Failing the market, failing deliberative democracy
How scaling up corporate carbon reporting proliferates information asymmetries
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 5260633 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Ingmar Lippert (0000-0002-1683-6983, Museum für Naturkunde, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2016 |
| Volume | 3 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Publication date | 2016-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Big Data & Society (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2053-9517 • E-ISSN: 2053-9517 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1177/2053951716673390 |
| OpenAlex | W2534932498 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 13 |
| References cited | 31 |
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
Environmental governance · Reflexivity · Climate Change Communication and Perception · Complex Network Analysis Techniques · Information Systems Theories and Implementation
After Numbers? Innovations in Science and Technology Studies’ Analytics of Numbers and Numbering
On Not Muddling Lunches and Flights
This Machine Kills CO 2
Greenwashing, net-zero, and the oil sands in Canada
Alleviation of energy poverty through transitions to low-carbon energy infrastructure
Beyond the Usual Suspects
Thinking algorithmically
Reworking the political in digital forests
Paying to pollute? The calculation of environmental indicators in crematorium burden sharing schemes
Big Data e as Ciências Sociais
Smart forests and data practices
Big data for climate action or climate action for big data
Practicing, materialising and contesting environmental data
The Audit Society
Participation and Environmental Governance
Environmental Governance in the Information Age
Remaking Participation
Sorting Things Out
The Tyranny of Transparency
A critical reflection on Big Data
Making big data, in theory
Political Communication in Media Society
Governing through disorder
Environment as datascape
All Together Now
"The Market for "Lemons
Critical Questions for Big Data
Big Data, data integrity, and the fracturing of the control zone
Blind regards
The political duality of scale-making in environmental markets1
The governance of unsustainability
Peripheral Vision
Technological Zones
Carbon as a Metric of the Human
Big Data
| Unique citing works | 13 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,3 |
| Citation span | 2016 - 2025 (10) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 13 |