The paper explores the growing importance of individual and corporate social responsibility (CSR) as an alternative to market and redistributive failures. It examines the motivations behind prosocial behavior, including genuine altruism, social image concerns, and material incentives. It contrasts three understandings of CSR: (1) firms adopting a long-term perspective, (2) delegated prosocial behavior on behalf of stakeholders, and (3) insider-initiated corporate philanthropy. The paper discusses the benefits, costs, and limits of socially responsible behavior for both individuals and firms. The paper begins by noting that traditional economics has focused on the shareholder-value approach, where firms are controlled by profit-maximizing shareholders and other stakeholders are protected by contracts and regulation. However, society and lawmakers are increasingly demanding CSR as an alternative to market and redistributive failures. This trend is influenced by factors such as the normal good status of social responsibility, increased access to information about corporate practices, and the expansion of environmental and social externalities due to globalization. The paper then discusses the motivations for CSR, including government failure, the territoriality of jurisdiction, and the inefficiency of the state in policing minor nuisances. It also highlights the role of image concerns, which can drive prosocial behavior but also lead to self-deception and the overjustification effect. The paper argues that while image concerns can be leveraged to promote prosocial behavior, they can also lead to a zero-sum game, where the pursuit of social prestige reduces the perceived altruism of others. The paper also examines the challenges and opportunities of CSR, including the potential for free riding, the need for accurate information, and the difficulty of defining what is socially responsible. It discusses the importance of distinguishing between different types of CSR, such as long-term perspective, delegated philanthropy, and insider-initiated philanthropy, and the challenges each presents. The paper concludes that while CSR has real promise, it is important to understand its motivations and limitations.The paper explores the growing importance of individual and corporate social responsibility (CSR) as an alternative to market and redistributive failures. It examines the motivations behind prosocial behavior, including genuine altruism, social image concerns, and material incentives. It contrasts three understandings of CSR: (1) firms adopting a long-term perspective, (2) delegated prosocial behavior on behalf of stakeholders, and (3) insider-initiated corporate philanthropy. The paper discusses the benefits, costs, and limits of socially responsible behavior for both individuals and firms. The paper begins by noting that traditional economics has focused on the shareholder-value approach, where firms are controlled by profit-maximizing shareholders and other stakeholders are protected by contracts and regulation. However, society and lawmakers are increasingly demanding CSR as an alternative to market and redistributive failures. This trend is influenced by factors such as the normal good status of social responsibility, increased access to information about corporate practices, and the expansion of environmental and social externalities due to globalization. The paper then discusses the motivations for CSR, including government failure, the territoriality of jurisdiction, and the inefficiency of the state in policing minor nuisances. It also highlights the role of image concerns, which can drive prosocial behavior but also lead to self-deception and the overjustification effect. The paper argues that while image concerns can be leveraged to promote prosocial behavior, they can also lead to a zero-sum game, where the pursuit of social prestige reduces the perceived altruism of others. The paper also examines the challenges and opportunities of CSR, including the potential for free riding, the need for accurate information, and the difficulty of defining what is socially responsible. It discusses the importance of distinguishing between different types of CSR, such as long-term perspective, delegated philanthropy, and insider-initiated philanthropy, and the challenges each presents. The paper concludes that while CSR has real promise, it is important to understand its motivations and limitations.