IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v123y2014i3p401-420.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Legitimizing Negative Aspects in GRI-Oriented Sustainability Reporting: A Qualitative Analysis of Corporate Disclosure Strategies

Author

Listed:
  • Rüdiger Hahn

    ()

  • Regina Lülfs

Abstract

Corporate sustainability reports are supposed to provide a complete and balanced picture of corporate sustainability performance. They are, however, usually voluntary and thus prone to interpretation and even greenwashing tendencies. To overcome this problem, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) provides standardized reporting guidelines challenging companies to report positive and negative aspects of an organization’s sustainability performance. However, the reporting of “negative aspects” in particular can endanger corporate legitimacy if perceived by the stakeholders as not being in line with societal norms and values. Starting from the theoretical lenses of economics-based disclosure theories and socio-political theories of disclosure, the focus of this study therefore was to analyze the communicative legitimation strategies companies use to report “negative aspects,” i.e., negative ecological and social impact caused by corporate activity. Using qualitative content analysis of GRI-oriented sustainability reports from companies listed on the US Dow Jones Industrial Average Index and on the German DAX Index, we identified six legitimation strategies. We discuss these strategies regarding to symbolic and substantial management of legitimacy. We show that symbolic legitimation strategies aiming at modifying the perception of legitimizing stakeholders dominate in the reports at hand. Such persuasion, however, does not meet the requirement of impartiality as postulated by the GRI guidelines. Building upon this conclusion we propose a concise characterization of “negative aspects” and develop a GRI-compliant schema of reporting about them. In doing so, we offer a way to improve the overall “balance” of sustainability reporting contributing to a true and fair view in sustainability disclosure. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Rüdiger Hahn & Regina Lülfs, 2014. "Legitimizing Negative Aspects in GRI-Oriented Sustainability Reporting: A Qualitative Analysis of Corporate Disclosure Strategies," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 123(3), pages 401-420, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:123:y:2014:i:3:p:401-420
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-013-1801-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10551-013-1801-4
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Blacconiere, Walter G. & Patten, Dennis M., 1994. "Environmental disclosures, regulatory costs, and changes in firm value," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 357-377, November.
    2. Ataur Belal & Robin Roberts, 2010. "Stakeholders’ Perceptions of Corporate Social Reporting in Bangladesh," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 97(2), pages 311-324, December.
    3. Skinner, Dj, 1994. "Why Firms Voluntarily Disclose Bad-News," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 38-60.
    4. Hughes, Susan B. & Anderson, Allison & Golden, Sarah, 2001. "Corporate environmental disclosures: are they useful in determining environmental performance?," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 217-240.
    5. Haniffa, R.M. & Cooke, T.E., 2005. "The impact of culture and governance on corporate social reporting," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 391-430.
    6. Patten, Dennis M., 2002. "The relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: a research note," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 763-773, November.
    7. Giacomo Manetti & Lucia Becatti, 2009. "Assurance Services for Sustainability Reports: Standards and Empirical Evidence," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 87(1), pages 289-298, April.
    8. Joseph, George, 2012. "Ambiguous but tethered: An accounting basis for sustainability reporting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 93-106.
    9. Neu, D. & Warsame, H. & Pedwell, K., 1998. "Managing public impressions: environmental disclosures in annual reports," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 265-282, April.
    10. Patten, Dennis M., 1992. "Intra-industry environmental disclosures in response to the Alaskan oil spill: A note on legitimacy theory," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 471-475, July.
    11. Doris M. Merkl-Davies & Niamh Brennan, 2007. "Discretionary disclosure strategies in corporate narratives : incremental information or impression management?," Open Access publications 10197/2907, Research Repository, University College Dublin.
    12. Våland, Terje & Heide, Morten, 2005. "Corporate Social Responsiveness:: Exploring the Dynamics of "Bad Episodes"," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 495-506, October.
    13. Sue Hrasky, 2012. "Carbon footprints and legitimation strategies: symbolism or action?," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 25(1), pages 174-198, March.
    14. Itziar Castelló & Josep Lozano, 2011. "Searching for New Forms of Legitimacy Through Corporate Responsibility Rhetoric," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 100(1), pages 11-29, April.
    15. Charles Cho, 2009. "Legitimation Strategies Used in Response to Environmental Disaster: A French Case Study of Total SA's Erika and AZF Incidents," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 33-62.
    16. Barbara Lougee & James Wallace, 2008. "The Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Trend," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 20(1), pages 96-108, December.
    17. Lori Holder-Webb & Jeffrey Cohen & Leda Nath & David Wood, 2009. "The Supply of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosures Among U.S. Firms," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 84(4), pages 497-527, February.
    18. Guidry, Ronald P. & Patten, Dennis M., 2012. "Voluntary disclosure theory and financial control variables: An assessment of recent environmental disclosure research," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 81-90.
    19. Richard Boele & Heike Fabig & David Wheeler, 2001. "Shell, Nigeria and the Ogoni. A study in unsustainable development: I. The story of Shell, Nigeria and the Ogoni people - environment, economy, relationships: conflict and prospects for resolution," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(2), pages 74-86.
    20. Lang, M & Lundholm, R, 1993. "Cross-Sectional Determinants Of Analyst Ratings Of Corporate Disclosures," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 246-271.
    21. Clarkson, Peter M. & Li, Yue & Richardson, Gordon D. & Vasvari, Florin P., 2008. "Revisiting the relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: An empirical analysis," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(4-5), pages 303-327.
    22. Verrecchia, Robert E., 1983. "Discretionary disclosure," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 179-194, April.
    23. Guido Palazzo & Andreas Scherer, 2006. "Corporate Legitimacy as Deliberation: A Communicative Framework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 66(1), pages 71-88, June.
    24. Thomas Riise Johansen, 2010. "Employees, Non-financial Reports and Institutional Arrangements: A Study of Accounts in the Workplace," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 97-130.
    25. Michael Spence, 1973. "Job Market Signaling," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 87(3), pages 355-374.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:123:y:2014:i:3:p:401-420. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla) or (Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.