SLAPPed: The relationship between SLAPP suits and increased ESG reporting by firms

The level of corporate ESG disclosure continues to rise and there appears to be no single theoretical model which explains why firms decide to report their ESG outcomes. Hopwood (2009) called for research into the different and complex motivations that underpin corporate ESG reporting decisions. In responding to Hopwood’s (2009) call for research into such different motivations for corporate ESG reporting this study investigates, through the lens of legitimacy theory, whether a relationship may exist between firms utilising a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) and an increase in their ESG reporting. SLAPP suits are typically issued by large corporations and target individuals engaged in public debate “on issues of societal and political significance” (Pring & Canan, 1996, p. 9). SLAPP suits generally try to gag “individuals and groups [who] publicly protest against activities … that undermine human rights or result in damage to the environment” (Anthony, 2009, p. 1). SLAPPs are designed to address threats to corporate legitimacy and rather than having a legal outcome as their goal, SLAPPs form part of a broader communication strategy aimed at legitimating the firm’s behaviour. This paper investigates whether ESG reporting is used as a complementary legitimating activity by firms which have issued SLAPPs.