The corporate reporting landscape: a market for virtue or the virtue of marketization?

Delphine Gibassier

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    5 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Purpose
    The purpose of this paper is to further elaborate on the topic of standardization bodies and standards “wars” within the “market for virtue” (Vogel, 2005). This paper is a commentary on the paper by Zinenko et al. (2015) who analyze the fit between different CSR instruments at the field and the organizational level.

    Design/methodology/approach
    This is a commentary based on secondary data analysis.

    Findings
    This commentary reviews the implications of Zinenko et al.’s (2015) paper for research on the CSR reporting landscape and provides some additional insights into coopetition practices and the impact on organizations. It elaborates both on the development of marketization strategies and the impact of this “marketization” on what the CSR standards were initially designed for.

    Originality/value
    This commentary provides six avenues for research, which are: coopetition between standard-setters, the influence of adopters on the development of standards, the key intermediary role of investors and analysts, the governance processes of standard-setting organizations, the role of the state in the arena of private CSR instruments and, finally, the disruption and maintenance of work linked to existing standards.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)527-536
    Number of pages10
    JournalSustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal
    Volume6
    Issue number4
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2 Nov 2015

    Keywords

    • Standards
    • Coopetition
    • IIRC
    • GRI
    • Standards war

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'The corporate reporting landscape: a market for virtue or the virtue of marketization?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this