IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i4p601-d95755.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Influence of the Sustainability Logic on Carbon Disclosure in the Global Logistics Industry: The Case of DHL, FDX and UPS

Author

Listed:
  • David M. Herold

    (Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD 4111, Australia)

  • Ki-Hoon Lee

    (Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD 4111, Australia)

Abstract

As a significant contributor to carbon emissions, global logistics companies are under scrutiny from various stakeholders, and respond by disclosing carbon-related information in the form of carbon reports. Carbon disclosure is, however, a mainly voluntary practice that allows for a broad range of interpretation from the management field, which leads to different approaches to the measurement and reporting of carbon-related information. From a theoretical perspective, these different carbon-disclosure approaches in global logistics companies can be attributed to the underlying construct of competing logics, namely the market and the sustainability logic. While competing logics are frequently discussed in the current literature, little is known about their influence on shaping carbon-disclosure practices. The aim of this paper is to examine the similarities and differences in the measurement and reporting of carbon-related information in order to capture the underlying logic that drives carbon-disclosure behaviour in the global logistics industry. We adopt an interpretative content analysis approach and examine the carbon-related information using the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) reports of DHL, FDX and UPS. The analysis reveals significant differences in the applied carbon-disclosure strategies, as well as in the degree of transparency between the three companies. The results also indicate that the carbon-disclosure practices of FDX are dominated by a market logic that emphasizes the economic benefits of carbon reductions, while DHL and UPS have prioritized the sustainability logic to gain a competitive advantage.

Suggested Citation

  • David M. Herold & Ki-Hoon Lee, 2017. "The Influence of the Sustainability Logic on Carbon Disclosure in the Global Logistics Industry: The Case of DHL, FDX and UPS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-21, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:4:p:601-:d:95755
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/4/601/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/4/601/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kaushik Sridhar, 2012. "Corporate conceptions of triple bottom line reporting: an empirical analysis into the signs and symbols driving this fashionable framework," Social Responsibility Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 8(3), pages 312-326, July.
    2. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    3. Hopwood, Anthony G., 2009. "Accounting and the environment," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(3-4), pages 433-439, April.
    4. Crawford, Sue E. S. & Ostrom, Elinor, 1995. "A Grammar of Institutions," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(3), pages 582-600, September.
    5. Royston Greenwood & Amalia Magán Díaz & Stan Xiao Li & José Céspedes Lorente, 2010. "The Multiplicity of Institutional Logics and the Heterogeneity of Organizational Responses," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(2), pages 521-539, April.
    6. Kim Hammond & Samantha Miles, 2004. "Assessing quality assessment of corporate social reporting: UK perspectives," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 61-79, March.
    7. Levy David L. & Kolk Ans, 2002. "Strategic Responses to Global Climate Change: Conflicting Pressures on Multinationals in the Oil Industry," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(3), pages 1-27, November.
    8. Ki-Hoon Lee & Stephan Vachon, 2016. "Business Value and Sustainability," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-137-43576-7, October.
    9. Sofie Bouteligier, 2011. "Exploring the agency of global environmental consultancy firms in earth system governance," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 43-61, March.
    10. Sue Hrasky, 2011. "Carbon footprints and legitimation strategies: symbolism or action?," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 25(1), pages 174-198, December.
    11. Peter Oberhofer & Maria Dieplinger, 2014. "Sustainability in the Transport and Logistics Sector: Lacking Environmental Measures," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(4), pages 236-253, May.
    12. Ans Kolk & David Levy & Jonatan Pinkse, 2008. "Corporate Responses in an Emerging Climate Regime: The Institutionalization and Commensuration of Carbon Disclosure," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 719-745.
    13. Levy, David L. & Kolk, Ans, 2002. "Strategic Responses to Global Climate Change: Conflicting Pressures on Multinationals in the Oil Industry," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(3), pages 275-300, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alvaro Plinio Pureza & Ki‐Hoon Lee, 2020. "Corporate social responsibility leadership for sustainable development: An institutional logics perspective in Brazil," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 1410-1424, May.
    2. Marko M. Mihić & Svetlana Shevchenko & Ema D. Gligorijević & Dejan Č. Petrović, 2019. "Towards Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility Approach in International Projects—Review of South-South Cooperation: A Case Study of Chinese Projects in Angola," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-16, May.
    3. Mario Dobrovnik & David M. Herold & Elmar Fürst & Sebastian Kummer, 2018. "Blockchain for and in Logistics: What to Adopt and Where to Start," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-14, September.
    4. Teruel-Gutiérrez, Ricardo, 2020. "Sustainability as a Corporate Strategy: A Performance Comparison of Green and Non-green SME Hotels," Small Business International Review, Asociación Española de Contabilidad y Administración de Empresas - AECA, vol. 4(2), pages 30-38, July.
    5. David M. Herold, 2018. "Has Carbon Disclosure Become More Transparent in the Global Logistics Industry? An Investigation of Corporate Carbon Disclosure Strategies Between 2010 and 2015," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-16, July.
    6. Cheng Qian & Shenghui Wang & Xiaohong Liu & Xueying Zhang, 2019. "Low-Carbon Initiatives of Logistics Service Providers: The Perspective of Supply Chain Integration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-13, June.

    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. Zahra Borghei, 2021. "Carbon disclosure: a systematic literature review," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(4), pages 5255-5280, December.
    2. Konstantinos Evangelinos & Ioannis Nikolaou & Walter Leal Filho, 2015. "The Effects of Climate Change Policy on the Business Community: A Corporate Environmental Accounting Perspective," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(5), pages 257-270, September.
    3. Binh Hoang Duc & Khang Do Ba, 2017. "Business responses to climate change: strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Vietnam," Asia Pacific Business Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(4), pages 596-620, August.
    4. Breeda Comyns, 2016. "Determinants of GHG Reporting: An Analysis of Global Oil and Gas Companies," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 136(2), pages 349-369, June.
    5. Thomas A. Tsalis & Ioannis E. Nikolaou, 2017. "Assessing the Effects of Climate Change Regulations on the Business Community: A System Dynamic Approach," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(6), pages 826-843, September.
    6. Chaiyapa, Warathida & Esteban, Miguel & Kameyama, Yasuko, 2018. "Why go green? Discourse analysis of motivations for Thailand's oil and gas companies to invest in renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 448-459.
    7. Tiberio Daddi & Niccolò Maria Todaro & Maria Rosa De Giacomo & Marco Frey, 2018. "A Systematic Review of the Use of Organization and Management Theories in Climate Change Studies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 456-474, May.
    8. Burkard Eberlein & Dirk Matten, 2009. "Business Responses to Climate Change Regulation in Canada and Germany: Lessons for MNCs from Emerging Economies," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 86(2), pages 241-255, March.
    9. Matthew M Haigh & Matthew A Shapiro, 2013. "Do Environmental Policy Instruments Influence Fiduciaries' Decisions?," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 45(4), pages 853-871, April.
    10. Amar Hisham Jaaffar & Azlan Amran & Jegatheesan Rajadurai, 2018. "The Impact of Institutional Pressures of Climate Change Concerns on Corporate Environmental Reporting Practices: A Descriptive Study of Malaysia’s Environmentally Sensitive Public Listed Companies," SAGE Open, , vol. 8(2), pages 21582440187, May.
    11. Sarasini, Steven, 2013. "Institutional work and climate change: Corporate political action in the Swedish electricity industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 480-489.
    12. Samuel Tang & David Demeritt, 2018. "Climate Change and Mandatory Carbon Reporting: Impacts on Business Process and Performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 437-455, May.
    13. Jose-Manuel Prado-Lorenzo & Isabel-Maria Garcia-Sanchez, 2010. "The Role of the Board of Directors in Disseminating Relevant Information on Greenhouse Gases," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 97(3), pages 391-424, December.
    14. Øyvind Ihlen, 2009. "The oxymoron of ‘sustainable oil production’: the case of the Norwegian oil industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 53-63, January.
    15. Chaiyapa, Warathida & Esteban, Miguel & Kameyama, Yasuko, 2016. "Sectoral approaches establishment for climate change mitigation in Thailand upstream oil and gas industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 204-213.
    16. Natalie Slawinski & Jonatan Pinkse & Timo Busch & Subhabrata Bobby Banerjeed, 2014. "The role of short-termism and uncertainty in organizational inaction on climate change: multilevel framework," Working Papers hal-00961226, HAL.
    17. Mäkitie, Tuukka & Normann, Håkon E. & Thune, Taran M. & Sraml Gonzalez, Jakoba, 2019. "The green flings: Norwegian oil and gas industry’s engagement in offshore wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 269-279.
    18. Hao Tan, 2017. "Making impact through industry-focused research: An Asia Pacific perspective," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 487-503, September.
    19. Ozgur Isil & Michael T. Hernke, 2017. "The Triple Bottom Line: A Critical Review from a Transdisciplinary Perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(8), pages 1235-1251, December.
    20. Julia Hamprecht & Jan Schwarzkopf, 2014. "Subsidiary Initiatives in the Institutional Environment," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 54(5), pages 757-778, October.

    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:9:y:2017:i:4:p:601-:d:95755. 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.