Beyond ESG: Reconstructing Corporate Pseudo-Social Responsibility Governance for Just Transition
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54691/xfcm6132Keywords:
Corporate Pseudo-social Responsibility; ESG Limitations; Just Transition; PORE Model.Abstract
This paper critiques the proliferation of corporate pseudo-social responsibility enabled by fragmented ESG frameworks. We identify three manifestations-green hypocrisy, labor rights hypocrisy, and structural hypocrisy-driven by institutional voids in the PORE model. Proposing a paradigm shift toward Just Transition, the study constructs a just sustainability framework integrating environmental justice, institutional theory, and stakeholder rights. This framework repositions corporations as transition risk managers, capacity-building platforms, and institutional entrepreneurs. We further design a multi-level governance system combining regulatory reinforcement, organizational integrity cultivation, and assessment paradigm innovation. The research contributes a critical pathway to transcend ESG’s limitations and achieve ecologically grounded, socially equitable corporate sustainability.
Downloads
References
[1] AGYEMAN, J. (2013) Introducing Just Sustainabilities: Policy, Planning, and Practice. London: Zed Books.
[2] FITCHETT, J.A. et al. (2022) ‘Moral disengagement in corporate greening’, Organization Studies, 43(9), pp. 1411–1435.
[3] FRENCH, D. and KOTZÉ, L.J. (eds.) (2021) Research Handbook on Law, Governance and Planetary Boundaries. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
[4] GLOBAL LABOR JUSTICE (2023) Just Transition Scorecard: Automotive Industry Report. Available at: https://www.globallaborjustice.org/reports (Accessed: 30 June 2025).
[5] JACKSON, G. et al. (2020) ‘Mandated corporate social responsibility: The German experience’, Review of International Political Economy, 27(6), pp. 1192–1214.
[6] MITCHELL, R.K. et al. (2023) ‘Stakeholder identification salience reconceptualized’, Academy of Management Review, 48(2), pp. 1–24.
[7] ØRSTED (2022) Just Transition Framework: Principles for Renewable Energy Development. Copenhagen: Ørsted A/S.
[8] PRINCIPLES FOR RESPONSIBLE INVESTMENT (PRI) (2022) Investor Strategies for Just Transition. London: PRI Association.
[9] SCHNEIDER, A. and SCHERER, A.G. (2019) ‘Corporate governance in a risk society’, Journal of Business Ethics, 155(3), pp. 823–835.
[10] SHRIVASTAVA, P. and IVANOVA, O. (2021) ‘Inequality and the Anthropocene’, Organization & Environment, 34(1), pp. 1–28.
[11] XIAO, H.J. et al. (2021) ‘Hypocrisy in corporate social responsibility engagement’, Journal of Business Research, 134, pp. 25–36.
[12] ZHOU, S. and YEO, J. (2023) ‘Blockchain-enabled supply chain justice’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 186, 122118.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Scientific Journal of Economics and Management Research

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.




