Beyond ESG: Reconstructing Corporate Pseudo-Social Responsibility Governance for Just Transition

Authors

  • Tianyi Qiao

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54691/xfcm6132

Keywords:

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

Download data is not yet available.

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

2025-08-27

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Qiao, Tianyi. 2025. “Beyond ESG: Reconstructing Corporate Pseudo-Social Responsibility Governance for Just Transition”. Scientific Journal of Economics and Management Research 7 (8): 28-34. https://doi.org/10.54691/xfcm6132.