In recent years, the production of goods and services has grown rapidly, and although it has allowed for the development of emerging economies, the increase in globalization and the advancement of the media has also led to neglect of labor rights, disregard for the environment, and rising levels of poverty in different countries around the world ( Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe, 2018).

Due to the lack of attention to different stakeholder groups, the concept of corporate social responsibility has gained importance in the last century ( Palacio, 2020). The initial approach to corporate social responsibility was introduced by Bowen (1953), who stated that social responsibility is “the obligation of businessmen to pursue policies, to make decisions or to follow lines of action that are desirable in terms of the objectives and values of society” (p.44). All decisions made by entrepreneurs in various organizations have an impact on the rest of society ( Tiep, Huan, and Hong, 2021).

As important as understanding the components of social responsibility is measuring and implementing them. However, due to the diversity of organizations and their multiple characteristics, there are various methods used in the implementation of corporate social responsibility programs, and consequently, the results vary ( Barragán et al., 2019, 2022).

While it is important to understand the implementation and results of this vision in different sectors and types of organizations, there are activities and institutions on which social pressures increase, and it is important to emphasize them given their nature and mission ( Garbanzo, 2015). This is the case with Higher Education Institutions and Universities, which have a high responsibility towards society as they are responsible for preparing the professionals of the future ( Santana, 2022).

It should be remembered that the mission of the university and higher education institutions is based on social awareness, as the university, above all, shapes individuals with all that entails culture, ethics, social commitment, and politics ( Ruiz and López, 2019). This is because it seeks to build knowledge and fulfil its missions of “education, research, and social dimension” ( Beltrán et al., 2014, p.5).

As evident, the link between the university and society as a principle of responsibility has always existed. This is why university social responsibility (USR) is defined as a set of integral management policies that contribute to the challenges of the 21st century ( Ibarra and Fonseca, 2020), aiming to develop a series of actions that improve the university’s relationships with society and fulfil its responsibility towards all stakeholders (administrative staff, professors, students, and administrative personnel, among others) ( Medina et al., 2017).

USR goes beyond traditional solidary social extension and outreach; it is not only about voluntary initiatives of assistance and service to vulnerable groups. It is important to coordinate university actors to transmit responsible knowledge, as it ensures the contribution of competencies and capabilities, which in turn leads to sustainable development and the education of future comprehensive professionals, as stated by Prieto et al. (2015), Cabrejos (2017), and Vallaeys and Álvarez (2019).

The rapid evolution of higher education and its increasing engagement with social development have highlighted the critical role of universities in fostering USR. Prior studies have examined the legal and ethical foundations of USR, emphasizing its significance in shaping socially responsible professionals. However, the methodological rigor of these studies has varied, necessitating a deeper evaluation of their quality and impact. This review integrates methodological assessments, policy implications, and diverse perspectives to offer a comprehensive understanding of USR in the Peruvian context.

The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review of scientific production related to university social responsibility (USR) in Peru and analyze the most important findings from that production. To carry out the research, a systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted using three databases: Scopus, Redalyc, and SciELO, which were selected based on the degree of result updates they provide and the bibliometric analysis tools they include.

For the development of the research, a search for scientific production associated with the topic of USR was conducted through a systematic review of articles. This method aims to identify, interpret, and evaluate different works carried out by scholars on a specific topic or field, based on the text ( Pardal and Ochoa, 2017) with the intention to “provide researchers and readers with clarifying information on a particular subject” ( Pardal and Pardal, 2020, p.1).

The systematic review of scientific literature was carried out based on the adaptation of the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology, a method published in 2009. It was designed to assist authors in conducting transparent systematic reviews, documenting the rationale for conducting a review, what the authors investigated and developed, and what their main findings were, based on the text by Page et al. (2021). Based on this, the research question for the review was formulated: How is university social responsibility developed in Peru?

As previously indicated, this study follows the PRISMA framework, ensuring a transparent and replicable systematic review. Articles were selected based on predefined inclusion criteria, including relevance to USR and empirical contributions within Peru. To enhance methodological clarity, this study incorporates a detailed assessment of the research designs, validity measures, and potential biases present in the selected articles. Furthermore, bibliometric analysis tools were employed to categorize and compare findings systematically.

The analysis of 20 selected articles reveals that 65% adopted a quantitative approach, 30% were qualitative, and 5% applied mixed methods. A critical assessment of these studies indicates that while many focus on student and faculty perceptions of USR, fewer explore its institutional integration and long-term effects. Additionally, by incorporating diverse perspectives, this study highlights contrasting viewpoints on the effectiveness of USR policies, ensuring a balanced discussion of its benefits and limitations ( Table 3).

Table 4 revealed that 65% of the analyzed literature was quantitative in nature, 30% was qualitative, and only 5% was mixed methods.

Social responsibility is being widely addressed as it has become a fundamental part of university policy ( Martí, et al., 2019). From its inception, it was included in the University Law 23733 which stated that “universities extend their educational activities in favor of those who are not their regular students; in this sense, they organize activities to promote and disseminate general culture and professional studies, which can be free or not, and which can lead to certification.” In this way, the law aimed to establish a university-society interrelationship. However, since this was often confused with carrying out social assistance activities or mere cultural activities, the new University Law 30220 was enacted, which incorporated university social responsibility and was regulated through the quality model of the National System for Evaluation, Accreditation, and Certification of Educational Quality (2019) [2016, 2017]. This quality model includes responsibility as part of institutional management, with Factor 6 focusing on responsibility. It states that “the university has a defined policy of social responsibility, and its actions are framed within it, achieving integration with research, technological development, and innovation activities (R&D&I)” ( Villegas and Cairampoma, 2021, p.3). This factor undoubtedly urges universities to involve faculty and students in social and environmental development projects and to engage the entire university community with stakeholders from the public and private sectors, thus contributing to society.

Furthermore, Article 125 of the law requires universities to allocate a minimum of 2% of their budget to social responsibility actions and provides instruments to incentivize the development of projects such as social responsibility initiatives or the establishment of competitive funds ( Villegas and Cairampoma, 2021).

In other words, university social responsibility concerns not only students but also other areas, including administrative functions such as purchasing, planning, service provision, enrollment, marketing, and personnel selection, among others. It also extends to the academic dimensions of education and research ( Vallaeys and Álvarez, 2019), as we must remember that the university becomes the center for knowledge production and professional training, with a significant impact on students’ lives ( Zolezzi, 2010). The university allows all its members to develop social, environmental, and economic awareness ( Severino, Sarmiento, Villar, and Ramírez, 2022).

Martí et al. (2018) conducted an analysis of university social responsibility in three countries, including Peru, where they found that it is implemented within the framework of the University Law 30220 (Ley 30220, 2014). They highlighted that the objective of university social responsibility is to generate mutual benefits between the university and the community, aiming to create development improvements that contribute to the well-being of citizens and the nation. In addition to being a requirement in the curriculum, university social responsibility serves as a support base for accreditation. It obliges higher education institutions (HEIs) to implement, develop, and put into practice social responsibility activities within their undergraduate programs. The goal is to prepare graduates who can contribute to and implementing “public policies of social interest and fostering altruistic and supportive behavior that contributes to improving the quality of life of vulnerable groups in our society” (Ley 30220, 2014, p.57), based on the knowledge and skills they have developed during their professional training.

Vargas (2021) presents a concept of university social responsibility from the perspective of innovation, indicating that every university should channel “the provision of a public service of knowledge generation where the general interests of citizens, the defense of the common good, and functioning as an agent of change and social improvement must be considered” (p. 442). In line with this, Ruiz (2018) discusses a proposal made by a university in collaboration with the Ministry of Education and three other universities, which involves granting a scholarship to students who have completed their undergraduate studies and wish to pursue a master’s degree within the same institution. This is known as the “Teaching Scholarship,” and its purpose is to provide social and economic support to professionals from any region of Peru, allowing them the opportunity to further their education and become master’s degree holders in their chosen field, with full academic preparation. The aim is to promote a culture of meritocracy within the teaching staff.

In 2017, the Universidad Los Ángeles de Chimbote implemented 3,716 social development projects, involving over 44,399 students and receiving guidance from 537 teachers. The target population benefited from these projects consisted of vulnerable communities in the region where the university is located. Similarly, the Pontifical Catholic University of Peru has made more concrete progress by engaging in activities across various dimensions such as the academic sphere, society, campus, strategic communication, and administrative strategies. Additionally, each organ, department, faculty, academic department, center, and institute within the university aims to strengthen the integration of this important topic in a comprehensive manner ( Villegas and Cairampoma, 2021).

Ortiz (2010) conducted a study on a specific course called “Proyección Social” (PROSODE) offered at the Pontifical Catholic University of Peru (PUCP) in the Law program. PROSODE is based on university social responsibility (USR), and the author emphasizes that the real purpose of USR is to act in the community and have this action benefit the university community as a source of learning. The course is designed for the development and execution of activities and projects for the benefit of citizens. Its objectives include exercising law in favor of those in need, generating experiences related to USR and being a lawyer, understanding the reality of Peru, and preparing students to fulfil their professional roles when the time comes. This perspective is supported by La Cruz, Zelada, Aguirre, and Garro (2022), whose study revealed a direct relationship between USR and four components: ‘Formation’, ‘Research’, ‘Management’, and ‘Extension’. The study concluded that USR is relevant for university institutions to achieve better positioning, as it encompasses aspects such as education, research, management, and extension. It allows for a stronger identity, communication, and image among the target audience. Therefore, policies and procedures should be in place to encourage greater participation of all university members in USR activities ( La Cruz et al., 2022, p.341).

Hinojosa et al. (2022) also emphasize the importance of university social responsibility in the context of teaching and learning. According to these authors, it is necessary to promote a participatory dynamic in university classrooms, utilizing different methods and virtual tools, all from a perspective of social responsibility. They consider social responsibility as a crucial pillar in the theoretical and practical consolidation of teaching processes and aim to ensure that these practices reflect their own characteristics, adapting to any eventualities that may arise ( Hinojosa et al., 2022, p.1094).

In summary, Kovács’s analysis (2016) highlights the importance of generating knowledge and findings based on the national reality, particularly in remote communities, while respecting their human dignity and cultures. It also emphasizes the need to eliminate the limited view of social responsibility as mere donations or sponsorships and instead promote the creation and management of knowledge for the benefit of society.

Díaz, Castillo, and Criollo (2022) point out that in 2020, with the arrival of COVID-19 in Peru, many higher education institutions (HEIs) had to close their doors and pause all scheduled activities for the start of the academic year due to the pandemic. This led to the suspension of in-person activities in universities and the need to implement contingency measures that would allow teaching to continue for students. The quickest solution was to transition to virtual teaching. This change posed a significant institutional challenge as it required guidance not only for students but also for faculty members. The new method of teaching had to maintain the same level of commitment and moral obligation as the classroom setting, ensuring the production of new knowledge relevant to solving citizens’ problems and the direct application of scientific and technological knowledge, as well as a more humanitarian professional preparation ( Díaz et al., 2022, p.335). This means that the essence of university social responsibility should not be neglected. Therefore, “it is necessary for different universities to guarantee the same quality of education in the virtual context as in the in-person setting, which is part of this university social responsibility” ( Díaz et al., 2022, p.336). This should be done while upholding the principles of university social responsibility as a social proposal, as expressed by Albertini (2015), who states that “universities can improve and enrich collaborative work experiences between the state and the population through co-production projects. They can provide guidance for the development of realistic participatory budgets and support their monitoring and proper implementation. They should raise the level of political and public debates by scrutinizing the suitability of proposals and demanding efficient and effective solutions for the problems faced by our communities and regions.”

Now all of this must also be seen from the student’s perspective, whether they perceived and felt that their academic preparation was humanistic and geared towards the country’s development. For this reason, a study was conducted by Pumacayo et al. (2020) to investigate the perceptions of USR among students. The study focused on a group of students from various faculties of a public university in Peru, aiming to understand their perception of USR and whether they believed that the university implemented it in their professional preparation. The results showed that 35.4% of students considered USR to be negative at the university, followed by 33.2% who rated it as average, and only 8.2% rated it as very good.

In universities such as the Hermilio Valdizán National University, activities related to university social responsibility have been carried out through projects and/or plans of University Extension and Social Projection ( Saquicoray and Cuadros, 2015). However, since the concept of social responsibility is broader, some studies indicate that these efforts are not sufficient. According to a study conducted by Condori and Reyna (2019), 58% of students from the Faculty of Sociology at the National University of Central Peru still consider social responsibility to be deficient. This perception includes dimensions such as environmental management and governance, where they also believe that social participation is passive. Therefore, there is still a need to work diligently to strengthen the implementation of university social responsibility in public universities in the interior of the country. While effective social participation is already carried out through volunteer actions, university extension, and social projection, it is necessary to include aspects such as knowledge dissemination and transfer through research and sustainable organizational management ( Condori et al., 2022).

Flores et al. (2022) questioned the constructs that would allow measuring USR from the perception of university students in Peru. To do this, they designed a rating scale to measure university social responsibility from the perspective of Peruvian students and obtained the following dimensions: “Broad and transformative academic education, socio-environmental engagement, socially focused research, and transformative institutional management and administration” ( Flores et al., 2022, p.94). It is worth noting that this scale was validated and reviewed by experts in the field who approved the instrument.

As observed in Peru, the law regulates processes and encourages universities to promote challenges in the education of their professionals, making them socially responsible, useful, and capable of promoting actions that contribute to equality, societal well-being, and sustainable development. According to Severino et al. (2022), university social responsibility incorporates the dimension of sustainable consumption as part of its improvement processes. It can be understood that a socially responsible university student exercises their consumption in a sustainable manner. This implies that the responsibility exercised by the university has a transformative capacity and is a fundamental axis for the implementation of educational policies in different higher education institutions. Therefore, it is essential to seek qualities in teachers, such as mental and emotional management of guiding environments. They should be able to share motivations, achieve the objectives of proposed plans, and improve educational productivity, thus reinforcing the practical dimension of individuals not only through the curriculum but also in other areas such as management, research, and university outreach to society ( Monzón et al., 2022).

Within the literature found, two points are quite clear when discussing university social responsibility. Firstly, the main beneficiary should always be society, as it is where university students coexist, and universities have the fundamental task of implementing and constantly developing USR within their institutions, ensuring its practical application among all members. This is expressed by Ruiz and López (2019) when they state that “the university cannot remain detached from the reality in which it exists; it must be a driver of development and social cohesion.” This should be achieved through various fields, not only through research but also through humanistic, social, and technological practices. Implementing this will provide students with education in principles and ethics, which will positively impact their professional activities and their contribution to society. Bracamonte and Reynafarje (2017) support this by concluding that USR within universities should be oriented towards the commitment that students, teachers, and authorities must have in contributing to the development and formation of a better society.

Although most of the studies included in this review agree in highlighting the importance of USR as a transformative function of the university, critical approaches and divergent points of view were also identified. For example, Albertini (2015) argues that the concept of USR can be redundant or superficial if it is not clearly differentiated from the traditional university social projection. From this perspective, the use of the term USR could be perceived as a discursive adaptation rather than a structural transformation.

Likewise, Zolezzi (2010) warns that many universities, especially private ones, prioritize business training to the detriment of social commitments. This critical view suggests that the implementation of USR is often limited to isolated actions, with no real impact on ethical training or the transformation of the environment. Similarly, studies such as those by Condori and Reyna (2019) show a negative or deficient perception on the part of the student body, which indicates a disconnection between the institutional discourse on USR and its concrete application.

These perspectives highlight the need to critically review university practices and move towards models of USR that are not limited to voluntary or welfare activities, but are deeply articulated with the curriculum, applied research and sustainable development.

It is important to mention that this analysis could have limitations, such as the lack of diversity in the bibliographic sources consulted or the lack of empirical support for the assertions made. In addition, the literature review may be subject to selection biases and limitations in the completeness of the search for sources. It should also be kept in mind that the interpretation of the results may be influenced by the author’s biases or theoretical approaches.

The results have implications relevant to practice, policy, and future research. They support the need for universities to assume university social responsibility as a central aspect, developing programs and practices that foster the engagement of students, faculty and authorities in contributing to social development. This implies practical considerations for the design of curricula, extension programs and university policies. It also suggests areas for future research to better understand the impacts and best practices of university social responsibility in the academic context.

Within the Peruvian context, it is evident that there is still much work to be done, as the student body does not view the promotion of USR within their educational institutions favourably, indicating that they do not feel their academic preparation is being carried out with a responsible focus that benefits society. Pérez (2020) supports this by finding that the perception level of students in a university in Peru regarding university social responsibility was low. This is often because teachers and/or authorities do not encourage it within their educational institutions. Híjar (2018) found that “university authorities interviewed indicated that there are several aspects that can be improved regarding university social responsibility within the educational institution. However, they do not specify what the university is doing to improve it,” and the teaching staff had a moderate perception of USR.

Therefore, there is a need to create additional policies and procedures that encourage greater participation from all members of the university in USR activities, rather than isolated cases in some universities, as evidenced in certain studies. It is worth noting that with the arrival of COVID-19 and the new forms of virtual teaching, it should not be a reason to give up and neglect USR. On the contrary, the necessary conditions must be created for universities to engage in more innovative work, which, in turn, meets the expectations of the community and the country regarding their university graduates.

This systematic review provides a robust analysis of USR in Peru, addressing critical methodological and policy-related gaps. By integrating a comprehensive evaluation of existing literature, discussing practical implications, and incorporating diverse perspectives, this study enhances the discourse on USR and its role in shaping responsible professionals. Future research should focus on longitudinal studies that assess the tangible outcomes of USR initiatives in diverse educational settings.