Making Disclosure Credible: An Intertextual Analysis of Argentine and Malaysian Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Reports
Abstract
The recent interest in environmental, social and governance (ESG) concerns reveals growing recognition of human-induced crises. ESG disclosure is articulated in various texts, but ESG reports are the principal genre. These reports display intertextuality because the absorption and transformation of other texts are crucial to making meaning. The present article investigates ESG reports from Argentina and Malaysia and performs an intertextual analysis. The intertextual references enable corporations to disclose compliance, guidance, confirmation, evidence and resources for ESG activities. The functions can be realised by different language features and provide variety in articulating intertextuality. The references can be organised, considering intertextual source and intertextual gap to reveal how references are employed and motivate querying why references are employed in such a manner. While internal sources promote self-regulation for ESG, external sources promote cooperation among various parties for ESG. Moreover, minimising more than maximising the intertextual gap gives corporations greater control of information, and it can be traced to specific individuals/groups and documents. Intertextuality is choreographed because corporations select the references or certain parts of these references. The selection is simultaneously inclusive and exclusive because amenable references are included, but others are excluded. Intertextuality in ESG reports becomes a ‘short-cut’ to garner corporate credibility. It frames beneficial activities and is an exercise in impression management because a favourable construal of ESG and therefore corporations is cultivated. These findings could motivate academics and practitioners to improve discursive competence, a systematic way to decipher and deploy intertextuality.
Keywords: ESG; disclosure; intertextuality; references; impression
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined communities. Verso.
Anderson, D. (2005). “What you’ll say is…”: Represented voice in organizational change discourse. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 18(1), 63-77.
Bakhtin, M. (1986). The dialogic imagination (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). University of Texas Press.
Bauman, R. (2004). A world of others’ words. Blackwell Publishing.
Bazerman, C. (2004). Intertextuality: How texts rely on other texts. In C. Bazerman and P. Prior (Eds.), What writing does and how it does it (pp. 83-96). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bondi, M., & Yu, D. (2019). Textual voices in corporate reporting: A cross-cultural analysis of Chinese, Italian and American CSR reports. International Journal of Business Communication, 56(2), 173-197.
Bremner, S. (2008). Intertextuality and business communication textbooks: Why students need more textual support. English for Specific Purposes, 27(3), 306-321.
Bremner, S. (2014). Genres and processes in the PR industry: Behind the scenes with an intern writer. International Journal of Business Communication, 51(3), 259-278.
Briggs, C., & Bauman, R. (1992). Genre, intertextuality and social power. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 2(2), 131-172.
Camilleri, M. (2015). Environmental, social and governance disclosures in Europe. Social Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 6(2), 224-242.
Cooren, F. (2020). A communicative constitutive perspective on corporate social responsibility: Ventriloquism, undecidability and surprisability. Business & Society, 59(1), 175-197.
Crawford Camiciottoli, B. (2010). Earnings calls: Exploring an emerging financial reporting genre. Discourse & Communication, 4(4), 343-359.
De Silva Lokuwaduge, C., & De Silva, K. (2022). ESG risk disclosure and the risk of greenwashing. Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 16(1), 146-159.
Devitt, A. (1991). Intertextuality in tax accounting. In C. Bazerman & J. Paradis (Eds.), Textual dynamics of the professions (pp. 336-355). University of Wisconsin Press.
Fairclough, N. (1995). Media discourse. Hodder Arnold.
Hodges, A. (2015). Intertextuality in discourse. In D. Tannen, H. Hamilton & D. Schiffrin (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 42-60). Wiley Blackwell.
Hooghiemstra, R. (2000). Corporate communication and impression management- New perspectives why companies engage in corporate social reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 27, 55-68.
Incelli, E. (2013). Managing discourse in intercultural business email interactions: A case study of a British and Italian business transaction. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 34(6), 515-532.
Kong, K. (2006). Property transaction report: News, advertisement or a new genre? Discourse Studies, 8(6), 771-796.
Koskela, M. (2013). Same, same, but different: Intertextual and interdiscursive features of communicate strategy texts. Discourse and Communication, 7(4), 389-407.
Kristeva, J. (1986). The Kristeva reader. T. Moi (Ed.). Blackwell.
Larcker, D., Tayan, B., & Watts, E. (2021). Seven myths of ESG. Retrieved 31 January, 2024, from https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/publications/seven-myths-esg
Lassen, I. (2006). Is the press release a genre? A study of form and content. Discourse Studies, 8(4), 503-530.
Perdomo, B., & Morales, O. (2024). Titles of architecture research articles in English and Spanish: Cross-language genre analysis for disciplinary writing. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, 30(4), 344-360.
Rajandran. (2016). Incorporating other texts: Intertextuality in Malaysian CSR reports. Ibérica, 32, 87-104.
Rajandran. (2023). Voices of economic competence: Legitimizing the government in federal budget speeches. In K. Rajandran & C. Lee (Eds.), Discursive approaches to politics in Malaysia (pp. 33-51). Springer.
Singh, A., Zhang, Y., & Anu. (2023). Understanding the evolution of environment, social and governance research: Novel implications from bibliometric and network analysis. Evaluation Review, 47(2), 350-386.
Singhania, M., & Saini, N. (2022). Quantification of ESG regulations: A cross-country benchmarking analysis. Vision, 26(2), 163-171.
Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis. Cambridge University Press.
Tamimi, N., & Sebastianelli, R. (2017). Transparency among S&P 500 companies: An analysis of ESG disclosure scores. Management Decision, 55(8), 1660-1680.
Tsang, A., Frost, T., & Cao, H. (2023). Environmental, social and governance disclosure: A literature review. The British Accounting Review, 55(1), 101149.
Wodak, R., & Fairclough, N. (2010). Recontextualizing European higher education policies: The cases of Austria and Romania. Critical Discourse Studies, 7(1), 19-40.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
eISSN : 2550-2247
ISSN : 0128-5157