This article analyzes sustainability values reports published by The Body Shop International and bythe Royal Dutch/Shell Group. The authors show how corporate discourses expressed in these precedent-setting texts both reflect and influence sociopolitical struggle over the meanings and practices of sustainable development. Specifically, the authors examine metaphors of transparencyand care used to describe corporate rationales for increasing stake-holder communication, including reporting. Drawing on distinct discursive domains of business accountancyand personal ethics and sentiment, these metaphors promise to reconstruct the interface between the firm and society. Exploring the quite different assumptions on which each of these metaphors relies and their implications for corporate practices of sustainable development, the authors consider whether sustainability values reporting and the dialogue that it claims to facilitate can promote more democratic and socially and environmentally responsive corporate decision making, even as they impose new forms of managerial control.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alvesson, M. , & Kärreman, D. (2000). Varieties of discourse: On the study of organizations through discourse analysis. Human Relations, 53(9), 1125-1149.
2.
Andersen, R. (1995). Consumer culture & TV programming. Boulder, CO: Westview.
3.
Andersen, R. (2000). Road to ruin: The cultural myths of SUVs. In R. Andersen & L. Strate (Eds.), Critical studies in media commercialism (pp. 158-172). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
4.
Barkin, D. (1998). Sustainability: The political economy of autonomous development. Organization & Environment, 11(1), 5-32.
5.
Bavaria, J. (1995, February 21). Address to the Environmental Law Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
6.
The Body Shop International . (1996, January). The values report 1995. Littlehampton, UK: Author.
7.
The Body Shop International . (1998a, January). The road ahead: A summary of The Body Shop Values Report 1997. Littlehampton, UK: Author.
8.
The Body Shop International. (1998b, January). The values report 1997. Available from http://www.thebodyshop.com/global/values/reporting/values97.pdf
9.
Burchell, S. , Clubb, C., & Hopwood, A. G. (1985). Accountingin its social context: Towards a history of value added in the United Kingdom. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 10(4), 381-414.
10.
Buttel, F. H. (1998). Some observations on states, world orders and the politics of sustainability. Organization & Environment, 11(3), 261-286.
11.
Campbell, D. J. (2000). Legitimacy theory or managerial reality construction? Corporate social disclosure in Marks and Spencer PLC corporate reports. Accounting Forum, 24(1), 80-100.
12.
Carson, R. (1994). Silent spring. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. (Original work published 1962)
13.
Cheney, G. , & Christensen, L. T. (2001). Identity at issue: Linkages between “internal” and “external” organizational communication. In F. M. Jablin & L. L. Putnam (Eds.), New handbook of organizational communication (pp. 231-269). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14.
Chouliaraki, L. , & Fairclough, N. (1999). Discourse in late modernity: Rethinking critical discourse analysis. Edinburgh, Scotland: Edinburgh University Press.
15.
Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu International, International Institute of Sustainable Development, & Sustain Ability. (1993). Coming clean. London: Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu International.
16.
Eccles, R. G. , Herz, R. H., Keegan, E. M., & Phillips, D.M.H. (2001). The Value Reporting™ revolution: Moving beyond the earnings game. New York: John Wiley.
17.
Elkington, J. (1998). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st centurybusiness. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society.
18.
Elkington, J. (with Burke, T.). (1987). The green capitalists: Industry’s search for environmental excellence. London: Victor Golanz.
19.
Entine, J. (1994, September/October). Shattered image. Business Ethics, pp. 23-28.
20.
Everett, J. , & Neu, D. (2000). Ecological modernization and the limits of environmental accounting?Accounting Forum, 24(1), 5-29.
21.
Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
22.
Foucault, M. (1973). The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences. New York: Vintage.
23.
Foucault, M. (1977a). The archaeology of knowledge. London: Tavistock.
24.
Foucault, M. (1977b). Discipline and punish. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
25.
Foucault, M. (1979). The history of sexuality (Vol. 1). New York: Pantheon.
26.
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972-1977 (C. Gordon, Ed.). New York: Pantheon.
27.
Foucault, M. (1984). The Foucault reader (P. Rabinow, Ed.). New York: Pantheon.
28.
Gibson-Graham, J. K. (1994). “Stuffed if I know!”: Reflection on postmodern feminist social research. Gender, Place and Culture, 2, 205-224.
29.
Global Reporting Initiative. (2000, June). Sustainability reporting guidelines. Available from http://www. globalreporting.org
30.
Goldsmith, R. , & Allen, R. (Eds.). (1971). The ecologist: Small is beautiful. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
31.
Gray, R. (1992). Accountingand environmentalism: An exploration of the challenge of gently accounting for accountability, transparency and sustainability. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(5), 399-425.
32.
Gray, R. , Kouhy, R., & Lavers, S. (1995). Corporate social and environmental reporting: A review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 8(2), 47-77.
33.
Gray, R. , Owen, D., & Adams, C. (1996). Accounting and accountability: Changes and challenges in corporate social and environmental reporting. London: Prentice Hall.
34.
Gray, R. H. , & Collison, D. J. (1991). Disclosure: The movement towards environmental disclosure. In T. Burke, N. Robins, & A. Trisoglio (Eds.), Environment strategy Europe (pp. 195-198). London: Campden.
35.
Gray, R. H. , & Symon, R. W. (1992, March). Environmental reporting: BSO/origin. Integrated Environmental Management, 7, 8-10.
36.
Hajer, M. A. (1997). The politics of environmental discourse: Ecological modernization and the policyprocess. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.
37.
Hart, S. (1997). Beyond greening: Strategies for a sustainable world. Harvard Business Review, 75, 66-76.
38.
Hopwood, A. G. , & Miller, P. (Eds.). (1994). Accounting as social and institutional practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
39.
Hoskin, K. , & Macve, R. H. (1986). Accounting and the examination: A genealogy of disciplinary power. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 11(2), 105-136.
40.
Hoskin, K. , & Macve, R. H. (1988). The genesis of accountability: The West Point connections. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 13(1), 37-73.
41.
Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales. (1997). Towards a market-led reporting model. Available from http://www.icaew.co.uk/depts/td/tdcgg/editorial.htm
42.
Karkkainen, B. C. (2001). Information as environmental regulation: TRI and performance benchmarking. Precursor to a new paradigm?Georgetown Law Journal, 89, 257-370.
43.
Killingsworth, M. J. , & Palmer, J. S. (1992). Ecospeak: Rhetoric and environmental politics in America. Carbondale: University of Southern Illinois Press.
44.
Knight, P. (1998). Profits and principles—Does there have to be a choice? (The Shell Report 1998). London: Shell International.
45.
Knight, P. (1999). People, planet & profits: An act of commitment (The Shell Report 1999). London: Shell International.
46.
Knight, P. (2000). The global debate continues (The Shell Report 2000). London: Shell International.
47.
Knight, P. (2001). How do we stand? People, planet & profits (The Shell Report 2001). London: Shell International.
48.
Knights, D. , & Collinson, D. (1987). Disciplining the shop floor: A comparison of the disciplinary effects of managerial psychology and financial accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 12(5), 457-478.
49.
Lawrence, A. (1999). Shell oil in Nigeria (Online case study, Council for Ethics in Economics). Available from www.i-case.com/cases/shella/docs/contents.htm
50.
Layder, D. (1994). Understanding social theory. London: Sage.
51.
Levy, D. L. (1997). Environmental management as political sustainability. Organization & Environment, 10(2), 126-147.
52.
Livesey, S. (1999). McDonald’s and the Environmental Defense Fund: A case study of a green alliance. Journal of Business Communication, 36(1), 5-39.
53.
Livesey, S. M. (2001). Eco-identity as discursive struggle: Royal Dutch/Shell, Brent Spar, and Nigeria. Journal of Business Communication, 38(1), 58-91.
54.
Livesey, S. M. (2002a). The discourse of the middle ground: Citizen Shell commits to sustainable development. Management Communication Quarterly, 15(3), 309-343.
55.
Livesey, S. M. (2002b). Global warmingwars: Rhetorical and discourse analytic approaches to Exxon Mobil’s corporate public discourse. Journal of Business Communication, 39(1), 117-148.
56.
Loft, A. (1986). Toward a critical understanding of accounting: The case of cost accounting in the UK: 1914-1925. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 11(2), 137-169.
57.
Lowenstein, L. (1996). Financial transparency and corporate governance: You manage what you measure. Columbia Law Review, 96, 1335-1362.
58.
Madrick, J. (2002, March 14). Enron: Seduction and betrayal. The New York Review of Books, 49(4), 21-24.
59.
Mayhew, N. (1998, August 10). Trouble with the triple bottom line. Financial Times, p. 10-10.
60.
Meadowcroft, J. (2000). Sustainable development: A new(ish) idea for a new century?Political Studies, 48, 370-387.
61.
Meadows, D. L. , Randers, J., & Behrens, W. W. (1972). The limits to growth—A report for the Club of Rome’s project on the predicament of mankind. London: Pan.
62.
Morgan, G. (1988). Accounting as reality construction: Toward a new epistemology for accountingpractice. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 13(5), 477-485.
63.
Nash, J. , & Ehrenfeld, J. (1996). Code green: Business adopts voluntary environmental standards. Environment, 38(1), 16-30.
64.
Newton, T. , & Harte, G. (1997). Green business: Technicist kitsch?Journal of Management Studies, 34(1), 75-98.
65.
Peterson, T. R. (1997). Sharing the earth: The rhetoric of sustainable development. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
66.
Plant, C. , & Albert, D. H. (1991). Green business in a gray world: Can it be done? An introduction. In C. Plant & J. Plant (Eds.), Green business: Hope or hoax? (pp. 1-8). Philadelphia: New Society.
67.
Poovey, M. (1998). A history of the modern fact: Problems of knowledge in the sciences of wealth and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
68.
Porter, T. M. (1995). Trust in numbers: The pursuit of objectivityin science and public life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
69.
Power, M. (1991). Auditingand environmentalism expertise: Between protest and professionalism. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 4, 30-42.
70.
Powers, W. C., Jr., Troubh, R. S., & Winokur, H. S., Jr. (2002, February 1). Report of investigation bythe special investigative committee of the board of directors of Enron Corp. Available from http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/enron/sicreport
71.
Roberts, R. W. (1992). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An application of stakeholder theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(6), 595-612.
72.
Rothermund, H. (1997, May 20). Matching green words with clear actions. Available from http://www.shell.com.uk/news/speech/spe_dialogue.htm
73.
Shell International . (1998). Report on health, safety and environmental performance 1998. London: Author.
74.
Smart, B. (1983). Foucault, Marxism and critique. London: Routledge Kegan Paul.
75.
Solomon, A. (2000). Could corporate environmental reportingshadow financial reporting?Accounting Forum, 24(1), 30-56.
76.
Spencer-Cooke, A. , & Elkington, J. (1996, November). Engaging stakeholders: The benchmark survey: The second international progress report on company environmental reporting (1st ed.). London: Sustainability Ltd. and the United Nations Environment Programme.
77.
Srikantia, P. , & Bilimoria, D. (1997). Isomorphism in organization and management theory: The case of research on sustainability. Organization & Environment, 11(3), 261-286.
78.
Sustain Ability & United Nations Environment Programme. (1994). Company environmental reporting: A measure of the progress of business and industrytowards sustainable development (Technical Report No. 24). Paris: United Nations Environment Programme.
79.
Sustain Ability & United Nations Environment Programme. (1997, December). Engaging stakeholders: The 1997 benchmark survey: The third international progress report on company environmental reporting. London: Sustain Ability Ltd.
80.
Sustain Ability & United Nations Environment Programme. (2000, November). The global reporters [4th international survey of corporate reports and reporting]. London: Sustain Ability Ltd.
81.
Turner, G. (1992). British cultural studies: An introduction. New York: Routledge.
82.
Van der Veer, J. (1998). Inzicht door doorzicht [Insight through openness]. Available from http://www.shell.com/library/speech/9,15253360,00.html
83.
Welcomer, S. A. , Gioia, D. A., & Kilduff, M. (2000). Resistingthe discourse of modernity: Rationality versus emotion in hazardous wastesiting. Human Relations, 53(9),1175-1205.
84.
Welford, R. , & Gouldson, A. (1993). Environmental management and business strategy. London: Financial Times Management.
85.
Wetherell, M. , & Potter, J. (1992). Mapping the language of racism: Discourse and the legitimation of exploitation. New York: Columbia University Press.
86.
Wheeler, D. , & Elkington, J. (2001). The end of the corporate environmental report? Or the advent of cybernetic sustainability reporting and communication. Business Strategy and the Environment, 10, 1-14.
87.
Wilson, A. (1991). The culture of nature: North American landscape from Disneyto the Exxon Valdez. Toronto, Canada: Between the Lines.
88.
Yanow, D. (2000). Conducting interpretive policyanalysis (Qualitative Research Methods, Vol. 47). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
89.
Zadek, S. (1999). Stalking sustainability. Greener Management International, 26, 21-31.
