Beyond Information Disclosure: A Communication Perspective on Corporate Sustainability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With increased external pressure on firms to behave sustainably, disclosure of sustainability efforts and performance has become a central concern. Academic research to date, too, has focused on the notion of disclosure as accountability and reporting, studying when firms disclose what information to stakeholders, and whether the information is accurate, giving rise to questions of greenwashing and brownwashing. However, this notion of disclosure as information dissemination is arguably narrow in that it draws attention to communication formats associated with formal reporting. From a communication perspective, firms’ engagement with stakeholders is more comprehensive and includes many additional dimensions. For example, how do firms frame their sustainability actions and how do stakeholders interpret corporate communications? How do different forms of communication about sustainability, for example, dialogical modes or targeted messaging to particular groups, interact with more scripted disclosures? How does communication about sustainability relate to corporate and stakeholder action? Considering sustainability information within a broader communication framework invites such a broader set of questions. In this symposium, we aim to understand firms’ sustainability communications from this broader perspective. To do so, the panel brings together experts engaged in different literatures for an exchange about sustainability communication as a broader organizational practice. Panelists include scholars of corporate communication (to discuss the possible uniqueness of communication about sustainability), scholars specializing in reporting and disclosure (to address the information demanded and received by stakeholders), and scholars studying corporate sustainability practices (to address the relationship of communication with corporate strategy and action). By fostering discussion across areas of research, the symposium hopes to serve as a platform to take stock of different literatures and sketch out an agenda for more integrated research on sustainability communication.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.030 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".