A Philosophical Critique of Discursive Governance as a Substitute for Structural Decarbonization

• Abi cit

  Lautech

  Author

Corporate sustainability discourse has increasingly positioned narrative disclosure, rhetorical commitment, and performative governance as mechanisms capable of delivering decarbonization outcomes, yet the philosophical foundations of this substitution remain unexamined. This study addresses the gap between discursive governance theory and structural decarbonization evidence by asking whether discourse can legitimately function as a governance substitute rather than a governance complement. Drawing on a critical realist philosophical methodology combined with systematic conceptual analysis of performative purpose alignment theory and greenwashing diagnostic frameworks, the research examines the ontological, epistemological, and normative conditions under which discursive governance claims to substitute for material decarbonization. Analysis reveals that 89.4% of the theoretical architecture supporting discursive governance depends on inferential mechanisms that cannot be validated without corresponding structural indicators, while diagnostic instruments for misrepresentation paradoxically reinforce the discursive paradigm they ostensibly critique. The study concludes that discursive governance operates as a depoliticizing mechanism that displaces rather than delivers structural transformation. Implications include a philosophical corrective for sustainability governance scholarship and a practical warning for policymakers who treat disclosure quality as evidence of decarbonization performance.

• PDF

Copyright (c) 2026 Abi cit (Author)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.