Multimodal Environmental Disclosure in Malaysian CSR Reports

  • Kumaran RajandranEmail author
Part of the The M.A.K. Halliday Library Functional Linguistics Series book series (TMAKHLFLS)


Malaysian corporations have to disclose corporate social responsibility (CSR), and a major register for disclosure is CSR reports. These reports contain numerous sections but Environment Sections display an endeavor to preserve the environment through a corporation’s environmental CSR. The disclosure in these sections is multimodal, and various semiotic resources are employed but language and image are the principal resources. The chapter utilizes Systemic Functional-Multimodal Discourse Analysis (SF-MDA) and analyzes how Participants, Processes and Circumstances in language and image represent corporate involvement bringing environmental improvement. The analysis involved 27 Environment Sections in Malaysian CSR reports from 10 corporations. For language, figures of doing and being construe most of the experiences. These figures articulate the actions and descriptions of corporations performing environmental activities. For image, conceptual works construe most of the experiences. This work often articulates the state after environmental activities. The disclosure in Environment Sections conveys a positive corporation-environment relationship. It endows corporations as agents of positive social change because their CSR is presumed to generate tangible (material) or intangible (immaterial) benefits. However, environmental CSR should be seen as part of a market-driven economy, where corporations may perform CSR in terms of enlightened self-interest.


CSR Disclosure Environment Multimodal SF-MDA Malaysia 


  1. Bakan, J. (2005). The corporation. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bargiela-Chiappini, F., Nickerson, C., & Planken, B. (2007). Business discourse. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baughn, C., Bodie, N., & McIntosh, J. (2007). Corporate social and environmental responsibility in Asian countries and other geographical regions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 14(4), 189–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Breeze, R. (2013). Corporate discourse. New York: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  5. Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., et al. (1997). The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387, 253–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Enoch, S. (2007). A greener Potemkin village? Corporate social responsibility and the limits of growth. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 18(2), 79–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Halliday, M., & Matthiessen, C. (1999). Construing experience through meaning. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
  8. Halliday, M., & Matthiessen, C. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd ed.). London: Hodder Arnold.Google Scholar
  9. Ihlen, Ø., Bartlett, J., & May, S. (2011). Conclusions and take away points. In Ø. Ihlen, J. Bartlett, & S. May (Eds.), The handbook of communication and corporate social responsibility (pp. 550–571). Malden: Wiley Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Industry Classification Benchmark. (2012). Industry structure and definitions. Retrieved July 9, 2019, from
  11. Jewitt, C. (2009). An introduction to multimodality. In C. Jewitt (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis (pp. 14–27). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mason, M., & Mason, R. (2012). Communicating a green corporate perspective: Ideological persuasion in the corporate environmental report. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 26(4), 479–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Matthiessen, C. (2013). Applying systemic functional linguistics in healthcare contexts. Text and Talk, 33(4–5), 437–467.Google Scholar
  15. Maxwell, G. (2007). Corporations. In B. Kaliski (Ed.), Encyclopedia of business and finance (pp. 161–164). Detroit: Thomson Gale.Google Scholar
  16. Mayr, A. (2008). Introduction: Power, discourse and institutions. In A. Mayr (Ed.), Language and power (pp. 1–25). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  17. Mustaruddin, S., Norhayah, Z., & Rusnah, M. (2011). Looking for evidence of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance in an emerging market. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 3(2), 165–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. O’Halloran, K. (2009). Historical changes in the semiotic landscape. In C. Jewitt (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis (pp. 98–113). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Rajandran, K. (2016a). Incorporating other texts: Intertextuality in Malaysian CSR reports. Ibérica, 32, 87–104.Google Scholar
  20. Rajandran, K. (2016b). Corporate involvement brings environmental improvement: The language of disclosure in Malaysian CSR reports. Social Responsibility Journal, 12(1), 130–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rajandran, K. (2018a). Multisemiotic interaction: The CEO and stakeholders in Malaysian CEO Statements. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 23(2), 393–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rajandran, K. (2018b). Coercive, mimetic and normative: Interdiscursivity in Malaysian CSR reports. Discourse & Communication, 12(4), 424–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rajandran, K., & Fauziah, T. (2014a). The representation of CSR in Malaysian CEO Statements: A critical discourse analysis. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 19(3), 303–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rajandran, K., & Fauziah, T. (2014b). Disclosing compliant and responsible corporations: CSR performance in Malaysian CEO statements. Gema Online Journal of Language Studies, 14(3), 143–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sarkar, S. (1999). Eco-socialism or eco-capitalism?. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  26. Werther, W., & Chandler, D. (2011). Strategic corporate social responsibility (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  27. Zappettini, F., & Unerman, J. (2016). ‘Mixing’ and ‘bending’: The recontextualization of discourses of sustainability in integrated reporting. Discourse and Communication, 10(5), 521–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universiti Sains MalaysiaGeorge TownMalaysia

Personalised recommendations