Author
Listed:
- Giuseppe Crapa
- Paolo Roma
- Manfredi Bruccoleri
Abstract
Most NGO‐corporate relationships have been founded on conflict. However, this pattern has started to change with the emergence of more collaborative (dialog‐based) approaches. Academic inquiry into how NGOs influence corporate policies related to sustainable development is a novel field of investigation. This article aims to identify the potential role of conflictual versus collaborative relationships between NGOs and companies in influencing the quality of the environmental disclosure (ED). We also investigate how NGOs may unintentionally lead companies to adopt greenwashing practices. In this article, we derive five propositions by studying the relationships between Greenpeace and 24 firms operating in the fashion industry through a qualitative longitudinal analysis. We gathered data through three semi‐structured interviews with the Greenpeace Global Corporate Leader of the Detox Campaign and content analysis of corporate communication documents. Our findings suggest that company behavior toward ED and the odds of greenwashing practices are affected by type of relationship established with NGOs. Specifically, if the NGO‐corporate relationship is conflictual, companies tend to achieve higher ED quality in the short and intermediate terms. Vice versa, more collaborative (dialog‐based) relationships result in initially low ED quality. However, in the long run, under both types of relationship the quality of ED settles at a medium level. Moreover, NGOs' communication, activism intensity, and pressure constitute powerful means of persuasion and contribute to increasing a campaign engagement rate. However, too much pressure may create a fertile ground for greenwashing, and so may an everlasting conflictual relationship between NGO and companies.
Suggested Citation
Giuseppe Crapa & Paolo Roma & Manfredi Bruccoleri, 2025.
"The influence of NGO‐corporate relationship on environmental disclosure: Evidence from the fashion industry,"
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(2), pages 2104-2127, March.
Handle:
RePEc:wly:corsem:v:32:y:2025:i:2:p:2104-2127
DOI: 10.1002/csr.3056
Download full text from publisher
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:wly:corsem:v:32:y:2025:i:2:p:2104-2127. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1535-3966 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.