Corporate citizenship: An overview of scientific publications

Negative demographic trends and the threat to demographic security are key challenges for modern Russia. Since 2020, the country has been experiencing depopulation: on January 1, 2020 the population was 147.9 million, and in 2024 it became 146.1 million ¹ . The issue of decreasing fertility is particularly acute. The fertility rate in Russia has been significantly lower for many years than the level of simple reproduction ( ≈ 2.14 children per woman) ² .

It is obvious that the negative demographic trends, which are observed against the background of the ongoing efforts of the state to overcome it, will only increase the already existing labor shortage at Russian enterprises in the future3. This state of affairs requires the government and the expert community to develop and implement new, more effective tools that can change the situation. One of these tools is to increase the participation of Russian business in solving the country’s demographic problems.

The inclusion of business in the demographic agenda is currently being actively discussed in the Russian media and authorities at various levels4, as well as in the business community itself5. Leading Russian sociological centers are also investigating this issue6. In recent years, the pool of publications has been actively increasing, substantiating the need and possibility of business participation in solving the issues of low fertility in the country (Rostovskaya et al., 2021; Shubat et al., 2022). Such participation is associated with the development of a special area of corporate social responsibility – corporate demographic policy, which is an integrated system of principles, norms and measures to support employees with family responsibilities (Rostovskaya et al., 2021; Bagirova et al., 2024; Tobysheva, Shubat, 2024). The scholars substantiate the need, opportunity, as well as efficiency, economic benefits for business from the implementation of corporate demographic policy, and present the most effective corporate practices in this area (Ivanitskii, Shishkarev, 2024).

The activation of business involvement in solving Russian demographic problems may be influenced by a number of factors. Theoretically, here we can talk about direct pressure and coercion from the state, about stimulating business through all kinds of subsidies, tax incentives and other preferences. An incentive factor may be the opportunity for business to gain economic advantages and benefits from the implementation of corporate demographic programs. Scholars point to a number of such advantages – lower costs, increased productivity, reduced staff turnover, and a number of others (Breaugh, Frye, 2007; Bourhis, Mekkaoui, 2010; Kim, Yeo, 2019).

In our opinion, the dissemination and rooting in the business environment of ideas and principles of corporate citizenship as an element of the value system of entrepreneurship, the entrepreneurs’ attitude toward participation in solving socially significant tasks, motivation for it, and manifestation of social solidarity can be considered as the most important factor of active involvement of business in solving demographic problems in Russia. Studies show that perceptions of such social solidarity in business evolve over time and develop as social expectations regarding corporate behavior change (Latapi Agudelo et al., 2019). Russian scholars note that under the influence of a number of external threats, the need for the development of a new responsible business strategy is increasing – a cumulative rational-social one, and the highest level of the value system of modern entrepreneurship consists of ethical and social values – a sense of duty, humanity, patriotism, social activity and responsibility (Asaul, Vetkina, 2022, p. 10). At the current stage of the evolution of the value paradigm of Russian entrepreneurship, its traditional values are reviving (Sazanova, 2016), which include, among other things, a sense of the interconnectedness and interdependence of increasing personal well-being with the development and prosperity of one’s land, city, and country (Vetoshkin et al., 2008). This trend in entrepreneurship value orientations fully correlates with the guidelines of Presidential Decree 809, dated September 11, 2022 “On approving the fundamentals of state policy for the preservation and strengthening of traditional Russian spiritual and moral values”. The manifestation of citizenship by business structures (corporate citizenship) is especially in demand today in the field of demography. The first Russian studies on corporate citizenship in the demographic area appear (Bagirova, 2025).

The aim of our study is to review and analyze the research discourse on corporate citizenship with an emphasis on the demographic segment of this discourse. As it was noted, the discussion of corporate citizenship issues in the context of demography is currently only developing, the corresponding discourse has not been fully formed. However, the exceptional importance of this topic for modern Russia determines the need for special attention to studies on demography-oriented corporate citizenship. Such an analysis will contribute to the activation of both research and socio-political discourse, which meets the needs of modern Russian society. Such discourses are capable of building an appropriate information field (information context) for the functioning of Russian business, which in the future will form the necessary and currently demanded moral attitudes and value orientations of entrepreneurship.

Research methodology

Achieving this aim requires, first of all, the development of certainty about the object of analysis. It is important to note that in Russian science, the discourse on corporate citizenship has a terminological feature. Obviously, due to the use of the borrowed, translated term (corporate citizenship) in publications, the authors use the terms korporativnoe grazhdanstvo and korporativnaya grazhdanstvennost’. In our opinion, there is an inappropriate confusion of the concepts of grazhdanstvo and grazhdanstvennost’ (we consider the latter as the most correct). At the same time, the interpretation of the term grazhdanstvennost’ in Russian scientific discourse is diverse, this concept does not have a strict scientific definition, unlike the term grazhdanstvo. The study of grazhdanstvennost’ as a scientific category in Russia began in the second half of the 19th century

(Zautorova, Makeeva, 2016). When defining grazhdanstvennost’, representatives of various sciences identify different significant features of it. Even within the framework of one scientific field it can be understood in different ways. Thus, grazhdanstvennost’ can be interpreted as a feeling of being a citizen of a particular country, responsible for what is happening there (Baev, 2023); as a person’s ability to get involved in issues related to life in society and act throughout his or her life as an active and responsible citizen who respects the rights of others (Lubskii, Mamina, 2019); as a set of beliefs and views, which presuppose, on the one hand, a high degree of independence of individual judgments about society, on the other – an inviolable social solidarity, manifested in participation in the life of society (Nikiforov, Skalina, 2007, p. 189). We think that the latter definition is the most complete, since it best expresses the idea of grazhdanstvennost’, therefore it will be used in this study as a basis for understanding corporate citizenship.

The analysis of the discourse on corporate citizenship was carried out on the basis of both quantitative and qualitative methods.

Quantitative methods of analysis. This analysis was based on the study of publication activity in the field of corporate citizenship using two services.

• 1.    Google Books Ngram Viewer. In conditions of limited access to international scientometric resources (due to the sanctions imposed on Russia, even in the field of science), a primary understanding of the dynamics of research interest in corporate citizenship issues can be obtained based on data from the Google Books Ngram Viewer search service. This open online service allows visualizing the frequency of occurrence of words and phrases in a corpus of books in different languages over different time periods. To obtain such visualization in our study, we used the terms corporate citizenship, korporativnoe grazhdanstvo

  and korporativnaya grazhdanstvennost’ by searching in English-language and Russian-language book corpora (archive is available up to 2019). As noted earlier, there is a confusion between the concepts of grazhdanstvo and grazhdanstvennost’ in Russian-language studies. That is why we used both translations of the term in our search queries.

• 2.    Russian index of academic citations (RINTS) on the Elibrary. Based on this online resource, which is actively developing in Russia and constantly updates and expands research opportunities, a scientometric analysis of Russian publication activity on corporate citizenship was conducted.

At the first stage of the analysis, a search query was formulated, at the second stage, a sample of corresponding publications was analyzed. The phrases “corporate citizenship”, “korporativnoe grazhdanstvo” and “korporativnaya grazhdan-stvennost’” were used to formulate the search query. We selected articles where these phrases (considering morphology) are found in the title, key words or abstract. Further, a kind of scientometric portrait of such articles was compiled based on the metrics and analysis tools available at RINTS. For this purpose, an analysis of the total number of publications on corporate citizenship and its dynamics, an analysis of the number of citations of such publications, as well as an analysis of the various structures of the generated sample of publications was carried out. Such structures were distinguished based on the following criteria:

• –    publication activity on the topic under research at RINTS;

• –    number of citations of works on corporate citizenship;

• –    representation of publications in indexing databases – core of RINTS, RSCI, Web of Science, Scopus;

• –    distribution of publications by authors and organizations these authors are affiliated with;

• –    distribution of publications by subject areas and key words.

To visualize the data, typical methods of reflecting dynamics (line graphs), heat maps were used to track trends in publication activity using a color scale (darker colors indicate more articles, and lighter colors indicate fewer), as well as semantic word clouds that visualize the frequency of certain words or phrases.

Qualitative methods of analysis. The analysis based on qualitative methods, in fact, was a critical review of the subject area; the research method was the analysis of documents. We used the traditional (classical) method – content-semantic analysis, focusing on describing the interpretations and semantic context of the use of the term corporate citizenship by Russian and foreign scholars.

Findings

The findings based on quantitative methods of analysis

The results of search queries in Google Books Ngram Viewer showed that the concept of corporate citizenship appeared in English-language literature in the 1930s. This term was the most common in articles in 2000–2010 ( Fig. 1 ). In the Russian-language corpus of Google Ngram Viewer, the term korporativnoe grazhdanstvo is found later – in the late 1960s. Since 1998, the number of books in Russian in which this term appears has been growing rapidly, reaching a peak by 2006. Then, obviously, research interest in this concept began to fade ( Fig. 2 ).

It should be noted that in the English-language corpus of books, the occurrence of the term has not decreased so rapidly in the last decade, demonstrating the stability of research interest in general (in all variants). The analysis also showed that the term korporativnaya grazhdanstvennost’ does not occur at all in the Russian-language corpus of books of Google Ngram Viewer.

Years

^^^^^^^^n corporate citizenship                 ^^^^^^^^n Corporate Citizenship

^^^^^^^^M Corporate citizenship                     CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP

^^^^^^^^n corporate Citizenship

Source: Google Ngram Viewer.

Years

Source: Google Ngram Viewer.

Further scientometric analysis based on the Russian index of academic citations (RINTS) showed that articles on corporate citizenship have been a phenomenon for the last two decades, and the dynamics of the number of such articles does not allow us to talk about the growth of research interest in this topic. Thus, the total number of publications was 180; the first article was indexed in 2002. The publication activity on the subject of corporate citizenship peaked in 2012 and 2016, and then it decreased ( Fig. 3) .

Over the five-year period (from 2020 to 2024), 39 papers on corporate citizenship were published; publication activity is noticeably lower than in the previous 5 years (from 2015 to 2019), when 72 such papers were published. Even taking into account the indexation lag and the potential increase in the number of publications indexed in RINTS in 2023–2024, such a significant difference indicates a decrease in research interest in corporate citizenship in Russian research discourse.

At the same time, the scientific significance of such articles remains stable. As a criterion of significance, we have adopted the scientometric indicator available at RINTS – the number of citations (note that we are aware of its incomplete validity and fair criticism of it). However, since 2015, 52 articles on average annually cite works on corporate citizenship (Fig. 4).

More than half of all these citations are from works published before 2013. The total average age of the cited papers is 11.1 years. Thus, the most significant, fundamental developments of the concept of corporate citizenship were most likely made in earlier articles – more than 10 years ago.

In the course of further research, a map of scientific work on corporate citizenship was compiled and analyzed. The representation of such papers in scientific discourse was studied based on a number of criteria: the title and subject of journals, authors of articles, organizations the authors are affiliated with, indexing databases.

The study showed that high-impact (most cited) scientific papers on corporate citizenship were published in the journals “Economy and Entrepreneurship”, “Tomsk State University Journal of Economics”, “World Eсonomy and International Relations”.

Figure 4. The number of publications indexed in RINTS citing works on corporate citizenship

2015      2016     2017     2018     2019     2020     2021      2022      2023     2024

Years

Compiled based on: RINTS data.

The analysis of the structure of the cited publications allowed us to identify key researchers in the field of corporate citizenship – the works of the following authors are most often cited: S.P. Peregudov (12% of the total number of citations), E.B. Zavyalova (8%), I.S. Semenenko (5%), R.N. Abramov (5%).

The analysis allowed identifying Russian scientific centers where relevant research is being conducted. Most of the papers on the topic have been published by researchers from the following universities:

• 1)    Yaroslav-the-Wise Novgorod State University (8% of the total number of publications);

• 2)    Kuban State University (8%);

• 3)    Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation (4%).

At the same time, over the past 5 years, researchers from Saint Petersburg Electrotechnical University “LETI” have been most actively engaged in the topic – 13% of publications indexed in RINTS in 2020–2024.

At the next stage of analysis, a so-called heat map showing the distribution of the number of publications over time was compiled, for which 10 academic institutions with the largest number of publications over the entire study period were selected ( Fig. 5 ). As follows from the data presented on the map, as time moved on, the leading role in the study of corporate citizenship belonged to different research and academic centers. For example, from 2004 to 2008, the Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IMEMO RAS) was leading. Then other universities took the lead in the number of publications. It should be noted that the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation has been engaged in research on corporate citizenship for the longest time: the earliest works date back to 2004, and from 2012 to 2021, university scientists continued to publish articles on this topic.

• Figure 5.    Heat map of publications on corporate citizenship indexed in RINTS in 2002–2024 grouped by academic institutions (AI)

<

Oxi О О Oxi

О О 0x1

Lf) О о 0x1

О о 0x1

О О 0x1

00 о о 0x1

СП о о 0x1

О о 0x1

О 0x1

0x1 О 0x1

00 О

N

Ш О ON

Ю О ON

00 о ON

СП о N

О N О N

ом о

ОМ N О N

ГП N О ON

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1 1

Scale of the number of publications

0                                        8

Academic instituitions in the figure:

• 1    – Yaroslav-the-Wise Novgorod State University

• 2    – Kuban State University

• 3    – Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation

• 4    – National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations

• 5    – Saint Petersburg State University

• 6    – Perm State National Research University

• 7    – Far Eastern Federal University

• 8    – Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

• 9    – Baikal State University

• 10    – Saint Petersburg Electrotechnical University "LETI"

Compiled based on: RINTS data.

Further scientometric analysis was conducted to see the distribution of publications by source. It showed that the majority of works on corporate citizenship (79%) are articles in scientific journals. Moreover, a very small part of them was published in journals designated by the expert community as high-impact. Thus, only 10% of the total number of articles were published in journals included in the core of RINTS, 9% – in journals included in RSCI, 6% – in journals indexed in Web of Science or Scopus. At the same time, over the past 5 years, there have been noticeable changes in this structure – more articles began to be published in high-impact scientific journals ( Tab. 1 ).

Table 1. RINTS articles on corporate citizenship in various indexing databases

Indexing database	Share of the total number of articles, %
	2002–2024	2020–2024
RINTS core	10	14
RSCI	9	8
Web of Science, Scopus	6	11
Compiled based on: RINTS data.

Then, key words in publications on corporate citizenship were analyzed using scientometrics. The total number of key words in the considered publications was 985 (479 of them were unique),

• Figure 6.    Semantic cloud of key words/phrases in publications on corporate citizenship indexed in RINTS in 2002–2024

УСТОЙЧИВОЕ РАЗВИТИЕ

СОЦИАЛЬНАЯ ОТВЕТСТВЕННОСТЬ таакнаиажал^и ■«»- КОРПОРАЦИЯ

УПРАВЛЕНИЕ ГРАЖДАНСКОЕ ОБЩЕСТВО

«яиш .мшвш отж С0ЦИАЛЬНАЯ ОТВЕТСТВЕННОСТЬ БИЗНЕСА

КОРПОРАТИВНОЕ ГРАЖДАНСТВО

КОРПОРАТИВНАЯ СОЦИАЛЬНАЯ ОТВЕТСТВЕННОСТЬ

CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

ОБЩЕСТВО

СОЦИАЛЬНЫЕ ИНВЕСТИЦИИ

СТЕЙКХОЛДЕРЫ

СОЦИАЛЬНАЯ ПОЛИТИКА

ГОСУДАРСТВЕННО-ЧАСТНОЕ ПАРТНЕРСТВО

ММЧЕСКИИ

КОРПОРАТИВНАЯ СОЦИАЛЬНАЯ ОТВЕТСТВЕННОСТЬ

КОРПОРАТИВНАЯ УСТОЙЧИВОСТЬ

БИЗНЕС

СОЦИАЛЬНОЕ ПАРТНЕРСТВО

CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP

ААЛЬШИ КАПИТАЛ

Compiled based on: RINTS data.

while a large number of key words (385) occurred only once. During the analysis, a semantic keyword cloud was built with a frequency of occurrence of more than 5 times. Thus, the frequency analysis of the 28 most common key words/phrases was visualized ( Fig. 6 ).

The analysis of the frequency of key words and visualization of its results allow identifying the main contexts (related topics, subtopics, directions) of works within the framework of corporate citizenship. As follows from the presented word cloud, the main related topics and contexts for corporate citizenship are corporate social responsibility, sustainable development, social investment and capital, stakeholders and charity.

Further analysis concerned subject areas where works on corporate citizenship are presented and it showed that the vast majority of such publications (66%) relate to “Economics and Business”, with a noticeable presence of such papers in “Political Science” (10%) and “Sociology” (7%). In total, publications on corporate citizenship are presented in 12 subject areas.

The heat map built for the subject areas ( Fig. 7 ) allows us to see entry and further development of the subject areas within which the topic is studied. For example, the data presented in Figure 7 show that in the three subject areas mentioned above, publications on corporate citizenship have been presented practically throughout the entire period under study and remain the most widespread, while in 2012 a new subject area emerged, through the lens of which issues of corporate citizenship began to be explored – “Philosophy, Ethics and Religion”.

Thus, the analysis of the subject areas of the publications showed the interdisciplinarity of corporate citizenship research with a dominant focus in the area “Economics and Economic Sciences”. At the same time, corporate citizenship is not conceptualized in the demographic area. During the time period under study, RINTS did not index a single publication on corporate citizenship in the subject area “Demography”. Today, as noted earlier, the first Russian publications devoted to corporate citizenship in the demography are appearing (Bagirova, 2025).

• Figure 7.    Heat map of subject areas (SA) of publications on corporate citizenship indexed in RINTS in 2002–2024

  

  0                                                   18

  
  

СП

CM О О см

о о см

о о см

со О о см

о о см

00 о о см

о о см

о о см

о см

см о см

СП о см

о см

о см

со О см

о см

00 о см

о см

о см о см

см о см

см см о см

СП см о см

см о см

1

■

■

■

■

■

■

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Scale of the number of publications

Subject areas in the table:

• 1    – Economics and Business

• 2    – Political Science

• 3    – Sociology

• 4    – Philosophy, Ethics and Religion

• 5    – Psychology

• 6    – Law

• 7    – Education

• 8    – Other Social Sciences

• 9    – Media and Communication

• 10    – History and Archeology

• 11    – Health Sciences

• 12    – Chemical Engineering

Compiled based on: RINTS data.

The findings based on qualitative methods of analysis

The analysis of publications on the topic has shown that neither in the scientific field nor in the corporate sector has there been a single, universal opinion on what constitutes corporate citizenship. Thus, in foreign studies, corporate citizenship can be understood as the fulfillment by a corporation of four types of commitments/engagements to stakeholders: economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic (Carroll, 1998); the degree to which the company meets these commitments/ engagements (Maignan et al., 1999); a special type of company management that minimizes the negative and maximizes the positive influences on society (Marsden, Andriof, 1998); connection between business activity and social accountability for mutual benefit (Waddell, 2000); portfolio of socioeconomic activities that companies often undertake to fulfill perceived duties as members of society (Gardberg, Fombrun, 2006).

In scientific and applied research, the concept of corporate citizenship can be identified with other concepts reflecting the company’s value orientations, such as corporate social responsibility (CSR) and ESG (Okoye, 2009). The terms corporate social responsibility and corporate citizenship are most often used interchangeably (sometimes completely equivalently) in applied research (Matten, Crane, 2005; Mirvis, Googins, 2006; Waddock, 2008; Rego et al., 2011). However, in some studies, corporate citizenship can be understood more broadly as a wide range of stakeholders and go beyond the concepts of sustainable development, CSR, and ESG (Waddock, 2008). At the same time, there are attempts to analyze the similarities and differences between CSR and corporate citizenship, as well as between CSR and ESG (Valor, 2005; Rendtorff, 2019).

Modern foreign scholars note that the concept of corporate citizenship is still insufficiently developed from an academic point of view and does not have a clear definition to differentiate it from other similar concepts and practices implemented by companies (Park et al., 2023). It is also important that the contexts and key words used to characterize corporate citizenship may differ significantly in each research field – scholars in various fields conceptualize corporate citizenship in various ways (Okoye, 2009).

Papers indicate the versatility and diversity of interaction between private enterprise and various stakeholders as a fundamental principle of corporate citizenship, within which business is identified as a corporate citizen who has four roles – an employer, a manufacturer, an economic entity and a member of society. As an employer, a corporate citizen creates favorable working conditions and staff development, as a manufacturer – provides safe and useful goods and services, as an economic entity – adheres to ethical standards of competition, as a member of society – supports social projects and solves social issues.

In some studies, corporate citizenship is considered as a special form of social partnership between business and the state characterized by their mutual responsibility to society (Kosorukov, 2017; Teteryuk, 2017); between business and society, when the degree of company’s involvement in civil society reflects the level of development of this interaction (Peregudov, Semenenko, 2008; Kivarina, 2016).

A number of Russian studies are devoted to the genesis of corporate citizenship ideas and the stages of its development (Grekova, Kuzmin, 2012; Kuzmin, 2013; Matveeva, 2014). At the same time, the duration and main points of such stages differ significantly among scholars.

Another feature of the research discourse on corporate citizenship is that it mainly concerns big business. However, some works note the need to spread its ideas and principles among representatives of small business (Peregudov, Semenenko, 2008).

The article by I.B. Adova and G.N. Ibragimov (Adova, Ibragimov, 2021) deserves special attention as the authors conducted a review (textual analysis) of Russian studies on corporate citizenship (the authors used the term korporativnoe grazhdanstvo), presenting a classification of definitions of the term.

Recognizing the undoubted importance of this study, we note its limitations. We question both the classification itself and principles for choosing such lines of research, as well as methods used to create a sample of publications for analysis.

Controversial research issues

The findings of the analysis raise a number of controversial issues. First of all, we note that currently we can talk about certain limitations in the development of the discourse on corporate citizenship, the most important of which is the predominance of descriptive, non-applied works on this phenomenon.

It has been revealed that scientific and applied research has not developed a single concept of corporate citizenship, and a place of corporate citizenship in the business value system and its practices has not been identified. At this stage, in our opinion, it is necessary to conceptualize corporate citizenship and carry out a more thorough theoretical research on it, especially in the demographical context. Obviously, insufficient conceptualization makes it difficult for business to perceive its ideas and principles and, consequently, to implement it into real business strategies and practices (Park et al., 2023). The need for a thorough conceptualization is important not only for the development of a system of scientific knowledge and research methodology, but also for the development of the stable corporate sector; even the use of the term corporate citizenship was mainly initiated by business practitioners (Valor, 2005).

Another important debatable issue revealed after the analysis is the question of the prospects and opportunities for Russian business to adopt ideas, principles of corporate citizenship in general and particularly in the demographic area. This question probably refers us to the theoretical and philosophical discussion about business/corporation as a moral agent. The answer to the question of the moral status of a corporation is actually required to substantiate the ontological consistency of ideas, postulates of corporate citizenship and the essence of entrepreneurship. Today, apparently, the return to this topic is in demand. It should be noted that the discussion about the moral status of a corporation is not new, it originates in the 1970s and is associated with the works of J. Ladd and P. French. While J. Ladd (Ladd, 1970) denied the possibility of moral responsibility of the corporation as a whole and its individual managers, P. French (French, 1979), on the contrary, justified the postulate that corporations are moral agents and have certain rights and duties. No consensus has been reached on the understanding of the moral status of a corporation, and although interest in this topic has somewhat decreased, it has not completely disappeared (Mansell et al., 2019).

To conclude, the discourse of corporate citizenship today is not an isolated research phenomenon, but can be actualized in parallel with other related and important business discourses, such as the moral status of a corporation.

Conclusion

The conducted research allowed us to draw a number of significant conclusions. First of all, it showed that, despite the rather impressive catalogue of accumulated ideas about corporate citizenship, neither the scientific community nor the business community has developed a single, universal understanding of it. The criteria differentiating corporate citizenship from other similar concepts and practices implemented by companies have not been identified. The possibilities, conditions for the dissemination of its ideas and principles in the business environment, as well as the determining factors for the adoption of ideas of corporate citizenship by business are practically not explored in research discourse.

Such a discourse, while maintaining a stable scientific significance for a number of years, has nevertheless been losing its volume in recent years – the number of publications on this topic has been decreasing. However, it is more widespread in foreign studies. Of course, the sanctions against Russia and the inability to gain full access to the largest and most significant international citation databases, Web of Science and Scopus, impose certain restrictions on our research in terms of scientific review of the foreign segment of discourse. In further studies, provided that the sanctions imposed on the Russian science are lifted, this limitation can be overcome.

Characterized by its representation in a number of subject areas, the discourse of corporate citizenship practically does not include the subject area “Demography”. The lack of conceptualization of corporate citizenship in the context of demography hinders business in its perception and does not contribute to its active involvement in solving Russian demographic problems.

The findings, in our opinion, have both scientific and practical significance. From a scientific and theoretical point of view, the study is significant as it meets the lack of scientific reviews in the field of corporate citizenship, develops scientific knowledge on strategic enterprise management and raises the question of conceptualizing the research area of corporate citizenship that is currently in demand (especially in the field of demography).

The practical significance of the work is determined by the possibility of using the results by other authors dealing with issues of corporate citizenship and related topics. The findings provide guidance on possible research collaborations (based on the identified development centers and leading researchers), journals for publishing research results (considering the identified journals with the best topic representation), directions for further development of the topic (based on the identified issues and shortcomings of the scientific discourse on corporate citizenship).

The practical significance of the research also lies in the fact that the systematization and conceptualization of this subject area will contribute to a more successful promotion of ideas and principles of corporate citizenship among Russian enterprises, and a more active involvement of Russian business in solving Russian national strategic tasks.

Abramov R.N. (2005). Corporate social responsibility as an example of organizational isomorphism in the context of globalization. Zhurnal issledovanii sotsial’noi politiki=The Journal of Social Policy Studies , 3(3), 327–334 (in Russian).

Bourhis A., Mekkaoui R. (2010). Beyond work-family balance: Are family-friendly organizations more attractive? Relations Industrielles / Industrial Relations , 65(1), 98–117.

Breaugh J.A., Frye N.K. (2007). An examination of the antecedents and consequences of the use of family-friendly benefits. Journal of Managerial Issues , 19(1), 35–52.

Egorova Yu.M. (2013). Sustainable development of the region based on corporate social responsibility. Ekonomicheskie sistemy , 2, 5–10 (in Russian).

French P. (1979). The corporation as a moral person. American Philosophical Quarterly , 16(3), 207–215.

Grekova G.I., Kuzmin A.V. (2012). Corporate citizenship: The conceptualization of ideas and stages of formation. Vestnik Instituta ekonomiki i upravleniya Novgorodskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta im. Yaroslava Mudrogo, 1, 13–20 (in Russian).

Hristova H.A. (2020). Corporate citizenship as a competitive advantage. Nauchnye vesti , 3, 177–187 (in Russian).

Ivanitskii V.L., Shishkarev S.N. (2024) Korporativnyi demograficheskii standart: luchshie praktiki otvetstvennogo biznesa po materialam EKG-reitinga [Corporate Demographic Standard: Best Practices of Responsible Business Based on ESG Rating]. Moscow: DPK Press.

Kim J.S., Yeo Y.H. (2019). Family-friendly policy and childbirth intention: Mediating effect of family life satisfaction. Asia Life Sciences , 3, 75–84.

Kuzmin A.V. (2013). Formation of the corporate citizenship concept in Russia. Rossiiskoe predprinimatel’stvo=Russian Journal of Entrepreneurship , 2(243), 108–115 (in Russian).

Ladd J. (1970). Morality and the ideal of rationality in formal organizations. The Monist, 54(4), 488–516.

Lubskii A.V., Mamina D.A. (2019). Civics in the youth environment as a subject of theoretical and methodological discourse. Sotsial’no-gumanitarnye znaniya=Social and Humanitarian Knowledge , 7, 69–78 (in Russian).

Maignan I., Ferrell O.C., Hult G.T.M. (1999). Corporate citizenship: Cultural antecedents and business benefits.

Peregudov S.P., Semenenko I.S. (2008). Korporativnoe grazhdanstvo: kontseptsii, mirovaya praktika i rossiiskie realii [Corporate Citizenship: Concepts, International Practice and Russian Realities]. Moscow: Progress-Tradition.

Petukhov K.A. (2010). Phenomenon of corporate social responsibility in the West. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Psikhologiya. Sotsiologiya=Perm University Herald. Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology , 3, 104–119 (in Russian).

Vavilova A.S., Bagirova A.P. (2022). Support for young families as a promising direction of social responsibility of business. In: Sem’ya i preemstvennost’ pokolenii: materialy Mezhdunarodnogo simpoziuma, g. Ivanovo – Ples, 30 sentyabrya – 1 oktyabrya 2022 g.=Family and Intergenerational Continuity: Proceedings of the International Symposium, Ivanovo – Ples, September 30 – October 1, 2022 . Ivanovo: Ivanovo State University, 65–71 (in Russian).

Vetoshkin A.P., Karateeva N.A., Minyailo A.M. (2008). Dukhovno-nravstvennaya ekonomika: monografiya [Spiritual and Moral Economics: Monograph]. Yekaterinburg: Ural State University.

Waddock S. (2008). The development of corporate responsibility/corporate citizenship. Organization Management Journal , 5(1), 29–39.

Zautorova E.V., Makeeva I.A. (2016). Civic consciousness as an interdisciplinary category and integrative personality characteristics. Vestnik instituta: prestuplenie, nakazanie, ispravlenie , 35, 94–99 (in Russian).