudden, 2006). The
specification of environmental and social conditions in tenders
and contracts of local, national and European institutions may
put more pressure on companies than CSR requirements from
private sector organizations. In line with this, a study conducted
in Denmark reveals public institutions are more demanding as
customers than private enterprises and private consumers (The
Copenhagen Centre, 2006).
In sum, when they act as customers, large business and
public authorities seem to be more powerful to request certain
CSR practices from their suppliers than SMEs. On the
contrary, smaller businesses are assumed to generally have less
power to stimulate their suppliers to implement CSR
practices. Based on this, we formulate the following
hypothesis:
H1. When the supplier is a SME, large companies and
public authorities will impose more CSR requirements
than SME customers.

499
 SMEs as “transmitters” of CSR requirements in the supply chain
Silvia Ayuso, Mercè Roca and Rosa Colomé
2.3 CSR requirements for suppliers
A relevant but often neglected issue in the CSR literature is
the extension of supply chain-related practices, i.e. how far
back in the chains are CSR requirements imposed. So far,
most companies solely set CSR requirements to their first-tier
suppliers (omitting going further down the supply chain).
However, in order for the entire supply chain to be
environmentally and socially sustainable, CSR requirements
should preferably be passed on from the first- to second-tier
suppliers, from second- to third-tier suppliers and so on
(Andersen and Skjoett-Larsen, 2009).
Just as large companies and public institutions can exert
some pressure on their suppliers, SMEs generally have lower
bargaining power due to their small purchase volumes. The
adoption of CSR practices and their transmission along the
supply chain can be problematic for SMEs also because of the
high costs involved in terms of necessary resources and
competences (Ciliberti et al., 2008). SMEs engage in CSR
activities in the supply chain when they are able to manage
and control CSR internally (Pedersen, 2009). However, in the
absence of power and resources, trust offers the SME an
alternative for managing interfirm relationships with
suppliers. In fact, the literature on SMEs suggests that they
use social factors in commercial relationships to build trust
and manage relationships (Morrissey and Pittaway, 2006).
This contrasts with the practices of larger firms, which are
governed by more formal arrangements. As a consequence,
the supply chain activities of SMEs will have to be more
imaginative in order to convince partners to adopt a socially
responsible behavior, for example by championing CSR
(Jenkins, 2006).
Previous research has not studied whether the pressure that
SMEs can exert over their suppliers depends on their
particular size. However, the general purchasing literature
stresses the problems that SMEs can face when they are
confronted with larger and/or more powerful suppliers
(Morrissey and Pittaway, 2006). Mudambi et al. (2004) for
example, confirmed that size asymmetry was a determining
factor affecting the levels of cooperation a purchasing SME
could expect from a larger supplier. Considering the lack of
size-based power of SMEs and their greater reliance on
informal business relationships, we expect that SMEs will
make more CSR demands on other SMEs than on larger
suppliers, and in accordance formulate the following
hypothesis:
H2. When the buyer is a SME, it will impose more CSR
requirements to their SME suppliers than to their large
business suppliers.
2.4 Diffusion of CSR requirements in the supply chain
Related with the previous issue of the extension of supply
chain-related CSR practices is the question of whether
suppliers are able to transfer pressure to their own suppliers
(Andersen and Skjoett-Larsen, 2009). The ability of SMEs to
pass on the imposed CSR requirements has an important
implication for the pervasiveness of sustainability standards in
the value chain (Jorgensen and Knudsen, 2006). There exists
some evidence of the “multiplier effect” of environmental
standards along the supply chain (Beske et al., 2008; Holt,
2004; Preuss, 2005) as well as of the diffusion of ISO
management systems standards such as ISO 9000 and ISO
14000 (Corbett, 2006; Corbett and Kirsch, 2001; Delmas,
500
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 18 · Number 5 · 2013 · 497 –508
2002). Diffusion of these standards is clearly influenced by
SCM practices, since their adoption requires enhanced
collaboration between buyers and suppliers.
In this sense, the diffusion of socially and environmentally
responsible practices seems to be consistent with recent trends
in effective SCM (Castka and Balzarova, 2008). However,
whereas some research analyzes how first-tier suppliers
influence second-tier suppliers further up the supply chain
(Beske et al., 2008; Holt, 2004), only few studies have
investigated sustainable supply chain practices both
downstream and upstream of the focal company. For
example, Nawrocka (2008) examines the environmental
requirements that small Swedish electronics manufacturers
receive from their customers and the environmental
requirements they pose to their upstream suppliers. Another
example is the survey of SSCM practices among Danish
SMEs by Jorgensen and Knudsen (2006) and The
Copenhagen Centre (2006). According to this study, small
and medium enterprises that are asked for fulfillment of CSR
requirements by buyers are more likely to ask themselves for
such requirements to suppliers than enterprises that have not
received any CSR demands. So, even though not all
requirements from buyers are passed on through the supply
chain, the presence of requirements from buyers seems to be a
precondition for the diffusion of social and environmental
requirements.
Since smaller firms are relatively less exposed to the
scrutiny of consumers, NGOs and the media, than large
companies are, one of the main incentives they have to adopt
SSCM practices is the customer pressure transmitted along
the supply chain (Hall, 2001). Correspondingly, we argue that
the imposition of CSR requirements from buyers will impact
significantly on the SMEs’ inclination to impose these types of
requirements to their own suppliers, which is reflected in the
following hypothesis:
H3. The more CSR requirements the SME receives from
its customers, the more CSR requirements it imposes
to its suppliers.
3. Methodology
3.1 Questionnaire and measures
In order gather quantitative data about CSR-related pressure
and to be able to test the formulated hypotheses, a survey was
conducted on a relatively large sample of Spanish SMEs.
Based on the literature review we designed a questionnaire
which consisted of four sections. The first section collected
general data on the company and its number and types of
customers and suppliers. To evaluate formal commitment to
CSR, the second section explored whether the company had
signed any international agreement on CSR or received any
certification. The third set of questions referred to the CSR
requirements customers were asked to comply with; while the
fourth and last section was devoted to CSR requirements
imposed on suppliers.
The questions about the formulation and implementation
of CSR requirements in the companies’ relationship with
customers and suppliers (third and fourth sections), followed
Jorgensen and Knudsen (2006) adding particular questions to
differentiate five basic CSR areas: environment, health and
safety, labor rights, human rights and corruption. Further, we
made a distinction between three levels of demand in order to
 SMEs as “transmitters” of CSR requirements in the supply chain
Silvia Ayuso, Mercè Roca and Rosa Colomé
assess the extent of CSR requirements (Ciliberti et al., 2008;
Jorgensen and Knudsen, 2006): “communication” of
requirements that are neither contractual nor subject to
control, and that could be considered simple
recommendations; “formalization” of these requirements by
requesting written declarations or other supporting
documents, and “verification” of compliance with
requirements by means of different control mechanisms.
This is an ordinal inclusive ranking (i.e. a Guttman
measurement scale), so that in the case that a company
verifies compliance with a requirement, its formalization and
in turn its communication is assumed. Additionally, in the
case of formalization and verification of CSR requirements,
we asked for the type of action taken by the company. Figure 1
depicts the analyzed variables regarding the diffusion of CSR
requirements along the supply chain.
We used two kinds of measures to analyze the CSR
requirements that SMEs are asked to comply with by their
customers and impose to their suppliers. On the one hand, we
identified those companies that had received or made at least
one CSR request in any of the areas considered in the study
(dichotomous variable). On the other hand, in order to take
into account the number of customers that set up CSR
requirements and the number of suppliers to which CSR
requirements are imposed, we calculated the average number
of requests per customer or supplier (numerical variable).
3.2 Sample characterization
The data collection was conducted through a telephone
survey on a representative sample of SMEs located in the
region of Catalonia (Spain), which we stratified by sector and
size. A total of 410 companies with more than 10 and less
than 199 employees were interviewed. Respondents were in
charge of procurement and/or sales activities within the
company, generally directors of the purchasing, sales,
administration, accounting or finance departments, or in
some cases the general managers of the firm. The interview
was conducted by telephone with a structured and
computer-assisted questionnaire (CATI) and was
undertaken by the specialized firm Clau Consultors during
the months of March to May 2009. Table II shows
information about the business sector and size of the SMEs
participating in the survey, correspondingly measured in
terms of their number of employees and turnover.
In average, firms in the sample had 33 years of existence at
the moment of the survey and an average of 654.5 customers.
More than half of the clients were SMEs (58 percent), about
one-third were large companies and central buying offices
(32 percent), and the rest were public institutions (5 percent)
and private consumers (5 percent). The companies in the
Figure 1 Diffusion of CSR requirements in the supply chain
501
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 18 · Number 5 · 2013 · 497 –508
sample had an average number of 191.9 supplier firms: 68
percent made up of large companies and central buying
offices and 32 percent of SMEs.
4. Analysis of results
4.1 Descriptive analysis
The CSR areas in which Spanish SMEs receive most
demands from their customers are health and safety,
followed by environment. Requirements related to labor
rights, human rights and corruption are less frequent, as
shown in Table III. The results indicate that the areas in
which the surveyed companies demand CSR criteria to their
suppliers also mostly refer to issues of occupational health and
safety and environment. In terms of the formalization of CSR
requirements both customers and focal SMEs mostly ask for
compliance with current legislation and, to a lesser extent,
they demand that companies sign a written commitment
(e.g. in form of a policy or a code of conduct). Other types of
actions, that are more infrequent, are to ask companies to
implement specific training plans and certified management
systems. In order to verify compliance with the formalized
CSR requirements, customer companies take different actions
in the following order: questionnaires, site visits,
self-conducted audits and third-party audits. The surveyed
SMEs report that they prefer using verification visits to their
suppliers more than questionnaires.
4.2 Hypothesis test
To test whether large companies and public authorities are
more likely than SMEs to ask for fulfillment of CSR
requirements to their SME suppliers (H1) we compared the
proportion of responding companies that received at least one
request of CSR communication, formalization and
verification with those that had not received any request, by
customer type. Table IV shows the results of this analysis. It is
noteworthy that a larger proportion of SMEs receive
communication, formalization and verification requests from
their large-scale customers, than from SME customers and
public institutions. However, while more SMEs receive
communication of CSR criteria from public institutions
than from SME customers, the relationship is reversed with
respect to the formalization and verification of requirements.
Hence, we find only partial support for Hypothesis 1 that
stated that SMEs would be more likely asked to comply with
CSR requirements by large companies and public authorities
than by their SME suppliers.
In order to look deeper into H1, we analyzed whether large
companies and public authorities impose more CSR
requirements to their SME suppliers than SMEs. To do so,
 SMEs as “transmitters” of CSR requirements in the supply chain Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Silvia Ayuso, Mercè Roca and Rosa Colomé Volume 18 · Number 5 · 2013 · 497 –508

Table II Sample characteristics
Percentage
Business sector
Transport and service
Commerce and hospitality
Manufacturing
Construction
Number of employees
10-20
21-40
41-60
61-80
81-199
Turnover (million Euros)
<2
2-10
10-40
> 40
we conducted a repeated measures ANOVA on the number of
requests received by SMEs per customer. The within-subjects
factors were the demand level (communicated, formalized,
verified) and the customer type (large customers, SME
customers and public institutions). We considered the sector
of the responding companies (manufacturing, construction,
commerce and transport) as the between-subjects factor.
The analysis shows that the demand level generates
significant differences in the number of requests per
customer (F ¼ 41:06, p , 0:05). The data presented in
Figure 2 show that for the three types of customer, the
average number of CSR communications (mean ¼ 0:38,
standard error ¼ 0:041) is higher than the average number of
formalizations (mean ¼ 0:23, standard error ¼ 0:038), and
this in turn is higher than the average number of verifications
(mean ¼ 0:15, standard error ¼ 0:025). These results are in
line with our ordinal definition of levels of demand.
Data indicate that customers that set fewer requirements
are public institutions (mean ¼ 0:121, standard
error ¼ 0:022), followed by SME customers (mean ¼ 0:213,
standard error ¼ 0:089) and large customers or central buying
offices (mean ¼ 0:223, standard error ¼ 0:028). However,
these differences between types of customers are not
significant as main effects (F ¼ 2:046, p . 0:1) but rather
appear to be significant under their interaction with the
demand level (F ¼ 4:557, p , 0:01). Figure 2 shows that
differences are large for the communication of demands and
decrease as the requirements are more rigorous. The result
28.78 that large customers appear to be more demanding than
28.54 SMEs suggests some support for H1. However, but the
27.32
expected relationship reverses when analyzing public
institutions.
15.37
Further analysis shows that the sector of surveyed
companies has a marginally significant effect on the number
42.93 of requests imposed by customers (F ¼ 2:094, p ¼ 0:101).
32.93 The sector ranking in terms of the amount of requests
11.22 imposed is led by the construction sector (mean ¼ 0:340,
3.17 standard error ¼ 0:082), followed by transport and services
9.75 (mean ¼ 0:182, standard error ¼ 0:061), manufacturing
(mean ¼ 0:167, standard error ¼ 0:060), and commerce and
hospitality (mean ¼ 0:053, standard error ¼ 0:061). No
11.4 relationship between the number of employees or the
61.5 company turnover and the average number of requests per
22.9 customer can be observed.
4.2 In order to test H2 according to which SME buyers will be
more likely to ask for fulfillment of CSR requirements to their
SME suppliers than to their large business suppliers, we
compared the proportion of responding SMEs that made at
least one request of CSR communication, formalization or
verification with those that have not made any requests, by
supplier type. Table V shows these results. It is to be noted
that the proportion of firms that communicate, formalize or
verify CSR requirements is slightly higher for SME suppliers
than for large suppliers. However, this proportion difference is
only statistically significant in the case of formalization
(10 percent of significance). Therefore, we only find marginal
support for H2.
In order to test the assertion that SME buyers impose more
CSR requirements to their SME suppliers than to their larger
business suppliers (H2), we performed a repeated measures
ANOVA on the number of requests per supplier, with the
demand level and the supplier type (large supplier, SME
supplier) as within-subject factors and the sector as the
between-subject factor.
The results show that the demand level generates significant
differences in the number of requests per supplier in its
interaction with turnover (F ¼ 16:607, p , 0:01) and sector
(F ¼ 5:922, p , 0:01). The data presented in Figure 3 show
that for both types of suppliers, the average number of CSR
communications (mean ¼ 0:39, standard error ¼ 0:036) is
higher than the average number of formalizations
(mean ¼ 0:25, standard error ¼ 0:030), and this in turn is

Table III CSR areas of customer and supplier requirements

Environment (%) Health and safety (%) Labor rights (%) Human rights (%) Corruption (%)
a
Customers
Communication 35.31 42.01 14 6 3
Formalization 22.9 30.9 10.1 3.9 1.8
Verification 14.2 17.3 5.2 2.1 0.8
Suppliersb
Communication 22 27.8 7.1 1.7 0.7
Formalization 15.1 19.8 5.4 1 0.2
Verification 7.8 12.2 3.2 0.5 0
Notes: a N ¼ 388; b N ¼ 410

502
 SMEs as “transmitters” of CSR requirements in the supply chain Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Silvia Ayuso, Mercè Roca and Rosa Colomé Volume 18 · Number 5 · 2013 · 497 –508

Table IV Share of SMEs receiving CSR requirements from their customers

Large customers SME customers Public institutions T
Communication (%) 49.5 38.3 49.3 Large customers – SME customers: 5.21 * *;
SME customers - Public institutions: 5.11 * *;
Large customers – Public institutions: 0.099
N 410 410 410
Formalization (%) 29.20 18.50 10.30 Large customers – SME customers: 3.32 * *;
SME customers – Public institutions: 2.92 * *;
Large customers – Public institutions: 6.28 * *
N 359 330 381
Verification (%) 13.40 9.30 5.80 Large customers – SME customers: 1.72 *;
SME customers – Public institutions:1.89;
Large customers – Public institutions: 3.42 * *
N 357 345 328
Notes: * p , 0:1; * * p , 0:05

higher than the average number of verifications
(mean ¼ 0:14, standard error ¼ 0:023). As was noted
before, these results are in line with our ordinal definition of
levels of demand.
The ANOVA also shows that the supplier type does not
generate any significant differences in the number of requests
(F ¼ 0:002, p . 0:1). As illustrated in Figure 3, which
represents the average number of requests per company for
each type of supplier, the distance between the requests
imposed on SMEs and large companies is not significant.
Therefore, we can conclude that responding SMEs impose
CSR requirements to both types of supplier to the same
extent and thus reject H2.
Similarly to what occurred in the case of customers, we
detect that the sector of the responding company has a
significant effect on the number of requests imposed on
suppliers (F ¼ 5:922, p , 0:01). The sectorial ranking by
average number of requests per supplier is the following:
construction (mean ¼ 0:465, standard error ¼ 0:066),
transport and service (mean ¼ 0:294, standard
error ¼ 0:048), manufacturing (mean ¼ 0:126, standard
error ¼ 0:051), and commerce and hospitality
(mean ¼ 0:123, standard error ¼ 0:048). Unlike what
happened with the requirements set by customers, the
number of requests made to suppliers has a positive
relationship with the company’s turnover (F ¼ 16:607,
p , 0:01). However, the number of supplier requests does
not depend on the number of employees.
In order to test H3 stating that the CSR requirements
SMEs impose on its suppliers increase with the number of
CSR requests they receive from customers, on the one hand,
we analyzed the relationship between the number of requests
per customer and per supplier and; on the other, we analyzed
the demand level achieved in the relationship with customers
and suppliers.
First, we computed the correlations between the number of
customers demanding fulfillment of any kind of CSR
requirement to SMEs and the number of suppliers to which
SMEs impose CSR requirements, controlling for the sector
and the number of employees of respondent firms. Table VI
shows these correlations. It depicts that there is a positive
correlation for all comparisons, which in all cases is
statistically significant. These results support H3.
In order to measure the intensity of CSR requirements, we
generated two variables respectively describing the highest
level of demand requested by customers and to suppliers.

Figure 2 Average number of customer requests for each demand level and customer type

503
 SMEs as “transmitters” of CSR requirements in the supply chain
Silvia Ayuso, Mercè Roca and Rosa Colomé
Table V Share of SMEs receiving CSR requirements to their suppliers
Large suppliers SME suppliers Z observed a positive impact of company turnover on the
Communication (%) 25.9 28.9 0.83
N 378 398
Formalization (%) 17.5 21.2 1.34 *
N 377 396
Verification (%) 9.9 10.8 0.42
N 395 399
Notes: * p , 0:1
Table VII shows the cross-tabulation of the frequencies in
each of the categories of these two variables.
In order to analyze the relationship between the intensity of
CSR requirements that customers have and those imposed to
suppliers, various correlation measures were extracted. The
results indicate that for all comparisons, the correlation
between the intensity of CSR requirements by customers and
suppliers is significantly positive (Kendall’s tau approx
t ¼ 7; 051, p , 0; 05). This result is also in line with H3.
5. Discussion
In this paper we deal with the integration of environmental
and social responsibility within the supply chain from a SME
perspective. Although the literature has revealed some of the
hindering factors for the engagement of SMEs with CSR
activities, less is known about the role of SMEs in SSCM as
both buyers and suppliers. We have argued that it is relevant
to consider the type of customer that asks for fulfillment of
CSR requirements to the SME and the type of supplier that
will be passed on these requirements. The results of this study
indicate that customer typology matters while supplier
typology does not. We found that large businesses are the
type of customers that most CSR requirements impose on
their SME suppliers irrespectively of the demand level. This is
in line with previous research (Pedersen, 2009; The
Copenhagen Centre, 2006) and may be explained by the
fact that larger companies receive more stakeholder pressure,
are able to devote more resources to implement CSR
Figure 3 Average number of supplier requests for each demand level and supplier type
504
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 18 · Number 5 · 2013 · 497 –508
standards and hold more bargaining power to enforce them
among suppliers. In line with this explanation, we also
number of requests made by SMEs to their own suppliers.
However, the fact that large companies exert more
CSR-related pressure does not necessarily mean that this
pressure is effective in order to stimulate suppliers to meet the
environmental and social requirements (Baden et al., 2009;
Ciliberti et al., 2009; Lee, 2008b).
Unlike reported in the Danish study by The Copenhagen
Centre (2006) we did not find that public institutions are
more demanding as customers when compared to other types.
In fact we observed that public authorities are the type of
customers that set the least requirements. An explanation may
be that Spanish public institutions have up to date introduced
CSR criteria to a much lesser extent than Danish public
institutions. In fact, analyses of national CSR policies in
Europe show that a group of countries (Austria, Denmark,
Finland, Germany, Netherlands and UK) have more
government initiatives in place to align public procurement
with environmental and social issues than the rest of EU
countries (Bouwer et al., 2006; Steurer et al., 2007).
Although we expected that SME buyers would impose
more CSR requirements to their SME suppliers than to their
larger business suppliers, we did not find a significant
difference between the requirements imposed to both types of
suppliers. It therefore seems that the imposition of CSR
requirements depends much more on the resources and/or
bargaining power of buyers than on the resources and
competences of suppliers. It also suggests that other supplier
characteristics, such as criticality to the focal company
(Kovács, 2008), may be relevant for posing CSR
requirements.
We have also argued that SMEs can play an important role
in SSCM by transferring the CSR standards set by their
customers. With regard to the diffusion of CSR requirements
in the supply chain, our data confirm that receiving CSR
requests from customers makes its more likely that CSR
requests are posed to suppliers, and that the higher the level of
CSR customer demands (formalization or verification), the
higher the level of demands passed on to suppliers will be.
This confirms previous research (The Copenhagen Centre,
 SMEs as “transmitters” of CSR requirements in the supply chain Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Silvia Ayuso, Mercè Roca and Rosa Colomé Volume 18 · Number 5 · 2013 · 497 –508

Table VI Correlations between customer and supplier requests for each demand level
Customers Suppliers
Communicated Formalized Verified Communicated Formalized Verified
Customers
Communicated 1.00
Formalized 0.93 * * 1.00
Verified 0.87 * * 0.95 * * 1.00
Suppliers
Communicated 0.23 * 0.24 * * 0.20 * 1.00
Formalized 0.27 * * 0.35 * * 0.34 * * 0.80 * * 1.00
Verified 0.48 * * 0.54 * * 0.58 * * 0.48 * * 0.68 * * 1.00
Notes: * p , 0:05; * * p , 0:001

Table VII Cross-tabulation of the number of firms according to the
highest CSR demand level met by customers and suppliers
Suppliers
Customers None Communicated Formalized Verified Total
None 152 13 14 9 188
Communicated 38 9 5 8 60
Formalized 33 5 16 5 59
Verified 34 10 9 29 82
Total 257 37 44 51
2006) and indicates that SMEs can be “transmitters” of CSR
standards throughout the supply chain. Nevertheless, it
cannot be asserted if surveyed SMEs actually pass on
requirements to the next tier of the supply chain because
customers impose this or if they do it for other reasons. Some
previous studies have shown that customer pressure is not the
only motivation for working with CSR issues and that other
issues such as SMEs’ own ethical attitudes and values might
also be an important driver (Baden et al., 2009; Ciliberti et al.,
2009; Lee, 2008b, The Copenhagen Centre, 2006).
Our method to measure the CSR-related supply chain
pressure, by calculating the average number of CSR requests
per customer or supplier, gives an accurate picture of this
phenomenon, especially regarding the diffusion of CSR
requirements along the supply chain. Unlike Jorgensen and
Knudsen (2006), we do not find that SMEs receive far more
social and environmental requirements from their buyers than
they pass on to their own suppliers. Moreover, we identify
that the proportions of CSR communications, formalizations
and verifications that SMEs receive are more or less the same
as the ones imposed to their own suppliers. However, in line
with the Danish study, we observe that there is gap between
“rule making” and “rule keeping”: only two thirds of the
communicated requirements are also formalized by
requesting written declarations or other supporting
documents, and only one third is verified by means of
different control mechanisms. Whereas CSR communications
about desirable standards regarding environmental
protection, health and safety, human rights etc. are not
necessarily translated into actual company behavior,
formalization and verification of these standards ensure their
enforcement to a greater extent. Nonetheless, empirical
research has shown that companies combine assessment tools
like establishing written requirements and monitoring
supplier performance with a more collaborative approach
focused on awareness building and training (Ciliberti et al.,
2008). Based on a systematic literature review, Gimenez and
Tachizawa (2012) conclude that supplier assessment and
collaboration are effective in improving sustainable
performance, although the most recent collaborative
paradigm stresses that assessment alone is not enough.
As suggested in the literature (Roberts, 2003), our data
indicate that the extent and intensity of CSR requirements
that SMEs are asked to comply with and pass on depend on
the sector of the firm. The most active economic sectors in
setting environmental and social standards are, in this order,
construction, transport and services, manufacturing, and
commerce and hospitality. The leading position of the
construction sector can be explained by its specific features:
in addition to its significant health and safety and
environmental risks, it is a sector with a high level of
subcontracting and a high turnover of labor subcontractors.
Therefore, it is not surprising that construction firms use
various mechanisms for transferring standards regarding
occupational health and safety and environment along their
supply chain. A recent survey revealed that 88 percent of
Spanish large and medium construction firms include specific
environmental clauses in the contracts with subcontractors
and suppliers, ensuring the monitoring of environmental
issues through surveillance by the site manager (79 percent)
or regular visits to the site (63 percent) (Piñeiro Garcı́a and
Garcı́a-Pintos Escuder, 2009). On the other hand, it is
surprising that commerce and hospitality, the sector with
most proximity and visibility to the final consumer, occupies
the lowest position in terms of the amount of requests
imposed. This suggests that consumer pressure has little
impact on the service industry and is more focused on
recognizable consumer goods (Hall, 2000).
6. Conclusions
This paper aims at developing understanding on the role of
SMEs in relation to SSCM and contributing to the limited
research in this field. In this sense, it offers a systematic
analysis of the way in which SMEs handle CSR requirements
in their double role as buyers and suppliers. Particularly, it
examines the influence of different types of buyers and
suppliers and the diffusion of CSR requirements in the supply
chain.Our data show that customer typology is an important
factor in determining CSR requirements imposed to SMEs:
large-sized buying firms exert more pressure than small and

505
 SMEs as “transmitters” of CSR requirements in the supply chain
Silvia Ayuso, Mercè Roca and Rosa Colomé
medium companies and public authorities. By contrast,
supplier typology seems to have no influence on SMEs that
pose CSR requirements since they set such requirements to
large and SME suppliers to the same extent. Finally, our
findings clearly show that the level of customer CSR-related
pressure significantly affects the likelihood of imposition of
such criteria on SMEs’ own suppliers and thus enables SMEs
to transfer the requests received from their (larger) customers
to the next tier on the supply chain. By using a more accurate
measure for CSR-related pressure than previous research we
show that the proportions of CSR requirements that SMEs
face from their buyers are more or less the same as the ones
applied to their own suppliers. Thus, the main implication of
our results for SSCM theory is that SME can be effective
“transmitters” despite their comparatively lower level of
resources and bargaining power.
Our results have relevant managerial implications for both
SMEs and their larger customers. SMEs can increasingly
expect to receive CSR requirements from their large
customers, even if most of these requirements are not
subject to compliance control. If SMEs are able to pass on
this kind of requirements to their own suppliers, this will not
only help to diffuse sustainability standards in the supply
chain but also improve companies’ competitiveness in the
growingly global business-to-business markets. Large buying
firms which want to extend their CSR pressure beyond the
first tier of suppliers should make the effort to formalize and
verify their CSR requirements and could actively prompt their
suppliers to pass on the requirements. In order to prevent the
risk of deficient environmental and social conditions further
up the supply chain, large corporate customers should assist
their smaller suppliers by providing them with adequate
resources and backing up their bargaining power vis-à-vis
second tier suppliers.
Our study has some limitations that need to be
acknowledged. First, data are confined to companies located
in a particular region (Catalonia), which questions its
generalizability to other geographical contexts and cannot
for example explain the differences between our results and
those of The Copenhagen Centre (2006) with regard to the
requirements of public institutions. Second, we used an
aggregated measure for requirement in five basic CSR areas
(environment, health and safety, labor rights, human rights
and corruption) which may hide the special features of each
kind of requirement. In addition, the numerical variable used
to assess the CSR requirements that SMEs receive or pose
only considers the average number of requests per customer
or supplier, but does not incorporate the strategic importance
of the customer or supplier to the focal company or the
volumes of sales and orders. Furthermore, our study did not
include particular variables that may influence the
formulation and transmission of CSR requirements, such as
the business subsector (to differentiate those activities with
specific risks concerning environmental issues, human rights
or labor rights), the country of origin of the supplier and the
company’s position in the supply chain.
Future research should use samples of other geographical
contexts and focus on specific sectors and CSR challenges to
verify our findings. It would also be interesting to broaden the
spectrum of considered SSCM tools and to analyze the
increasingly important collaboration practices among supply
chain partners, and the relationship between assessment and
collaboration activities. At the same time, more qualitative
506
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 18 · Number 5 · 2013 · 497 –508
research could explore the company-specific factors that
might facilitate or hinder SMEs to implement and transmit
the received CSR requirements. In order to better understand
the diffusion of CSR standards in the supply chain, more
research is needed on the drivers of SSCM practices adoption
and the resulting benefits experienced by SMEs.
Notes
1 Although they have different origins and shades of
meanings, in this paper we will use the concepts CSR
and sustainability interchangeably.
2 The recent systematic literature review conducted by
Brammer et al. (2011) shows that 66% of prior research
has been oriented to the firm and/or its supply chain,
whereas only 8% has used the supplier and another 8%
the buyer-supplier relationship as units of analysis.
References
Andersen, M. and Skjoett-Larsen, T. (2009), “Corporate
social responsibility in global supply chains”, Supply Chain
Management: An International Journal, Vol. 14 No. 2,
pp. 75-86.
Baden, D., Harwood, I. and Woodward, D. (2009), “The
effect of buyer pressure on suppliers in SMEs to
demonstrate CSR practices: an added incentive or
counterproductive?”, European Management Journal,
Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 429-441.
Beske, P., Koplin, J. and Seuring, S. (2008), “The use of
environmental and social standards by German first-tier
suppliers of the Volkswagen AG”, Corporate Social
Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 15
No. 2, pp. 63-75.
Bouwer, M., Jonk, M., Berman, T., Bersani, R., Lusser, H.,
Nappa, V., Nissinen, A., Parikka, K., Szuppinger, P. and
Viganò, C. (2006), Green Public Procurement in Europe 2006
– Conclusions and Recommendations, available at: http://ec.
europa.eu/environment/gpp/pdf/take_5.pdf (accessed
18 March 2011).
Brammer, S., Hoejmose, S. and Millington, A. (2011),
“Managing sustainable global supply chains. A systematic
review of the body of knowledge”, Network for Business
Sustainability, available at: http://nbs.net/wp-content/uploads/
NBS-Systematic-Review-Supply-Chains.pdf (accessed
14 March 2012).
Carter, C.R. and Easton, P.L. (2011), “Sustainable supply
chain management: evolution and future directions”,
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
Management, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 46-62.
Castka, P. and Balzarova, M.A. (2008), “ISO 26000 and
supply chains – on the diffusion of the social responsibility
standard”, International Journal of Production Economics,
Vol. 111 No. 2, pp. 274-286.
Ciliberti, F., Baden, D. and Harwood, I. (2009), “Insights
into corporate social responsibility practices in supply
chains: a multiple case study of SMEs in the UK”,
Operations and Supply Chain Management: An International
Journal, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 154-166.
Ciliberti, F., Pontrandolfo, P. and Scozzi, B. (2008),
“Investigating corporate social responsibility in supply
chains: a SME perspective”, Journal of Cleaner Production,
Vol. 16 No. 15, pp. 1579-1588.
(The) Copenhagen Centre (2006), Managing Social and
Environmental Requirements in Global Value Chains –
 SMEs as “transmitters” of CSR requirements in the supply chain
Silvia Ayuso, Mercè Roca and Rosa Colomé
Perspectives for Danish Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises.
Summary, The Copenhagen Centre for Corporate
Responsibility, available at: http://www.copenhagencentre
.org/graphics/CopenhagenCentre/Publications/Events/The
%20weak%20link%20in%20the%20chain/Globale_UK_
small.pdf (accessed 27 November 2008).
Corbett, C.J. (2006), “Global diffusion of ISO 9000
certification through supply chains”, Manufacturing and
Services Operations Management, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 330-350.
Corbett, C. and Kirsch, D. (2001), “International diffusion of
ISO 14000 certification”, Production and Operations
Management, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 327-342.
Dahlsrud, A. (2008), “How corporate social responsibility is
defined: an analysis of 37 definitions”, Corporate Social
Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 15 No. 1,
pp. 1-13.
Delmas, M.A. (2002), “The diffusion of environmental
management standards in Europe and the United States:
An institutional perspective”, Policy Sciences, Vol. 35 No. 1,
pp. 91-119.
Elsayed, K. (2006), “Reexamining the expected effect of
available resources and firm size on firm environmental
orientation: an empirical study of UK firms”, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 65 No. 3, pp. 297-308.
European Commission (2007), Opportunity and Responsibility.
How to Help More Small Businesses to Integrate Social and
Environmental Issues into What They Do, European
Commission – Directorate General for Enterprise and
Industry, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/
policies/sustainable-business/files/csr/documents/eg_report_
and_key_messages/key_messages_en.pdf (accessed 27
November 2008).
European Commission (2012), “Corporate social
responsibility: a new definition, a new agenda for action”,
MEMO/11/730, Brussels, 25 October, available at: http://
europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-11-730_en.htm
(accessed 26 October 2012).
Forética (2008), Informe Forética 2008 Evolución de la
Responsabilidad Social de las Empresas en España, available
at: www.foretica.es/recursos/doc/Biblioteca/Informes/
36900_16121612200821230.pdf (accessed 13 July 2009).
Gimenez, C. and Tachizawa, E.M. (2012), “Extending
sustainability to suppliers: a systematic literature review”,
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 17
No. 5, pp. 531-543.
Hall, J. (2000), “Environmental supply chain dynamics”,
Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 8 No. 6, pp. 455-471.
Hall, J. (2001), “Environmental supply chain innovation”,
Greener Management International, NO., Vol. 35,
pp. 105-119.
Hervani, A., Helms, M. and Sarkis, J. (2005), “Performance
measurement for green supply chain management”,
Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 12 No. 4,
pp. 330-353.
Holt, D. (2004), “Managing the interface between suppliers
and organizations for environmental responsibility - an
exploration of current practices in the UK”, Corporate Social
Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 11 No. 2,
pp. 71-84.
Jenkins, H. (2006), “Small business champions for corporate
social responsibility”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 67
No. 3, pp. 241-256.
Jorgensen, A.L. and Knudsen, J.S. (2006), “Sustainable
competitiveness in global value chains: how do small
Danish firms behave?”, Corporate Governance: The
507
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 18 · Number 5 · 2013 · 497 –508
International Journal of Effective Board Performance, Vol. 6
No. 4, pp. 449-462.
Kovács, G. (2008), “Corporate environmental responsibility
in the supply chain”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 16
No. 15, pp. 1571-1578.
Lee, M.D.P. (2008a), “A review of the theories of corporate
social responsibility: Its evolutionary path and the road
ahead”, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 10
No. 1, pp. 53-73.
Lee, S.Y. (2008b), “Drivers for the participation of small and
medium-sized suppliers in green supply chain initiatives”,
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 13
No. 3, pp. 185-198.
Lim, S.J. and Philips, J. (2008), “Embedding CSR values:
The global footwear industry’s evolving governance
structure”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 81 No. 1,
pp. 143-156.
McCrudden, C. (2006), ““Corporate social responsibility and
public procurement”, Working Paper No 9/2006.
Maloni, M. and Brown, M. (2006), “Corporate social
responsibility in the supply chain: an application in the
food industry”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 68 No. 1,
pp. 35-52.
Mamic, I. (2005), “Managing global supply chain: the sports
footwear, apparel and retail sectors”, Journal of Business
Ethics, Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 81-100.
Morrissey, W.J. and Pittaway, L. (2006), “Buyer-supplier
relationships in small firms: the use of social factors to
manage relationships”, International Small Business Journal,
Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 272-298.
Mudambi, R., Schruender, C.P. and Mongar, A. (2004),
“How co-operative is co-operative purchasing in small
firms?”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 85-102.
Nawrocka, D. (2008), “Environmental supply chain
management, ISO 14001 and RoHS. How are small
companies in the electronics sector managing?”, Corporate
Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 15
No. 6, pp. 349-360.
Nawrocka, D., Brorson, T. and Lindhqvist, T. (2009), “ISO
14001 in environmental supply chain practices”, Journal of
Cleaner Production, Vol. 17 No. 16, pp. 1435-1443.
Pedersen, E.R. (2009), “The many and the few: rounding up
the SMEs that manage CSR in the supply chain”, Supply
Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 14 No. 2,
pp. 109-116.
Pedersen, E.R. and Andersen, M. (2006), “Safeguarding
corporate social responsibility (CSR) in global supply
chains: how codes of conduct are managed in
buyer-supplier relationships”, Journal of Public Affairs,
Vol. 6 Nos 3-4, pp. 228-240.
Piñeiro Garcı́a, P. and Garcı́a-Pintos Escuder, A. (2009),
“Prácticas ambientales en el sector de la construcción: el
caso de las empresas constructoras españolas”,
Investigaciones Europeas de Dirección y Economı́a de la
Empresa, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 183-200.
Preuss, L. (2005), The Green Multiplier. A Study of
Environmental Protection and the Supply Chain, Palgrave
Macmillan, Houndmills.
Roberts, S. (2003), “Supply chain specific?
Understanding.the patchy success of ethical sourcing
initiatives”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 44 Nos 2-3,
pp. 159-170.
Seuring, S. and Müller, M. (2008), “From a literature review
to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain
management”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 16 No. 15,
pp. 1699-1710.
 SMEs as “transmitters” of CSR requirements in the supply chain
Silvia Ayuso, Mercè Roca and Rosa Colomé
Steurer, R., Berger, G., Konrad, A. and Martinuzzi, A.
(2007), Sustainable Public Procurement in EU Member States:
Overview of government initiatives and selected cases. Final
Report to the EU High-Level Group on CSR, available at:
http://www.sustainability.eu/pdf/csr/Sustainable%
20Public%20Procurement%20in%20EU%20Member%
20States_Final%20Report.pdf (accessed 18 March 2011).
Strand, R. (2009), “Corporate responsibility in Scandinavian
supply chains”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 85 No. 1,
pp. 179-185.
Walker, H., di Sisto, L. and McBainj, D. (2008), “Drivers and
barriers of environmental supply chain practices: lessons
from the public and private sectors”, Journal of Purchasing
and Supply Management2146985, Vol. 14 No. 2, p. 69.
Walker, H. and Jones, N. (2012), “Sustainable supply chain
management across the UK private sector”, Supply Chain
Management: An International Journal, Vol. 17 No. 1,
pp. 15-28.
About the authors
Silvia Ayuso is researcher at the Escola Superior de Comerç
Internacional – ESCI (International Trade Business School)
in Barcelona and coordinates the Mango Chair in Corporate
Social Responsibility. Previously she has been a post-doctoral
research fellow at IESE Business School and Assistant
Teacher at the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya. Her main
research interests are international CSR strategies, sustainable
supply chain management, stakeholder management and
corporate governance. Her research has been published in
Business & Society, Business Ethics: A European Review,
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
508
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 18 · Number 5 · 2013 · 497 –508
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management
and Journal of Sustainable Tourism, among other journals.
Silvia Ayuso is the corresponding author and can be contacted
at: silvia.ayuso@esci.upf.edu
Mercè Roca is Director of the Master in International
Business jointly organized by ESCI and the Barcelona School
of Management and Academic Coordinator of Marketing and
Research techniques at ESCI. She is a researcher of the
Research Group in International Economics and
Management (GREEI) of ESCI, of the Experimental
Economics Laboratory (LeeX) and of the Business Logistics
Research Group (GREL) of Pompeu Fabra University. She
has published several articles and book chapters related to
international business and marketing research in prestigious
academic journals and has participated in consulting projects
for companies and public institutions.
Rosa Colomé is Academic Coordinator at ESCI, where she
coordinates the business area and the internships and is
Co-Director of the Master in International Retailing. She is a
member of ESCI’s research group GREEI (Research Group
in International Economics and Management) and of
Pompeu Fabra University’s research group GREL (Business
Logistics Research Group), where she works in projects for
private firms and institutions. She has worked in projects
focused on models and tools used to locate points of sale, the
design of inverse logistics models, the creation of tools for the
computation of CO2 emissions in business distribution chains
and internationalization processes of Catalonia’s distribution
firms.