Carbon footprints and legitimation strategies: symbolism or action?

Abstract

Purpose -Climate change and carbon footprints are among the most urgent concerns facing society and are key issues of corporate responsibility. The purpose of this study is to assess whether Australian companies have adjusted their footprint-related disclosure responses. Adopting a legitimacy perspective, a key aim is to assess whether pragmatic or moral legitimation approaches dominate by determining whether disclosure tends to be more reflective of symbolism or of apparent behaviour. Design/methodology/approach -Content analysis of the sustainability and annual reports of the ASX's Top 50 companies is undertaken to compare carbon footprint-related disclosures in 2008 and 2005. Their extent and nature (action or symbolism) and the use of attention-attracting devices are reported for the more carbon intensive and less carbon intensive sectors. Findings -Footprint-related disclosure rates are increasing, and disclosure is being signalled more prominently. However, while carbon-intensive sectors appear to be pursuing a moral legitimation strategy underpinned by substantive action, the less intensive sectors are relying more heavily on symbolic disclosure. Research limitations/implications -The sample size is small and comprises only large listed Australian companies. Practical implications -While the carbon-intensive sectors appear to be taking encouraging actions, a regulatory response may be required for the less carbon-intensive sectors to take advantage of their market power to facilitate cooperative carbon reduction with broader constituent groups. Further, incentives for the carbon-intensive sectors may be needed to encourage ongoing efforts to bridge the carbon chasm that is emerging. Originality/value -This study appears to be the first to provide direct Australian evidence on favoured legitimation tactics by assessing the symbolic versus behavioural management implicit in carbon footprint-related disclosures.

Strategies for Climate Change and Impression Management: A Case Study Among Canada’s Large Industrial Emitters

“…However, this type of exemplification tends to rely on unreliable information. In fact, regardless of the nature of the actions implemented by companies, numerous studies question the quality, usefulness, and comparability of the disclosed environmental data, also in the field of climate performance (e.g., Cowan and Deegan 2011;Green and Li 2012;Hrasky 2012;Kolk et al 2008;Talbot and Boiral 2013). In general, as in the case of sustainability reporting, the disclosure process on climate change issues appears to be influenced more by the logic of public relations than by transparency (Boiral 2013;Unerman et al 2007).…”

“…The disclosure of climate performance can also be achieved through more specific media, such as the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), in which a growing number of FT500 companies participate (Pinkse and Kolk 2009). Regardless of the mode of disclosure used, business decisions in this area are not necessarily motivated by the search for more transparency and accountability (e.g., Dawkins and Fraas 2010;Hrasky 2012;Rankin et al 2011;Reid and Toffel 2009). According to the voluntary disclosure theory, proactive organizations tend to use sustainability reports to demonstrate their commitment and good performance in this area (e.g., Bewley and Li 2000;Clarkson et al 2008).…”

“…Faced with increasing pressures from stakeholders, companies are called to develop performance indicators and to disclose information on climate performance in order to legitimize their industrial activities (e.g., Cowan and Deegan 2011;Dawkins and Fraas 2010;Hrasky 2012;Prado-Lorenzo and Garcia-Sanchez 2010;Prado-Lorenzo et al 2009). Disclosing information on climate issues can be done through sustainability reporting, the use of which has become widespread among large companies (Gray 2006;Perego and Kolk 2012;Unerman et al 2007).…”

Has Carbon Disclosure Become More Transparent in the Global Logistics Industry? An Investigation of Corporate Carbon Disclosure Strategies Between 2010 and 2015

“…Existing research, however, found that companies implement carbon management practices in different ways and to different extents [8][9][10][11][12]. Research links the difference in applied carbon management practices to the various multiple pressures, and current literature distinguishes between internal and external pressures and a company's reaction to these pressures [8,9,13]. For instance, institutions such as Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) increasingly put pressure on organizations to disclose their carbon related information and companies respond internally to these demands by integrating carbon management practices into their operations, structures and processes [14][15][16].…”

“…In corporate circles, the response to these pressures by implementing various carbon management practices is increasingly regarded as a key strategic component for a company's long-term sustainability [5][6][7]. Existing research, however, found that companies implement carbon management practices in different ways and to different extents [8][9][10][11][12]. Research links the difference in applied carbon management practices to the various multiple pressures, and current literature distinguishes between internal and external pressures and a company's reaction to these pressures [8,9,13].…”