IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i3p2766-d1056360.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The ESG Discourse Is Neither Timeless Nor Stable: How Danish Companies ‘Tactically’ Embrace ESG Concepts

Author

Listed:
  • Henrik Nielsen

    (Department of Finance, Copenhagen Business School, Porcelaenshaven 18a, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark)

  • Kaspar Villadsen

    (Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy, Copenhagen Business School, Porcelaenshaven 18a, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark)

Abstract

During the last decade, ESG has become a globally widespread doctrine of good investment principles. ESG defines investing for broader, extra-financial goals by the use of “environmental, social and governance” (ESG) factors. While commentators generally agree that ESG has become a crucial arena for defining responsible investment, research is so far scarce on the conceptual development of the ESG discourse as well as how companies articulate it in their public communication. By analysing ESG concepts, this article combines methods derived from corpus linguistics with dispositional analytics, inspired by Michel Foucault. The data material consists of 281 annual reports, which contain the self-representation of 24 Danish large-cap companies, including how they communicated their ESG policies from 2010 to 2021. The analysis displays the proliferation of specific ESG keywords as well as changes over time in their frequency, proportional to each other. We supplement the quantitative analyses with dispositional analytics, considering how the dispositives of law, discipline, and security condition Danish companies’ adoption of ESG. We also discuss how companies use ESG concepts ‘tactically’ to navigate a context, in which the dispositives ‘over-determine’ urgent environmental, social, and governance issues.

Suggested Citation

  • Henrik Nielsen & Kaspar Villadsen, 2023. "The ESG Discourse Is Neither Timeless Nor Stable: How Danish Companies ‘Tactically’ Embrace ESG Concepts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-26, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:3:p:2766-:d:1056360
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/3/2766/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/3/2766/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:eme:aaaj00:09513571111184788 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Helen Tregidga & Markus J. Milne, 2006. "From sustainable management to sustainable development: a longitudinal analysis of a leading New Zealand environmental reporter," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(4), pages 219-241, July.
    3. Roberts, John, 2009. "No one is perfect: The limits of transparency and an ethic for 'intelligent' accountability," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 957-970, November.
    4. Jill F. Solomon & Aris Solomon & Simon D. Norton & Nathan L. Joseph, 2011. "Private climate change reporting: an emerging discourse of risk and opportunity?," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 24(8), pages 1119-1148, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dillard, Jesse & Vinnari, Eija, 2019. "Critical dialogical accountability: From accounting-based accountability to accountability-based accounting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 16-38.
    2. Solomon, Jill F. & Solomon, Aris & Joseph, Nathan L. & Norton, Simon D., 2013. "Impression management, myth creation and fabrication in private social and environmental reporting: Insights from Erving Goffman," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 195-213.
    3. Journeault, Marc & Levant, Yves & Picard, Claire-France, 2021. "Sustainability performance reporting: A technocratic shadowing and silencing," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    4. Lehman, Glen, 2010. "Perspectives on accounting, commonalities & the public sphere," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 21(8), pages 724-738.
    5. Guénin-Paracini, Henri & Malsch, Bertrand & Paillé, Anne Marché, 2014. "Fear and risk in the audit process," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 264-288.
    6. Karunakaran, Arvind & Orlikowski, Wanda J. & Scott, Susan V., 2022. "Crowd-based accountability: examining how social media commentary reconfigures organizational accountability," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114401, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Alexandra Rausch & Alexander Brauneis, 2015. "It’s about how the task is set: the inclusion–exclusion effect and accountability in preprocessing management information," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 23(2), pages 313-344, June.
    8. Matias Laine, 2009. "Ensuring legitimacy through rhetorical changes?," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 22(7), pages 1029-1054, September.
    9. Evangeline O. Elijido-Ten & Peter Clarkson, 2019. "Going Beyond Climate Change Risk Management: Insights from the World’s Largest Most Sustainable Corporations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 157(4), pages 1067-1089, July.
    10. Robbins, Geraldine & Lapsley, Irvine, 2015. "From secrecy to transparency: Accounting and the transition from religious charity to publicly-owned hospital," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 19-32.
    11. Christopher, Joe, 2012. "Tension between the corporate and collegial cultures of Australian public universities: The current status," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 23(7), pages 556-571.
    12. Yuchen Shen & Mohammad Tazul Islam & Michiyuki Yagi & Katsuhiko Kokubu, 2015. "How do firms' climate-related management and strategy affect climate change risks and opportunities awareness?," Discussion Papers 2015-26, Kobe University, Graduate School of Business Administration.
    13. Maria Järlström & Essi Saru & Sinikka Vanhala, 2018. "Sustainable Human Resource Management with Salience of Stakeholders: A Top Management Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 703-724, October.
    14. Saravanamuthu, Kala & Lehman, Cheryl, 2013. "Enhancing stakeholder interaction through environmental risk accounts," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 410-437.
    15. Goddard, Andrew, 2021. "Accountability and accounting in the NGO field comprising the UK and Africa – A Bordieusian analysis," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    16. Qian, Wei & Schaltegger, Stefan, 2017. "Revisiting carbon disclosure and performance: Legitimacy and management views," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 365-379.
    17. Roberts, John, 2021. "The boundary of the ‘economic’: Financial accounting, corporate ‘imaginaries’ and human sentience," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    18. Victoria Pagan & Kathryn Haynes & Stefanie Reissner, 2023. "Accountable Selves and Responsibility Within a Global Forum," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 187(2), pages 255-270, October.
    19. María Luisa Pajuelo Moreno & Teresa Duarte-Atoche, 2019. "Relationship between Sustainable Disclosure and Performance—An Extension of Ullmann’s Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-33, August.
    20. Vuontisjärvi, Taru, 2013. "Argumentation and socially questionable business practices: The case of employee downsizing in corporate annual reports," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 292-313.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:3:p:2766-:d:1056360. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.