Unveiling the Underlying Tensions in Chinese Corporate Discourse on Human Rights: A Circuit of Culture Perspective

Human rights give rise to stronger duties for business due to tighter regulation and sustainability focus (Schrempf‐Stirling et al., 2022; Ruggie, 2013). Leading international reporting standards, such as Global Reporting Initiative, mandate the disclosure of corporate impact on human rights (GRI, 2021). Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) reporting has become a dominant platform for corporations to communicate their human rights performance, fulfilling legal obligations, and responding to the anticipations and concerns of key stakeholders. (Golob & Bartlett, 2007; McPhail & Adams, 2016). However, the discursive construction of human rights entrenched in cultural and political dynamics (Merry, 2001) through ESG reports has largely been unexplored.

This study explicates how corporate human rights discourse is evolvingly constructed and uncovers the underlying power tensions within the discourse in the Chinese context. In China, human rights have long been regarded as an ideological threat imposed by Western countries (Chan, 2013; Chen & Hsu, 2018). Additionally, compared with the Western perspective on human rights, which focuses on individual rights and the rule of law, the Chinese conception of human rights places greater emphasis on collective interests, social stability, and economic well-being (Chan, 2013; Xie, 2019).

Drawing on the Circuit of Culture (Ciszek, 2017; Curtin & Gaither, 2005; Mak et al., 2023), we analyze the corporate discourse through the COC five moments (i.e., regulation, production, representation, consumption, and identity) from ten ESG reports of two China headquartered technology corporations (i.e., Lenovo and Xiaomi) over the past five years (2019-2023). Operating in both transnational and national milieus, multinational companies (MNCs), such as Lenovo and Xiaomi, are prone to juggle between global and local requirements, especially when it comes to corporate social responsibility issues like human rights (Tan & Wang, 2011). Originated from cultural and media studies, COC not only provides a robust theoretical framework for exploring the cultural dynamics, power tensions, and conflicts behind the discourse of human rights in the international public relations context, but also offers a rigorous methodological toolkit for interpreting the meaning-making process (Curtin & Gaither, 2005; Mak et al., 2023). Combined with thematical analysis, subcategories including workers’ rights, minorities’ rights, consumers’ rights, and compliance with international standards have emerged.

Findings reveal that the scope and representation of human rights have been enriched (e.g., labor rights to civil rights). Both companies have downplayed their sociocultural role in human rights advocacy while repetitively manifesting their commitments (e.g., workplace equality and a signatory to UNGC) to gain legitimacy. In terms of regulation in COC, international authoritative instruments such as the Responsible Minerals Initiative and the Responsible Business Alliance are frequently cited as endorsements, demonstrating companies’ adherence to international human rights guidelines. Numbers related to gender equity, including the ratio of female executives and female employees, are foregrounded as a representation of positive human rights discourse. Two companies repeatedly acknowledge their identity as globalized technology leaders, dwelling on sector-specific human rights topics (e.g., closing the digital divide and ensuring accessibility of technology). Some socio-cultural nuanced differences between the two companies and power struggles with the international standards have also been identified. For example, Lenovo explicitly described its efforts to promote workplace diversity, equity, and inclusion (DE&I). However, Xiaomi only mentioned its emphasis on diversity and equity in general without a detailed explanation of concrete measures. In addition, although Lenovo and Xiaomi are based in China, most of the cases used to manifest their support for DE&I come from places outside of China, implying subtle competitive discourses surrounding human rights.

This study represents an early attempt to investigate how human rights narratives are constructed by Chinese MNCs, deepens the understanding of discursive tensions within the human rights narratives, and helps practitioners better navigate diverse cultural contexts.