Corporate Social Responsibility in Family Firms: A Systematic Literature Review

The field of CSR in family firms has experienced remarkable growth recently. Therefore, a literature review on the topic is needed to provide an updated overview of extant research and draw guidelines for future research. Using bibliometric mapping, we conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) on corporate social responsibility (CSR) in family business drawing on the Web of Science (WOS) and Scopus databases. The bibliographic coupling conducted suggests that family involvement, corporate governance, and sustainability are the most frequently studied topics. Furthermore, through our SLR, we systematized the studies into an interpretative framework, identifying the drivers and outcomes of CSR practices, processes, and strategies in family business. The study reveals and organizes the state-of-the-art of CSR research in family business, outlines important theoretical implications and develops a future research agenda.


Introduction
Since the 1950s, corporate social responsibility (CSR) has flourished as a research topic in the management field (Bergamaschi and Randerson 2016;Bowen 1953;Carroll 1999;McWilliams and Siegel 2001;Moura-Leite and Padgett 2011). Scholars have developed numerous definitions of CSR, mirroring the evolution of social movements pertaining to civil rights and environmental issues (Carroll 2016), and incorporating different nuances regarding the economic, regulatory, voluntarism, and ethical dimensions of CSR. Generally, CSR is related to a company's activities, processes, and status in connection with its stakeholder obligations (Hsu and Cheng 2012;Wood 1991).
However, the issue at stake in this work is not defining CSR, but rather assessing the research field of CSR in family firms. Indeed some CSR research suggests that it is important to understand how CSR behaviors and strategies might change in different organizational settings (Dahlsrud 2008). One type of organizational setting that is ubiquitous in any world economy is the family firm (Poutziouris et al. 1997;Gallo 1995;Poza 1995;Bennedsen et al. 2007;De Massis et al. 2018a). Family firms (FFs) and their management are increasingly studied in the management field (Lu et al. 2013;Sharma 2004), and specifically in the entrepreneurship field (Williams et al. 2018). Academics used a variety of definitions to identify family firms (Chua et al. 1999), combining family involvement and family essence criteria De Massis et al. 2014). One of the most adopted definitions of FF is any firm in which the founder owns a portion of the firm and sits on the board of directors (Miller et al. 2011;Chrisman et al. 2012;Habbershon et al. 2003).
Family business CSR research has focused either on the relationship between family involvement and CSR, or on the impact of CSR on FF performance. For example, Cui et al. (2018) address the relationship between family involvement and CSR, Martínez-Ferrero et al. (2017) examine the role of family ownership and CSR disclosure, Iyer and Lulseged (2013) investigate the relationship between family status and CSR, and Gavana et al. (2017a) study the influence of equity and bond issues on sustainability disclosure. Gavana et al. (2018) analyze the impact of CSR reporting on revenues. Before our systematic review, we could not quantify exactly whether family firms are more or less socially responsible than other types of firms. The vast number of papers on CSR in the FF literature analyzed in this work has allowed us to gain a deep understanding of the behavioral and operational aspects of FFs in relation to CSR adoption, and the impact of such adoption on FFs.
Despite calls for a comprehensive study of CSR in FFs, most research has tended to focus on firm characteristics and contextual factors (Campopiano and De Massis 2015), with few studies examining the relationship between FFs and CSR orientation. The latest FF CSR research stream constitutes a promising avenue for further exploration, given the high proportion of such firms in any national economy and that FF are increasingly interested in (and engaging with) CSR (De Massis et al. 2018a;Le Breton-Miller and Miller 2009;McGuire et al. 2012;Miller et al. 2009;Peake et al. 2015;Kuttner et al. 2020), especially considering that (i) research on CSR has not yet reached full maturity, and (ii) management scholars, while using different perspectives, have attained inconsistent findings on the drivers and outcomes of CSR strategies and practices. In addressing these two research questions, we contribute to both the FF and CSR literature streams. Indeed, not only we do illustrate the evolution of the research field at the intersection of FFs and CSR, but also shed light on the factors that motivate FFs to embrace CSR and the outcomes of CSR for FFs. To our best knowledge, no attempts have been made to carry out either a systematic literature review or bibliometric mapping of research at the intersection of CSR and FFs, illuminating the motivations for CSR adoption and the outcomes of CSR practices in FFs.

Research Design
To understand the evolution of the topic over time and capture the drivers and outcomes of CSR adoption in FFs, we carried out a Systematic Literature Review (SLR), drawing on the Web of Science (WOS) and Elsevier Scopus databases, corroborated with bibliometric mapping. SLR is considered a necessary tool to systematically evaluate a given body of literature (Ginsberg and Venkatraman 1985). Moreover, as a comprehensive, structured, and analytical means of accurately organizing reviews, SLR is an effective method to identify research gaps in the literature (Klassen et al. 1998). Widely adopted in the broad social sciences (Tranfeld et al. 2003) and in management and entrepreneurship research (Crossan and Apaydin 2010;Parris and Peachey 2013;Pittaway et al. 2004), SLR offers a number of benefits, including the ability to construct flexible databases of articles that can easily be updated and interrogated (Pickering and Byrne 2014).
Furthermore, bibliometric mapping is a method that introduces a statistical evaluation of academic connections across publications (De Solla Price 1965;Garfield 1955;Pritchard 1969), providing a clear picture of the most relevant topics under analysis (in our case, CSR in FFs). This method has been commonly adopted in the management literature (Fahimnia et al. 2015;Markoulli et al. 2017;Zupic and Čater 2015), and the benefits include the ability to provide visualization maps based on the most cited papers, presenting insights for current research concerns and guidelines for upcoming research (Jones and Gatrell 2014).

Data
Data were gathered from the most comprehensive sources of indexed academic work: WOS and Scopus.
The former covers works published since 1900 and content from 8,700 journals. Additionally, it focuses on a multifaceted set of disciplinary fields in the wider hard sciences, technology, social sciences, arts, and humanities (Archambault et al. 2009;Falagas et al. 2008). The latter covers works published since 1966, indexing 12,850 journals in fields such as physical sciences, health sciences, life sciences, and of course, social sciences (Archambault et al. 2009;Falagas et al. 2008). The two databases have been widely adopted in prior academic research (e.g., Liñán and Fayolle 2015;Mariani et al. 2018;Mariani and Borghi, 2019;Zupic and Čater 2015), and are considered the most comprehensive sources of studies in the social sciences (Mongeon and Paul-Hus 2016;Vieira and Gomes 2009). The data for this study were collected in January 2021, with the search limited to articles published until 2020.
To search the databases, we first created a data extraction protocol/sheet  covering a set of keywords related to CSR and FFs. The objective was to gather the greatest number of relevant articles from both datasets. More specifically, the CSR-related keywords are 'corporate social responsibility' and 'social responsibility', while the FF-related keywords are 'family business*', 'family firm*', 'family-owned compan*', 'family-owned business*', 'family-owned firm*', 'family owned compan*', 'family owned business*', 'family owned firm*'. Where appropriate and relevant, words were taken in both their singular and plural form using appropriate syntax (e.g., an "*" symbol). We then linked the CSR-related keywords with the FF-related keywords, using Boolean operators (e.g., we matched 'corporate social responsibility' AND 'family business', 'social responsibility' AND 'family business', 'social responsibility' AND 'familyowned firms', etc.), and combinations using the plural forms.
To begin, we ran different queries in WOS based on the identified keywords (and their plurals), and all the different combinations of keywords in the 'topic' and 'title' fields. Only works published up to December 2020 were included in the analysis. The WOS search yielded 345 studies in total. After excluding duplications, proceedings, book chapters, books, and editorial material not published in English, the final results yielded 134 outputs.
We then repeated the same process on Scopus. We ran the same queries, using the different combinations of keywords in the fields related to 'articles', 'abstract', and 'keywords'. For consistency, we only took into account works published until December 2020. The search yielded a total 236 works. After the same exclusions, the final results yielded 121 outputs. The overall data gathering process is illustrated in Fig. 1. Fig.1

Methods
Our aim is to present a clear picture of the most relevant topics and aspects relating to CSR in FFs and identify the drivers and outcomes of CSR adoption. To provide a systematic review, we used a bibliometric approach and, consistently with Mas-Tur et al. (2020), Mariani (2020), and Rovelli et al. (2021), we implicitly proxied productivity through the number of publications and popularity through the number of citations.
Moreover, we moved a step forward and conducted a data analysis using bibliometric mapping (e.g., cocitation, co-occurrence, and bibliographic coupling) that utilizes bibliographic data extracted from databases to create structure maps of scientific fields (Zupic and Čater 2015). Bibliographic coupling is a technique that measures the similarity between documents by capturing the number of shared references (Kessler 1963). The references cited in an article help explain the topic. Therefore, articles citing the same references are linked (Perianes-Rodriguez et al. 2016). Such analysis has been widely adopted in the literature (Mura et al. 2018;Nosella et al. 2012;Yan and Ding 2012), as it is considered a beneficial technique to evaluate data through mapping extant research (Boyack and Klavans 2010;Small 1999;Vogel and Güttel 2013). We hence deemed the bibliographic coupling analysis of documents, authors, and journals an appropriate approach to present a clear picture of the evolution of scientific production on the focal topics of CSR in FFs. We employed the VOSviewer package of Van Eck and Waltman (2009) to generate bibliometric maps, widely adopted in the literature (e.g., Apriliyanti and Alon 2017;Ferreira 2018). The mapping technique used (VOS) did not involve multidimensional scaling as VOS has been found to be superior to multidimensional scaling to build bibliometric maps (Van Eck et al., 2010).
The stages of our data analysis are shown in Fig. 2. After bibliographic coupling, the next step was to merge the 134 outputs from WOS and the 121 from Scopus to obtain a final merged sample of 168 studies after removing 87 duplicated publications. The merged sample was examined in relation to the following criteria: subtopics, variables, constructs, samples, geographic region, theory, and findings. The framework identifies the drivers, practices, and outcomes of CSR adoption in FFs, drawing on several literature reviews (e.g., Campopiano et al. 2017;De Massis et al. 2013;Feliu and Botero 2016;Lumpkin et al. 2011). We interpret CSR as a set of practices and strategies influenced by certain drivers that produce outcomes in FFs. We define drivers as any FF factor that has an impact on CSR, while outcomes are any impact of CSR on FFs. This framework is useful to create a matrix analysis of CSR drivers and outcomes in FFs.
We next provide a descriptive analysis of our samples (obtained through the SLR queries), and then present the findings of the bibliographic coupling. Last, after identifying the drivers and outcomes of CSR in FFs based on the adopted framework, we present the findings of the selected review studies.

Findings
The findings illustrate the scope and variety of research on CSR in FFs. As Fig. 4.a and 4.b clearly show, interest in this topic from entrepreneurship and management researchers has increased exponentially over time both within each database (WOS and Scopus) and generally (considering both databases). The studies were carried out in 34 different countries and published in 76 different journals. A wide variety of theories and methods have been adopted. To illustrate the evolution of scientific production on the focal topics, we plotted the cumulative frequency of the published documents. The annual growth of outputs testifies to this evolution: the average annual growth in WOS is 33 percent and in Scopus 29 percent.
(Insert Fig. 4.a and 4.b about here)

Samples Description
The field of CSR in FFs has experienced remarkable growth over the last 10 years, since half the documents in our dataset were published between 2010 and 2020, as shown in Fig. 4. One of the main objectives of our research is to provide a clear picture of the current research and the journals that have published the highest number of articles on CSR in FFs.
The dataset extracted from WOS shows that a total 134 relevant academic studies were published in 59 different journals until 2020. The journals that published the most studies are the Journal of Business Ethics (21 studies), Sustainability (12 studies), and Business Strategy and the Environment (9 studies), as shown in Our analysis includes both conceptual and empirical work. Based on bibliographic coupling, in what follows we cluster the studies based on the drivers and outcomes of CSR activities.

Bibliographic Coupling
We then analyzed the most cited papers in the FF CSR literature in both datasets: 134 from WOS and 121 from Scopus. The top 20 most cited articles are illustrated in Table 1. The table is organized from the most cited to the least cited papers. The first column shows the ranking of the article in both datasets, columns twofive the data extracted from WOS, and columns six-nine the data extracted from Scopus. The work of Dyer and Whetten (2006) is ranked as the most cited paper, with a total of 425 citations in WOS and 473 in Scopus at the time of data retrieval (i.e., January 2021). It is worth noting that the order and number of citations of papers differ in each dataset.
(Insert Table 1 about here)

Recurrent topics
Adopting a bibliographic coupling network analysis using the VOSviewer software, we present the graphical representations (Figs. 8 and 9) for each database. We followed Van Eck and Waltman's (2009) recommendation to create a visualization map, which presents many colored dots, each indicating an article.
The size of each dot represents the density of citations, the colors represent the theme of the clusters, and the lines between dots the linkages between articles. The clusters' themes were identified based on a frequency analysis carried out by the software, and subsequently named by the Authors according to the main theme covered by the documents belonging to the same cluster. (Insert Figs. 8 & 9 about here) The bibliographic coupling analysis of the WOS outputs using a network visualization map shows that the literature on CSR in FFs focuses mainly on three themes. Hence, the three colors in the map each refer to a theme. The most frequently occurring theme is family involvement, which includes 46 articles (in red in Fig.   8). The topic appears in many different studies addressing family ownership, family control, family influence, and FF structure. The corporate governance theme is the second largest group and includes 45 articles (in blue in Fig. 8). The topic appears in various different studies focusing on the role of independent directors and family mangers. The sustainability theme features in 42 articles (in green in Fig. 8) and appears in many diverse studies focusing on the sustainability practices in FFs.
The bibliographic coupling analysis of the Scopus outputs using a network visualization map shows that the FF CRS literature focuses mainly on three themes. Hence, the three colors in the map each refer to a theme.
The most frequently occurring theme is family involvement in 47 articles (in red in Fig. 9) addressing family ownership and family control. The theme of corporate governance is the second largest group and includes 40 studies (in blue in Fig. 9) examining the impact of family members on boards. The sustainability theme features in 31 articles (in green in Fig. 9).
Interestingly, the themes identified by running the bibliographic coupling analysis across the WOS and Scopus dataset are largely consistent. This cross-database comparison, working also a robustness check for our bibliographic coupling analysis, reveals that family involvement, corporate governance and sustainability are the three topical areas where a critical mass of research has been produced. SEW, ethics/religion, and entrepreneurial orientation are topics often examined in conjunction with one or more of the three major topics indicated (i.e., family involvement, corporate governance, and sustainability). Moreover, some studies cover more than one theme: for instance, some on family involvement also appear to examine marginally corporate governance aspects.
The results of the bibliographic coupling analysis from both databases (WOS and Scopus) provide a clear picture in terms of the most active authors, topics, relevant journals, and the most cited documents relevant to CSR in FFs.

Family versus Non-family Firms
Based on our analysis of the reviewed articles, several studies in the CSR and FF literature have compared the performance of family and non-FFs in relation to their CSR engagement (Maung et al. 2020;Campopiano et al. 2019;López-Pérez et al. 2018;Gavana et al. 2017a, b;Gavana et al. 2018;Kim et al. 2017;Nekhili et al. 2017). Research on the spread of social responsibility in FFs has focused on differences in terms of CSR among family and non-FFs (Bergamaschi and Randerson 2016), addressing FFs with regard to their different CSR approach.
In a recent study, García-Sánchez et al. (2020) examine an international sample of 956 listed firms and show that FFs show higher level of CSR performance compared to non-FFs.  analyze firms in the US and observe that FFs are more responsible to shareholders than non-FFs in engaging in environmental investments. In the US context, Madden et al. (2020) draw on socioemotional selectivity theory to examine the differences between FFs and non-FFs in engaging with CSR activities, and show that FFs are more likely to invest in CSR than non-FFs. Rubino and Napoli (2020) examine the impact of ownership structure and board of directors on Corporate Environmental Performances (CEP) and find that Italian FFs have better environmental performances compared to non-FFs. Sharma et al. (2020) analyze the linkage between CSR disclosure and firm value in 245 Indian firms, showing that FFs make higher CSR disclosure than non-FFs. Esparza Aguilar (2019) suggests that FFs are more engaged with CSR practices than non-FFs. In the US, Dyer and Whetten (2006) compare the degree to which family and non-FFs are socially responsible. The authors build their argument on organizational identity. The findings, based on a sample of 261 family and non-FFs, show that FFs are more socially responsible compared to non-FFs. Furthermore, Kashmiri and Mahajan (2014b) emphasize that FFs are likely to maintain high levels of corporate social performance during recessions compared to non-FFs. Building on institutional theory, Kim et al. (2017) indicate that FFs positively moderate the link between the top management team's consideration of natural environmental concerns and proactive environmental actions. In contrast, non-FFs show less active environmental actions as their consideration of environmental concerns increases. Campopiano and De Massis (2015) adopt institutional theory and a content analysis to analyze the CSR reports of family-owned and nonfamily-owned firms. A total of 40 out of 168 articles compare the performance of FF vis-a-vis non-FF in terms of firms' engagement in CSR. Our analysis shows that 15 out of 40 studies reveal that family firms are more socially responsible than non-FFs. In the following section, we address the drivers of CSR adoption in FFs.

Drivers of CSR Adoption in Family Firms
The findings indicate that firm features, family involvement, corporate governance, ethics and religion, and SEW motivate FFs to engage in CSR practices.

1) Firm Features
Based on our analysis, we identify that firm features, such as firm size (Huang et al. 2016) and firms' name (Kashmiri and Mahajan 2010), influence FF engagement in CSR practices.
Regarding firm size, a recent study conducted in Mexico by Esparza Aguilar (2019) indicates that CSR engagement is higher for large size FFs. In Italy, a study conducted by Gavana et al. (2017b) indicates that a firm's visibility in terms of size influences significantly CSR practices, and that the impact is higher for FFs than non-FFs. In Italy, Campopiano and De Massis (2015) argue that the research stream examining the relationship between FF and CSR has focused on firm characteristics and contextual factors. Huang et al.
(2016) adopt resource-based and behavioral theories to explore the effect of family influence and the firm's internal factors in the adoption of green product innovations. Their findings indicate that firm size positively affects the adoption of green product innovations. In the Netherlands, based on small-and medium-sized enterprises, Uhlaner et al. (2012) find that firm size motivates FFs to engage in selected environmental practices. Using the US as their empirical setting, Niehm et al. (2008) show that firm size is significantly correlated with an FF's ability to provide and obtain community support. Graafland et al. (2003) find that firm size positively influences the use of several instruments and tools, such as social reporting. In Morocco, Elbaz and Laguir (2014) develop an argument building on stakeholder, legitimacy, and stewardship theories to address the link between family structure, financial performance, and CSR orientation. Their findings, based on 50 FFs in the food and tourism industries, indicate that family structure positively affects CSR orientation.
As for firm name, Kashmiri and Mahajan (2014a) emphasize that the family name is positively related with product-related trustworthy behavior. In the US, Mullens (2018) shows that the level of entrepreneurial orientation is an important antecedent of social and environmental practices. Building on stakeholder and institution theories to explore the impact of internationalization on corporate philanthropy, Du et al. (2018) analyze Chinese firms, showing that internationalization is positively related to corporate philanthropy. In Italy, Arena and Michelon (2018) emphasize that the family name drives an increase in environmental disclosure.

2) Family Involvement
The relationship between family involvement and CSR is well researched in the FF literature. Building on stewardship and SEW theories, Marques et al. (2014) address the heterogeneity of 12 Spanish FFs and their engagement in CSR practices. The findings reveal that a high level of family involvement is a driver of high CSR engagement. Building on agency and SEW theories, Labelle et al. (2018) examine the relationship between family control and corporate social performance (CSP) in FFs and non-FFs, suggesting that when the family's control increases, CSP also increases. Based on 146 publications, Faller and Zu Knyphausen-Aufseß (2018) emphasize that the level of equity ownership concentration influences a firm's CSR commitment. Block and Wagner (2014a), building on organizational identity and family identity theories, study 286 FFs and show that family ownership is negatively correlated with community-oriented CSR performance, but positively correlated with diversity, employee, environment, and product-oriented dimensions of CSR.
In Germany, Fehre and Weber (2019) build on SEW theory to examine the relationship between family ownership and CSR activities, indicating that FFs ownership positively effects CSR activities. Ye and Li (2020) investigate the impact of family involvement on internal and external CSR for 2,114 Chinese listed firms and show that family involvement is positively correlated to external CSR. In India, Cordeiro et al.
(2018) build on neo-institutional theory to analyze the impact of ownership type on CSR, and reveal that multinational ownership, family control and management can be considered as driving factors to CSR. In the U.S, Cordeiro et al. (2020) draw on resource dependency, SEW and secondary agency theories to examine the impact of ownership structure and board gender diversity on CEP, revealing a positive relationship between ownership structure and CEP. Britzelmaier et al. (2015) address the motivations for CSR in small FFs. Their findings based on five FFs in southwest Germany indicate that owner families have a strong influence on the CSR approach. Building on SEW theory, Bansal et al. (2018) examine an international sample of 1,072 firms, indicating that family involvement in ownership increases the likelihood of CSR disclosure.
In the US, building on regulatory focus theory and based on 71 public FFs, Lamb et al. (2017) show that the higher the percentage of family owners' equity, the higher the diversity-oriented CSR concerns. Building on stewardship, SEW, and agency theories, Lamb and Butler (2018) study firms in the US and reveal that the greater the percentage of family-owned equity, the higher the increase in CSR strengths. Building on agency theory and examining an international sample of firms, Martínez-Ferrero et al. (2016) suggest that family ownership positively affects the promotion of socially responsible practices.

3) Corporate Governance
Some studies in our dataset examine corporate governance aspects and issues, such as the involvement of family members on boards as CEOs, and how this affects their decision to engage in CSR practices. In Japan, Endo (2020) builds on stakeholder theory to examine the impact of board size on CEP and shows that the relationship is positive. In Europe, Meier and Schier (2020) 2015) analyze an international sample and reveal that the higher the proportion of independent directors, the higher the level of CSR reporting disclosure.
In France, Laguir and Elbaz (2014) indicate that FFs managed by competent external CEOs show better social performance than those managed by family CEOs. In Italy, building on institutional and agency theories, Gavana et al. (2017a) show that a family CEO improves CSR disclosure. Drawing on SEW theory, Block and Wagner (2014b) analyze 399 FFs and find that the presence of a family founder as CEO is associated with fewer CSR concerns. Building on stakeholder, legitimacy, and agency theories, Rudyanto and Siregar (2018) examine 123 Indonesian FFs and find that board of commissioner efficiency positively affects the quality of sustainability reports. Building on stakeholder, legitimacy, and SEW theories, Gavana et al. (2016) examine 230 firms and reveal that family CEOs have a significant positive effect, specifically on environment and labour disclosure. Dick et al (2020) build on stakeholder theory to examine the impact of founder-controlled family firms and managerial overconfidence on CSR of 343 medium-sized Polish FFs: they reveal that overconfident executives show higher CSR performance.
The presence of women directors is examined by Sundarasen et al. (2016) analyzing 450 non-executive directors and independent non-executive directors, revealing a positive relationship between female representation on the board and CSR engagement. In Italy, Campopiano et al. (2019), draw on self-construal theory to examine the impact of presence of female directors on CSR practices, thus showing that female directors are positively related to CSR activities. In the U.S, Cordeiro et al. (2020) indicate that board diversity influences positively CEP.

4) Socioemotional Wealth
Many recent studies illustrating the ways that FFs differ from other firms in making decisions focus on the role of SEW, defined as the "non-financial aspects of the firms that meet the family's affective needs" (Gómez-Mejía et al. 2007, p. 106). Management and entrepreneurship scholars are paying increasing attention to SEW as a developing perspective in the FF literature. Lamb and Butler (2018) emphasize that FFs are particularly interested in SEW as conducive to adopting CSR practices. Labelle et al. (2018) argue that FFs make CSR investments to balance SEW preservation and financial performance. Yu et al. (2015) evaluate the CSR performance of family and non-FFs in Taiwan. In the US, building on SEW and organizational identity theories, Block and Wagner (2014a) examine 286 firms and reveal that FFs care about their SEW, which in turn leads to a high relevance of CSR. Moreover, Kallmuenzer et al. (2018) analyze 152 Austrian firms and show that SEW enhances CSR activities for FFs in the rural tourism industry. Vazquez (2018) systematically analyses 31 articles and indicates that SEW is considered one of the characteristics allowing FFs to adopt CSR practices.

5) Ethics and Religion
Scholars have investigated the impact of ethical behavior on CSR practices. In Belgium, Fassin et al. (2011) examine 226 small FFs and show that managers understand the interrelationships and interdependencies of business ethics concepts. Building on stewardship theory, Déniz et al. (2005) illustrate that CSR practices are based on ethical and cultural factors. Among 112 Spanish CEOs, Schäfer and Goldschmidt (2010) examine the motives for CSR engagement in large German FFs. Their findings indicate that the ethical motive dimension is a significant predictor of the overall success of CSR engagement. Based on 10 semi-structured interviews, Perrini and Minoja (2008) indicate that the beliefs and value systems of entrepreneurs play an important role in determining a sustainable corporate strategy. In their multi-country study, including the UK, US, Thailand, and Malaysia, Feliu and Botero (2016)  In the following section, we provide an analysis of the outcomes of CSR adoption in FFs.

Outcomes of CSR Adoption in Family Firms
The findings of our analysis -based on a triangulation of bibliometric methods and in-depth reading of the articles -indicate that financial performance, reputation, innovation, and sustainability are the most recurrent outcomes of CSR adoption in FFs.  (2014), based on 580 firms and drawing on slack resources and instrumental theories, reveals that an FF's investment in CSR generates positive effects on its future financial performance; Niehm et al. (2008) find that commitment to the community significantly explains perceived family business performance, while community support explains financial performance in FFs. Building on legitimacy, stakeholder, and SEW theories, Gavana et al. (2018) find that CSR reporting has a significant effect on revenues when a firm is characterized by consumer proximity. Drawing on social identity theory, Kashmiri and Mahajan (2014a) examine 107 FFs and find that family name is related to higher stock returns and more ethical product-related behavior. Wu et al. (2012b) study 125 firms in the high-tech industry and reveal that the relationship between CSP and the cost of capital is negative in FFs. Building on stakeholder and SEW theories, Shahzad et al.

1) Firm Performance
(2018) study 190 FFs in Pakistan and reveal that the effect of CSR performance on investment efficiency is high in FFs.

2) Reputation
Family members recognize that their reputation and image are closely identified with the firm's, as it often carries their name (Dyer and Whetten 2006). Building on stakeholder theory, Uhlaner et al. (2004) find that FFs have a sense of responsibility for workers and the local community: long-term relations and family values increase reputation. In the US, Dyer and Whetten (2006) analyze 202 non-family and 59 FFs and find that FFs tend to be more socially responsible than non-FFs due to family concern about image and reputation, as well as the desire to protect family assets. Building on stakeholder theory, Cruz et al. (2014) emphasize that FFs are socially responsible towards external stakeholders to maintain their firm's reputation and image. Sageder et al. (2018) adopt a systematic review of FF image and reputation, and one of the studies they reviewed (Fernando and Almeida 2012), finds that CSR initiatives enhance a firm's reputation as a responsible employer, fostering performance and business opportunities. Moreover, building on stewardship theory, Déniz and Suárez (2005) analyse 112 Spanish FFs and find that CSR practices improve firm image.

3) Innovation
Wanger (2010), in a study conducted in the US, analyses 3,697 large FFs and finds a link between innovation with high social benefits and CSP. Interestingly, innovation is rarely measured as a dependent variable (except for Wagner, 2010): rather, it seems only to appear as a control variable in most of the studies measuring performance. For instance, Kashmiri and Mahajan (2014) find that FFs outperform non-FFs during recessions because they keep high levels of new product introductions and advertising intensity (however performance is not measured in terms of innovation).

4) Sustainability
Building on behavioral theory, Foster (2018) observes the impact of philanthropy on firm performance in the UK, US, Thailand, and Malaysia. The results, based on 7 case studies, show that social responsibility helps long-term sustainability, especially in a modern business environment. In the US, Niehm et al. (2008) show that CSR dimensions contribute to FF sustainability in small rural communities.
In sum, financial performance, lower cost of capital, reputation, innovation, and sustainability are the outcomes of CSR adoption in FFs, as shown in Fig. 11. (Insert Fig. 11 about here) We present the results of the SLR analysis in a comprehensive framework in Fig. 12. The findings illustrate that firm features, family involvement, corporate governance, ethics and religion, and SEW are drivers of CSR practices in FFs, while the outcomes are financial performance, reputation, innovation, and sustainability.
(Insert Fig. 12 about here) In the following section, we provide a discussion of the matrix analysis of the variables, theories, methods, and empirical settings adopted for each CSR driver and outcome in FFs.

Discussion
This paper is motivated by the significance of FFs in the global economy and their growth (De Massis et al. 2018a). As the following section will show, the number of studies addressing CSR in FFs has increased over time, albeit lacking a comprehensive SLR. In the next section, we provide a discussion of the most relevant and frequently researched topics and aspects of CSR in FFs. Then, we discuss the constructs adopted for drivers versus outcomes, and summarize these in Tables 2 and 3.

FF CSR Topics and Aspects
The findings of the bibliographic coupling analysis indicate that family involvement, sustainability, Sustainability is another topic that emerged from the literature review, identified and measured through CSR practices (Iyer and Lulseged 2013;Niehm et al. 2008), sustainability disclosure (Gavana et al. 2017a), sustainability reports (Rudyanto and Siregar 2018), and sustainability certifications (Richards et al. 2017).
Ethics and religion are examined in the literature by measuring the product-related ethical behavior of FFs (Kashmiri and Mahajan 2014a). the effect of core Buddhism values (Chou et al. 2016), and spiritual beliefs and values (Bhatnagar et al. 2019).
Socioemotional wealth is another topic addressed. Vazquez (2018) indicates that three key features in FFs increase ethical behavior, one of which is SEW measured through majority ownership and family control (Yu et al. 2015).
Entrepreneurial orientation is the last topic discussed and measured in three dimensions: innovation, proactivity, and risk-taking (Hernández-Perlines and Ibarra Cisneros 2017).

Constructs Adopted as Drivers
Our findings indicate that firm features, family involvement, corporate governance, ethics and religion, and SEW are the key drivers of CSR in FFs. The findings are summarized in Table 2 providing a matrix that analyses the variables, theories, methods, and empirical settings of the drivers of CSR adoption in FFs.
(Insert Table 2 about here)

Firm Features
Level of entrepreneurial orientation. Drawing on stewardship, agency, and stakeholder theories, Mullens (2018) investigates the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and investments in sustainability initiatives in the US.
Firm size. Esparza Aguilar (2019) draw on stakeholder theory to analyze the impact of gender, size, and university education on CSR in Mexico. Gavana et al. (2017b) build on institutional and signaling theories, addressing earnings management and CSR disclosure in Italy. Graafland et al. (2003) analyze the relationship between CSR and strategy in FFs in Netherland. Uhlaner et al. (2012) build on planned behavior theory and investigate the relationship between firm size and environmental management practices in the Netherlands. Niehm et al. (2008) draw on enlightened self-interest and social capital theories and examine the relationship between total number of employees and CSR dimensions in the US.
Firm name. Kashmiri and Mahajan (2014a) draw on social identity theory and analyze the relationship between family name presence and product-related ethical behavior in the US. Zeng (2020) draws on SEW theory to assess the impact of CSR activities in Canada.
FF structure. Campopiano and De Massis (2015) address the relationship between FFs versus non-FFs and CSR reporting in Italy, building on institutional theory.
Internationalization. Building on stakeholder and institutional theories, Du et al. (2018) investigate the relationship between internationalization and corporate philanthropy in China.
In sum, firm features have been examined through identifying their influence on CSR adoption. Some studies use both qualitative and quantitative methods across various countries. The arguments on this topic mostly draw on stakeholder, institutional, and stewardship theories.

Ethics and Religion
Business ethics. show that spirituality represents an antecedent of philanthropic practices in India.
Religion. Chou et al. (2016) examine the core values of Buddhism and CSR in Thailand. Perrini and Minoja (2008) address corporate strategy and CSR in Italy, building on institutional theory and qualitative analysis.
In sum, the impact of religion and ethics has been examined through FF moral motivations to adopt CSR predominantly through qualitative methods across various countries. The arguments on this topic mostly draw on stakeholder, institutional, and stewardship theories. In sum, family involvement has been measured through identifying the impact of family involvement in ownership or control on CSR practices relying on qualitative and quantitative methods across a number of countries. The arguments on this topic mostly draw on agency and SEW theories.

Corporate Governance
Rubino and Napoli (2020) build on agency theory to examine the relationship between board independence and environmentally responsible practices in Italy. In Japan, Endo (2020)  In sum, corporate governance factors have been examined by identifying the impact of family members on boards or CEOs on adopting CSR practices, measured through quantitative methods in various countries. The arguments on this topic mostly draw on agency, stakeholder, and SEW theories.

Constructs Adopted as Outcomes
Our findings indicate that the outcomes of CSR adoption in FFs are financial performance (including cost of capital), reputation, innovation, and sustainability, as summarized in Table 3 providing a matrix that analyses the outcomes and variables, theories, methods and empirical settings adopted for each CSR outcome in FFs.
(Insert Table 3 about here)

Firm Performance
As far as financial performance is concerned, several studies are worth mentioning. Nirmala et al. (2020) examine the impact of CSR disclosure on firms' value in Indonesia. In Korea, Choi et al. (2019)  In sum, performance (both financial and non-financial) has been examined through identifying the impact of CSR practices on firm performance, analyzed through quantitative methods in various countries. The arguments on this topic draw mainly on agency, stakeholder, and legitimacy theories. Dyer and Whetten (2006) examine family ownership and CSP in the US. Uhlaner et al. (2004) examine FF characteristics and CSR in Dutch firms, building on stakeholder theory. Cruz et al. (2014) examine family control and social practices in Europe, building on stakeholder theory. Déniz and Suárez (2005) address FF orientation and four approaches of CSR in Spain, drawing on stewardship theory.

Theories Adopted
Based on the inspection and read of each work, and beyond the bibliometric mapping, the most adopted theoretical lenses in the literature on CSR in FFs are agency theory (Rubino and Napoli 2020;Labelle et al. 2018), stakeholder theory (Dick et al. 2020;Hernández-Perlines and Rung-Hoch 2017;Maggioni and Santangelo 2017), stewardship theory (Lamb and Butler 2018;Marques et al. 2014), legitimacy theory (Gavana et al. 2018), social identity theory (Kashmiri and Mahajan 2010), and institutional theory (Amann et al. 2012;Kim et al. 2017). The theory most adopted to explain family business behavior and strategic actions is stakeholder theory, suggesting that firms can obtain benefits from being socially responsible towards their stakeholders (Aguilera and Jackson 2003;Freeman and Reed 1983). Agency theory argues that these firms will pursue their own interests at the expense of other stakeholders, since they own and manage the firm, and determine its strategies. The other main view is stewardship theory, which states that these firms will act in accordance with the interests of all stakeholders. In other words, agency and stakeholder theories provide some insights into understanding the mechanisms of FF CSR conduct, albeit ambiguous. Interesting to note is the different ways the theoretical lenses are adopted in the studies.

Methods Adopted
As for the methodological approaches, out of the total 168 studies, 101 (60 percent) adopt a quantitative approach, 55 (32 percent) qualitative. The former is mostly adopted to examine the relationships between different variables based on questionnaires, the latter often focused on interviews (Fassin et al. 2011;Peake et al. 2015), questionnaires (Zhou 2014), the case study approach (Iaia et al 2019), and surveys (Britzelmaier et al. 2015). Among the quantitative articles, 46 percent adopt a cross-sectional approach (e.g., Chou et al. 2016;Kashmiri and Mahajan 2014), and seven percent adopt a longitudinal approach (e.g., Kuttner et al. 2020;Boissinet et al. 2007).
In terms of level of analysis, eight percent adopt an institutional level (e.g. Peake et al. 2015;Faller et al. 2018), 82 percent adopt a firm level (e.g., Kashmiri and Mahajan 2010;Du et al. 2018) and five percent adopt an individual level (e.g., Randolph et al. 2019;Kallmuenzer et al. 2018).
The CSR behavior of FFs seems to differ across emerging and developed countries. In developed countries, CSR is typically aimed at addressing environmental, economic, and governance issues (Fehre and Weber 2019;Doluca et al. 2018). Moreover, there is more emphasis on business ethics rather than religion (Déniz and Suárez 2005;Schäfer and Goldschmidt 2010). Since within most developing countries there is preoccupation on basic livelihood, it is more frequent for businesses to engage primarily in CSR that concentrates on a few areas: environment, safety and human rights (Caputo et al. 2017;Lamb and Butler 2018), economic performance and environmental preservation (Gavana et al. 2017b), community, employees, product quality management (López-Cózar-Navarro et al. 2017), and environmental human rights, employees and consumer protection ).
On the other hand, CSR behavior of FFs in emerging countries is more related to community and religious orientations. Accordingly, the leading motive for FFs engaging in CSR activities is normative in nature, that is belief or religious reasons (Singh and Mittal 2019;Chou et al. 2016). Moreover, it seems that several firms in emerging countries pay attention to philanthropy (Du et al. 2018;Du et al. 2016; Ye and Li 2020; Abdelhalim and Eldin 2019) rather than legal or ethical dimensions of CSR. This is driven largely by the desire to feel like they are part of the communities in which they operate, which is often critical to the overall identity of the firms and their employees in these countries. Fig. 13 about here)

Conceptualizations and Measures of CSR
While our SLR has focused on CSR in family firms, we should acknowledge that CSR is an umbrella concept that entails multiple heterogeneous sub-concepts and constructs including CSR disclosure (e.g., Nekhili et al., 2017), environmental disclosure (e.g., Arena and Michelon, 2018), sustainability (e.g., Kallmuenzer et al., 2018), sustainability reporting (e.g., Hsueh, 2018), environmental performance (e.g., Endo, 2020), gender diversity (e.g, Peake et al., 2017), philanthropy (e.g., Du, 2015), business ethics (e.g., Fassin et al., 2011). Overall, the CSR conceptualization adopted in each study reflects the specific nuance of CSR that the author/s aim to illustrate, describe, and capture. The empirical setting seems to influence the conceptualization of CSR: for instance, in developed countries the concept of CSR is related to business stakeholders (e.g., customers, suppliers, etc.) and entails a focus on reporting (e.g., Campopiano and De Massis, 2015), while in emerging countries it relates more to philanthropy, spirituality and religion (e.g., Bhatnagar et al., 2020). Furthermore, CSR has been conceptualized as internal when it involves stakeholders within the firm such as employees, and external when it involves stakeholders external to the firm such as customers, suppliers, governmental bodies, etc. Several recent studies look at both internal and external CSR (e.g., Meier and Schier, 2020).
As far as the measures of CSR are concerned, we note that the methods used to measure CSR are rather various. The majority of studies measures CSR by using content analysis (e.g., Campopiano and De Massis, 2015), while other studies have adopted surveys (e.g., Graafland, 2020), reputation indices (e.g., Rodriguez-Ariza et al., 2016), and single case studies (e.g., Boisin et al., 2007). Moreover, some studies measure CSR based on scores or ratings of CSR dimensions within specific databases such as the Kinder, Lydenberg and Domini (KLD) Research & Analytics database (e.g., Kashmiri and Mahajan, 2014), while other studies measure it through surveys that capture both the internal (employee-related) and external (customers-, suppliers-, and local community-related) dimensions of CSR (Lindgreen et al., 2009). Interestingly, while in developed countries it is more likely that established databases are leveraged (e.g., Kashmiri and Mahajan, 2014), this is not the case in emerging countries where typically ad hoc surveys are conducted to build datasets.

Conclusions, Contributions and Future Research
Corporate social responsibility in FFs is increasingly gaining the attention of management and entrepreneurship scholars, as the impressive growth in the number of studies on this topic clearly shows.
However, the main objective of this review was to identify the topics and aspects of CSR in FFs, and the drivers and outcomes of CSR adoption in FFs. The bibliometric mapping identifies three major topical areas -namely family involvement, corporate governance, and sustainability. SEW, ethics/religion, and entrepreneurial orientation are minor topics often examined in conjunction with one or more of the three major topics. The findings of the SLR analysis reveal that firm features, family involvement, corporate governance, ethics and religion, and SEW are the key drivers of CSR. On the other hand, the most recurring outcomes of FF CSR are financial performance, reputation, innovation, and sustainability. However, and interestingly, while there seems to be more consistency across the findings of papers investigating the drivers of CSR, research findings related to the outcomes display a mixed evidence. This provides certainly an opportunity for further research, for instance by means of meta-analyses.

Contributions
This work contributes to advance both the FF and CSR literatures. First, we assessed the research field at the intersection of FFs and CSR by offering an updated overview of extant literature. This contributes to address recent calls for more research on CSR in family firms (e.g., Kuttner et al., 2020) and organize the growing body of research analyzing the role of CSR in FF (e.g., De Massis et al. 2018a;Peake et al. 2015;Kuttner et al. 2020). Second, our findings suggest that there are three established topical areas that are informing developments in the research field at the intersection of FFs and CSR: family involvement (e.g., Dyer and Whetten, 2006), corporate governance (e.g., Campopiano et al., 2019), and sustainability (e.g., Niehm et al. 2008). Moreover, SEW, ethics/religion, and entrepreneurial orientation are further topics often examined in conjunction with one or more of the three major topics indicated (i.e., family involvement, corporate governance, and sustainability). Interestingly, several studies cover more than one theme: for instance, some studies on family involvement also appear to examine marginally corporate governance aspects. This suggests that researchers are already working across topical areas which perhaps allows them to gain a more holistic view of what they are researching. Third and last, we have contributed to draw some guidelines for future scholarship (reported in the Limitations and Future research section below), by developing a research agenda that will likely inform the future evolution of this research area in the next decade. practitioners might derive insights from our work to document themselves on the challenges, issues, benefits and opportunities for FF willing to engage with CSR. This might support opportunities' evaluations and cost/benefit analyses before even embracing CSR practices. Second, as CSR is also becoming a trending topic in the rhetoric of policy makers and practitioners, we encourage them to engage with some recent studies (e.g., Fehre and Weber, 2019) that have critically pointed out that firms' attention to CSR might be dependent on a number of factors including firm heterogeneity, as well as resources (Huang et al., 2016;Singal, 2014). Third, by indicating that there are a multitude of antecedents and drivers of CSR across different contexts, the knowledge generated by this SLR might assist policy makers and practitioners in identifying the most relevant reasons why CSR practices could or should be adopted differently in different contexts. Fourth, as there are mixed and inconsistent findings regarding the effect of CSR on firm performance (both financial and non-financial), practitioners interested in embracing CSR to enhance their firms' performance might need to focus on those studies describing firms that operate in a similar national context and industry. Indeed, there does not seem to be any "one size fits all" type of CSR strategy leading consistently to enhanced performance.

Practical implications
However, most studies suggest that embracing CSR practices yields reputational gains: therefore, firms could engage with CSR to enhance their reputation. Last, as CSR behaviors of FFs are different across developed vs. emerging countries (Singh and Mittal 2019;Ye and Li 2020), policy makers in emerging countries will need to emphasize community-and religious-related outcomes if they want to persuade FFs to engage more with CSR practices.

Limitations and Research Agenda
This work has some limitations that could be addressed in future studies. First, our analysis is based on the systematization and bibliographic coupling of extant literature. We encourage scholars to adopt other advanced data science, text-mining, and machine learning tools such as topic modelling to discover the hidden semantic structure of the documents used in our literature review. Second, other sources such as Google Scholar might have been leveraged to derive additional scientific outputs that are neither indexed in Scopus nor in WOS. Third, while the VOSviewer package is certainly a good tool to generate bibliometric maps, there are additional tools to visualize bibliometric maps such as Bibexcel and the Sci2 Tool.
That said, based on our review, we provide a rich agenda for future research by outlining some promising research questions. Table 4 summarizes this future research agenda based on the knowledge gaps in the field, and while not exhaustive, identifies particularly interesting research questions at the intersection of CSR and family business that deserve attention in the near future. We then briefly discuss some of the key methodological and empirical challenges associated with such research.
(Insert Table 4 about here) First, our SLR highlights some important knowledge gaps in relation to the social responsibility strategies and practices of FFs. Second, we see a need to better understand the implication of the demographics of FF members on the CSR behavior and performance of their firms. Here, we even encourage future scholars to draw on the psychological foundations of management in family firms (e.g., Picone et al. 2021;Humphrey et al., 2021) to understand how the heuristics, biases, values, emotions, experiences, and memories of different family and non-family actors within the FF may affect CSR strategies and behaviors. Third, although ownership criteria have been the most adopted in the empirical literature to distinguish FFs from their nonfamily counterparts , our knowledge of the impact of ownership factors, including not only the extent but also the type and dispersion of ownership, on CSR strategies and behavior is still limited.
Thus, a number of unaddressed questions on the effects of ownership factors remain. Fourth, most literature on CSR in FFs has overlooked the impact and variegated role of CSR investments, leaving a number of questions open. Fifth, most family business research focuses on CSR economic outcomes, thus leaving a gap in our understanding of outcomes of a different nature (e.g., economic, noneconomic) and at different levels (e.g., individual, firm, family). Sixth, the role of the context and/or industrial sector has been overlooked in prior research on CSR and FFs, despite its potential importance (De Massis et al. 2018b). Thus, we see a need for future research that more closely examines the effects of contextual factors on CSR drivers, processes, and outcomes. Finally, a number of other important unaddressed questions for future research on CSR in the context of FFs emerge, for instance, in relation to topics such as CSR as enabler of innovation objectives, the impact of SEW dimensions and interactions thereof, the effect of different leadership styles on the adoption of CSR practices, and the use of a microfoundational lens (e.g., De Massis and Foss 2018) to better understand CSR practices and dynamics in FFs.
Of course, advancing research on CSR in FFs entails methodological and empirical challenges. In fact, to address some of the unanswered questions presented above, scholars will need to broaden the range of methods currently adopted by relying more on, for instance, qualitative research methods that may be particularly useful to capture aspects related to how processes unfold and/or how practices are adopted, as well as multi-level quantitative research designs. Experimental approaches may also be particularly promising for understanding the cognitive aspects that lead to CSR behavior. Moreover, pursuing the research agenda will also likely affect the datasets that scholars adopt. We encourage future scholars to develop datasets that trace, ideally over time, how organizations, families, and/or individuals have built sustainable competitive advantages through CSR strategies and activities, making decisions and acting in a particular FF context. Thus, moving the FF CSR field forward also has the potential to influence the methods and datasets that scholars adopt.