‘Isomorphic’ behavior of corporate greenwashing

Rong-bing, Huang; Xie, Xiaojun; Zhou, Huifen

doi:10.1016/j.cjpre.2022.03.004

Cited by 21 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, from the perspective of corporate management, the internal organizational structure of a large company is complex and the decision-making is scattered, therefore the top management may ignore the “greenwashing” behavior for the sake of benefit distribution [ 23 ]. Finally, from the reputation perspective, “greenwashing” is considered a symbolic response to social responsibility and a reputation strategy [ 24 ].…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Second, constructing an indicator system from four perspectives, including governance and structure, process and control, and characterizing them through the degree of selective disclosure and manipulation disclosure [ 27 ]. This paper argues that this multi-dimensional “greenwashing” degree indicator system is more objective and reasonable [ 24 ].…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Unveiling the “Veil” of information disclosure: Sustainability reporting “greenwashing” and “shared value”

2023

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the increasing attention of the capital market to environmental, social and governance information, sustainability reporting has become an important carrier for stakeholders to gain insight into sustainability of companies. But the emerged “greenwashing” problem has also brought haze to the value creation of capital market. To study the consequences of the pseudo-social responsibility behavior of “greenwashing”, this paper takes China’s listed companies as the research sample to empirically examine the relationship between sustainability reporting “greenwashing” and “shared value” creation. It is found that the “greenwashing” behavior of corporate sustainability reporting significantly reduces the “shared value” creation, while the degree of sustainability information asymmetry and the quality of information disclosure play a partial mediation role between them. Further analysis shows that the more effective internal control of a company and the greater pressure of external media supervision, the more conducive to weaken the negative impact of “greenwashing” on “shared value” creation. This paper enriches the literature on the economic consequences of “greenwashing” in sustainability disclosure and the influencing factors of “shared value” creation, extends the research on information disclosure and “shared value” from financial information to non-financial information. The results call for the state to promote legislative work, formulate unified standards and compress the “greenwashing” gray space; Governments could implement mandatory disclosure, implement independent authentication and strengthen “greenwashing” social supervision; Companies should strengthen capacity building and improve the “greenwashing” governance mechanism with the help of digital empowerment.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unveiling the “Veil” of information disclosure: Sustainability reporting “greenwashing” and “shared value”

2023

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The framework of this study. [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com] of external drivers, prior literature mainly focused on product market competition (Arouri et al, 2021), institutional isomorphism (Huang, Xie, & Zhou, 2022), green marketing (De Jong et al, 2018;Guerreiro & Pacheco, 2021). In terms of individual drivers, previous study has discussed the impact of selection bias on greenwashing (Delmas & Burbano, 2011).…”

Section: The Driver and Consequence Of Greenwashingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In terms of internal drivers, there are mainly corporate characteristics (e.g., information transparency (Wu et al, 2020), profit decline (Kim & Lyon, 2015) and environmental performance (Ferrón‐Vílchez et al, 2020)), incentive mechanism and ethical environment (e.g., leadership and ethical incentives [Blome et al, 2017]). In terms of external drivers, prior literature mainly focused on product market competition (Arouri et al, 2021), institutional isomorphism (Huang, Xie, & Zhou, 2022), green marketing (De Jong et al, 2018; Guerreiro & Pacheco, 2021). In terms of individual drivers, previous study has discussed the impact of selection bias on greenwashing (Delmas & Burbano, 2011).…”

Section: Literature Review and Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As more and more companies learn and imitate the “greenwashing”, it is showing clear signs of proliferation and its adverse effects are spreading to all areas of people's lives (Huang, Xie, & Zhou, 2022). It is worth further analyzing how the “common” governance of greenwashing is being implemented in time, space and surroundings.…”

Section: Further Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How does multi‐agent govern corporate greenwashing? A stakeholder engagement perspective from “common” to “collaborative” governance

Wang

Sun

Zhu

et al. 2022

Corp Soc Responsibility Env

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Greenwashing is an obstacle to the sustainable development of society, but the current governance of greenwashing is still a “common” governance, not a “collaborative” governance. Accordingly, this study focuses on the three stakeholders of greenwashing governance: company, media and government. Using a sample of listed companies that have published social responsibility reports from 2014 to 2018, this study analyzes the influence mechanism of media reports on greenwashing and discusses the moderating role of government regulation and mediating role of internal supervision. This study finds that internal supervision plays a hiding role in the process of media reports reducing greenwashing, but government regulation has a weakening effect on this hiding effect, showing a “common” governance. Simultaneously, this “common” governance is heterogeneous across time (i.e., corporate life cycle), space (i.e., spatial spillovers) and environment (i.e., the uncertainty of corporate external policies). However, when the cooperation between the government and the media is strengthened, the hiding behavior of the companies is suppressed and the performance of greenwashing governance is improved, so that “collaborative” governance is achieved. Against this backdrop, this study provides a macro‐to‐micro governance policy framework for corporate greenwashing from the four dimensions of strategy, systems, tools, and information to achieve “collaborative” governance. This study enriches the research on the corporate greenwashing governance and has practical implications for the government, media and other stakeholders.

show abstract

Unveiling greenwashing dynamics: exploring the nexus between transparent corporate practices, employee perspectives, and ethical leadership impact

Xie,

Liu,

Liu

et al. 2024

Environ Dev Sustain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

‘Isomorphic’ behavior of corporate greenwashing

Cited by 21 publications

References 20 publications

Unveiling the “Veil” of information disclosure: Sustainability reporting “greenwashing” and “shared value”

Unveiling the “Veil” of information disclosure: Sustainability reporting “greenwashing” and “shared value”

How does multi‐agent govern corporate greenwashing? A stakeholder engagement perspective from “common” to “collaborative” governance

Unveiling greenwashing dynamics: exploring the nexus between transparent corporate practices, employee perspectives, and ethical leadership impact

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About