Skip to search boxSkip to navigationSkip to main content

Failing the market, failing deliberative democracy: How scaling up corporate carbon reporting proliferates information asymmetries

  • Ingmar Lippert
Research Output:
Journal Article or Conference Article in Journal
Journal article
Peer-review

Open access

Publication Information

Output type

Research Output:
Journal Article or Conference Article in Journal
Journal article
Peer-review

Original language

English

Pages from-to (Number of pages)

Pages 1-13

Journal (Volume, Issue Number)

Big Data & Society

Publication milestones

  • Published - 25/10/2016

Publication status

Published - 25/10/2016

ISSN

2053-9517

Publication IDs

  • Scopus: 85043530281

Abstract

Corporate carbon footprint data has become ubiquitous. This data is also highly promissory. But as this paper argues, such data fails both consumers and citizens. The governance of climate change seemingly requires a strong foundation of data on emission sources. Economists approach climate change as a market failure, where the optimisation of the atmosphere is to be evidence based and data driven. Citizens or consumers, state or private agents of control, all require deep access to information to judge emission realities. Whether we are interested in state-led or in neoliberal ‘solutions’ for either democratic participatory decision-making or for preventing market failure, companies’ emissions need to be known. This paper draws on 20 months of ethnographic fieldwork in a Fortune 50 company’s environmental accounting unit to show how carbon reporting interferes with information symmetry requirements, which further troubles possibilities for contesting data. A material-semiotic analysis of the data practices and infrastructures employed in the context of corporate emissions disclosure details the situated political economies of data labour along the data processing chain. The explicit consideration of how information asymmetries are socially and computationally shaped, how contexts are shifted and how data is systematically straightened out informs a reflexive engagement with Big Data. The paper argues that attempts to automatise environmental accounting’s veracity management by means of computing metadata or to ensure that data quality meets requirements through third-party control are not satisfactory. The crossover of Big Data with corporate environmental governance does not promise to trouble the political economy that hitherto sustained unsustainability.

Publication metrics

PlumX

Captures
86
Mentions
1
Citations
25