Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG), and Sustainability Development Goals (SDGs) as ideological apparatuses: Sustainability and the new hegemony in emerging markets
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article critically examines the diffusion of Corporate Social Responsibility; Environmental, Social, and Governance frameworks; and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals in emerging markets. While often presented as neutral instruments of ethical business and sustainable development, we argue that these frameworks function as Sustainability Ideological State Apparatuses that embed, naturalize, and reproduce dominant ideologies under the guise of responsible management. Drawing on theory of ideology and theory of hegemony, we show how organizations are positioned as compliant sustainability subjects, while Western-centric norms are legitimized and internalized—often at the expense of local priorities, capacities, and epistemologies. This process constitutes a form of ideological colonization, wherein global sustainability standards displace alternative models rooted in local knowledge systems. This study illustrates how small and medium-sized enterprises in the Global South resist, reinterpret, and reconfigure these frameworks through contextually grounded practices. Our analysis contributes to Management Learning by reframing sustainability as a contested space of power, knowledge, and resistance. We call for more reflexive, decolonial approaches to organizational learning that foreground local agency and critically interrogate the ideological undercurrents embedded in global sustainability discourse.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it