Journal Paper Published

Abstract

Although corporate climate discourse has been extensively studied, research has primarily focused on self-legitimisation and self-promotional strategies. How corporations engage with key stakeholders and balance competing priorities remains underexplored. By integrating stakeholder theory with corporate climate discourse, this study explores how American and Chinese petroleum corporations frame their climate discourses in relation to two key global and national stakeholders: the Paris Agreement and their respective national governments. Using a mixed-methods approach, this study conducts a quantitative thematic analysis of the Paris Agreement and national climate policies, followed by a qualitative thematic analysis of climate discourse from six leading petroleum corporations—Marathon Oil, ExxonMobil, and Chevron (U.S.) and CNPC, Sinopec, and CNOOC (China). Findings indicate that the Paris Agreement prioritises global engagement, development capacity and a formal, obligatory commitment to directives. China's policy discourse presents the government as a central orchestrator, actively guiding national policy within a global framework. Meanwhile, U.S. policy discourse focuses on addressing immediate climate crises and promoting environmental justice while emphasising the roles of various agencies. In response to these two key stakeholders, Chinese corporations align their discourse closely with the Paris Agreement, centring on two themes: ‘transition to sustainable energy management’ and ‘policy-driven climate strategy’. American corporations take a more delicate approach, balancing global commitment with business operations while demonstrating ‘selective policy support and active lobbying’ and ‘advocacy for market-driven carbon pricing’. This study concludes with a discussion of its academic contributions and practical implications for climate regulators, corporate communication students and practitioners.

Keywords