Corporate argumentation for acceptability: Reflections of environmental values and stakeholder relations in corporate environmental statements [Book Review]
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Business Ethics 87 (2):285 - 298 (2009)
This article studies argumentation for acceptability of corporate environmental actions in corporate environmental statements, with emphasis on stakeholder relations and environmental values. Stakeholder theory is commonly taken as the basis for corporate environmental management, and rhetoric typical of the stakeholder approach dominates the field. Although environmental issues are strongly charged with values, the dominant stakeholder approach does not stress the value dimension. The data of the study consists of environmental statements by Finnish forerunning business corporations in the forefront of corporate environmental responsibility. The results of the study indicate that the statements argue for the acceptability of corporate environmental actions through three power-related rhetorical forms that are competing ways to produce acceptability in the data: dominance, subordination and equality, and joint action. Each rhetorical form describes a power-based relationship between stakeholders and the corporation and leans on a specific value type producing legitimacy for that rhetoric form.
|Keywords||acceptability argumentation corporate environmental management environmental values stakeholder relations|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Tarja Ketola (2008). A Holistic Corporate Responsibility Model: Integrating Values, Discourses and Actions. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 80 (3):419 - 435.
Shirish Sangle & P. Ram Babu (2007). Evaluating Sustainability Practices in Terms of Stakeholders' Satisfaction. International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics 3 (1):56-76.
Georges Enderle (1997). In Search of a Common Ethical Ground: Corporate Environmental Responsibility From the Perspective of Christian Environmental Stewardship. Journal of Business Ethics 16 (2):173-181.
Benjamin J. Richardson (2005). Corporate Finance and Environmentally Responsible Business. International Corporate Responsibility Series 2:79-100.
Michelle Greenwood (2007). Stakeholder Engagement: Beyond the Myth of Corporate Responsibility. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 74 (4):315 - 327.
J. Angelo Corlett (1996). Corporate Responsibility for Environmental Damage. Environmental Ethics 18 (2):195-207.
Denis Cormier, Irene M. Gordon & Michel Magnan (2004). Corporate Environmental Disclosure: Contrasting Management's Perceptions with Reality. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 49 (2):143-165.
Cheng-Li Huang & Fan-Hua Kung (2010). Drivers of Environmental Disclosure and Stakeholder Expectation: Evidence From Taiwan. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 96 (3):435 - 451.
Richard H. Guerrette (1986). Environmental Integrity and Corporate Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics 5 (5):409 - 415.
Anita Jose & Shang-Mei Lee (2007). Environmental Reporting of Global Corporations: A Content Analysis Based on Website Disclosures. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 72 (4):307 - 321.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads20 ( #70,391 of 1,008,712 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,702 of 1,008,712 )
How can I increase my downloads?