Biodiversity reporting and organised hypocrisy

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to examine biodiversity reporting by South African food producers and retailers. It not only draws attention to the disconnect between reporting on an important environmental issue and the sense of commitment to environmental responsibility, but also shows that over time, organisations are becoming more proactive about biodiversity reporting. Design/methodology/approach The research uses a content analysis of sustainability and integrated reports and organised hypocrisy as a theoretical framework for analysing biodiversity-related disclosures. Findings Consistent with an organised hypocrisy framework, the research finds that the several companies rely on corporate reporting to emphasise actions and internal management strategies that are already producing favourable results. In contrast, mission statements, firm policy commitments and forward-looking analysis are avoided. There is, however, evidence to suggest that the gaps between corporate reporting and action may be giving companies the time to reform their practices, align biodiversity disclosures with genuine corporate action and move towards truly integrated business models. Research limitations/implications Poor biodiversity reporting raises questions about the extent to which companies are managing serious environmental issues that can have a direct impact on their business models. Improvements in biodiversity reporting also suggest that corporate reporting is maturing and that some organisations are beginning to understand the need for managing their biodiversity impact. Originality/value The paper offers empirical evidence on how the disconnect between organisational rhetoric and action is used to manage stakeholder expectations and negate the need for environmental reforms. In this manner, organised hypocrisy is framed as a specific legitimisation strategy. The research also shows that organised hypocrisy is not absolute; despite the opportunity to engage in organised hypocrisy, some companies are taking a more proactive approach to biodiversity reporting. As a result, it may be appropriate to see organised hypocrisy as part of a transition to higher quality integrated or sustainability reporting.

Implementing biodiversity reporting: insights from the case of the largest dairy company in China

“…However, they do not belong to the same sector. Although Mansoor and Maroun (2016) and Maroun et al (2018) conduct a comparative analysis of biodiversity disclosure practices of companies in two different industries, a comparative analysis between companies in the same sector may provide different perspectives. Thirdly, although we have attempted to invite some managers of the Yili Group to participate in the interview survey, they declined on the grounds this would not conform with the Yili Group's confidentiality requirement.…”

“…Usher and Maroun (2018) find that the quantity of biodiversity disclosures of sample companies is low, but there is a sign that some companies have started disclosing detailed information on biodiversity. Maroun et al (2018) investigate biodiversity disclosure practices by 19 South African food and retail companies. The theoretical framework of organized hypocrisy proposed by Cho et al (2015) and Maroun et al (2018) distinguishes biodiversity disclosures into biodiversity rhetoric and action and finds that several companies neglected biodiversity rhetoric but favoured biodiversity action.…”

“…Maroun et al (2018) investigate biodiversity disclosure practices by 19 South African food and retail companies. The theoretical framework of organized hypocrisy proposed by Cho et al (2015) and Maroun et al (2018) distinguishes biodiversity disclosures into biodiversity rhetoric and action and finds that several companies neglected biodiversity rhetoric but favoured biodiversity action. Additionally, most companies provided little information on biodiversity in 2013, but the trend of biodiversity disclosure practices from 2013 to 2015 was upward.…”

Does the MTEF shape annual budgets in a developing country?

“…Most of the previous studies in areas other than the MTEF that have employed the organizational façade concept have incorporated Does the MTEF shape annual budgets? other theories or concepts, such as organized hypocrisy (Cho et al, 2015;Maroun et al, 2018) and agency theory (Garc ıa-S anchez et al, 2020). Organized hypocrisy works well with organizational façades to provide an alternative lens from which to examine why and how organizations manage conflicting demands (Michelon et al, 2016).…”

“…Organizational actors exploit problems and employ rationalistic decision procedures, producing hypocritical outputs in the shape of talks and decisions. Talks, decisions and actions are coupled in that talks and decisions decrease the likelihood of corresponding actions, while actions decrease the likelihood of talks and decisions (Brunsson, 2007;Cho et al, 2015;Maroun et al, 2018). Lipson (2007) described this coupling as counter coupling.…”