Beschreibung:
<jats:p>Because of the declining fiscal capabilities of the <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">G</jats:styled-content>erman welfare state and the resulting reductions in social services provided by the government, increasing attention has been given to the voluntary social engagement of businesses, often referred to as corporate citizenship. In that context, scholars and politicians alike have pointed to the <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">U</jats:styled-content>nited <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">S</jats:styled-content>tates as a country with a strong corporate citizenship culture and advocated a transatlantic transfer of the respective practices. Against this background, it is the first aim of this paper to examine the socio‐economic environment for corporate citizenship in both countries. Second, it will be investigated if corporate citizenship is really practiced more widely in the <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">U</jats:styled-content>nited <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">S</jats:styled-content>tates than in <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">G</jats:styled-content>ermany and what forms of corporate citizenship are used by businesses. For that purpose, the corporate citizenship activities of the 100 largest companies in the <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">U</jats:styled-content>nited <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">S</jats:styled-content>tates and <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">G</jats:styled-content>ermany each will be analyzed. Results show that more <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">US</jats:styled-content> than <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">G</jats:styled-content>erman companies undertake corporate citizenship activities and apply a wider variety of different forms. The possibilities for a transatlantic transfer are limited because of the differences in the cultural and political systems of both countries.</jats:p>