Confronting climate crisis through corporate narratives: the fairy tale in LVMH’s 2020 and 2021 social and environmental responsibility reports

Abstract

Situated in the context of the climate crisis this research examines the LVMH Corporation’s 2020 and 2021 Social and Environmental Responsibility Reports through the lens of the narrative structure found in fairy tales. Central characters and the trajectory of the narrative are consistent with this literary form, and counter narratives that provide context to the corporate narrative also emerge. This analysis suggests the significance of narratives to corporate communications, their application extending beyond the brand communication or user-generated content generally investigated in the marketing and consumer research literature. Moreover, the article elaborates on how luxury corporations, like LVMH, communicate their efforts to counter climate crisis in ways that meet the expectations of stakeholders, especially investors and consumers. The findings have implications for future research on how narratives impact stakeholder perceptions of luxury corporations.

Keywords:

• Climate crisis
• corporate communication
• narratives
• fairy tale narratives
• LVMH
• sustainability
• environment

Narrative is frequently employed by luxury companies, perhaps most notably in relation to heritage stories.¹ Additionally, luxury brand advertising often employs storytelling with a rich imagery to portray the lifestyle, values and attitudes of people who live a life of luxury.² Consumers interpret brand stories through adverts and other communication media and transform them into a memorable experience.³ This article is concerned with crisis management narratives relating to environmental sustainability employed by luxury companies at a corporate level.

Annual reports evaluate to what extent corporations have achieved their objectives and state future goals. Initially focused on financial data, corporate reporting practices have evolved in recent decades, largely due to regulatory changes reflecting the growing importance of corporate and social responsibility, to including narrative sections that consider financial and non-financial performance concerning environmental and social matters.⁴ Annual reports, therefore, offer a recurring opportunity to shape a corporations’ message to stakeholders by engaging in storytelling. Given the significant global concerns about the impending climate crisis and environmental sustainability, many large corporations are increasingly producing additional reports to elaborate on their engagement with environmental and social issues. Consumers are increasingly concerned with climate crisis, yet skeptical of organizations’ overt claims of environmental sustainability. As PWC reports, 83 percent of consumers think that companies should be actively shaping environment, social and governance (ESG) best practices.⁵ Consequently, a compelling story can be an effective means of persuasion in the self-reporting of an organization’s environmental responsibility performance.

Stories and storytelling are very familiar to marketing and consumer researchers.⁶ Nonetheless, whereas storytelling in advertising and social media has attracted research attention,⁷ environmental storytelling is not commonly considered in the consumer research literature.⁸ When it is, it seems to follow the dominant social paradigm, (DSP), which seeks social change within its parameters⁹. In western capitalist societies, the DSP is associated with neoliberalism both in terms of economics and politics supporting economic growth and heightened consumerism.¹⁰ Of late, the climate crisis and the importance of sustainability seems to have generated deeper reformist approaches within the DSP which have led to considerations of market innovations and environmentally oriented consumer choices. The 2015 United Nations (UN) report on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provided a pathway to achieving such objectives.¹¹ However, the UN’s Global Sustainable Development Report 2023, which provides a half-way assessment of whether we are close to achieving the UN SDGs notes that “the world is far off track” and “[w]ithout urgent course correction and acceleration, humanity will face prolonged periods of crisis and uncertainty.”¹²

This research focuses on Louis Vuitton Moët Hennessy’s (LVMH) 2020 and 2021 Social and Environmental Responsibility Reports, which communicate the corporation’s approach to environmental sustainability and argue for the efficacy of its programs.¹³ We analyze the narrative of these reports, building on Propp’s work on the structure of fairy tales.¹⁴ Does the story LVMH tells communicate its efficacy as a leader in the luxury business when it comes to sustainability? Is the story believable and acceptable to its readers? Will the actions proposed by LVMH serve to reduce the uncertainty and crisis that surrounds us?

As annual reports tell a corporation’s story from its own perspective¹⁵ and are selective and partial, they may be challenged by external sources, referred to as shadow, grey, or counter accounts.¹⁶ Indeed Wells, Athwal, Nervino and Carrigan suggest that LVMH like its counterparts, such as Kering, may be involved in selective reporting and symbolic management which may have negative impacts on its stakeholders.¹⁷ These authors go on to suggest that such reports may be seen as calculated green washing¹⁸ since they are not balanced and emphasize certain issues and outcomes over others.

With this in mind, we also integrate external counter-narratives that challenge and question several elements of the corporation’s report, such as the World Wildlife Fund’s (WWF) 2007 report Deeper Luxury,¹⁹ which awarded LVMH a sustainability grade of C + and Good On You that stated that LV (the flagship house of LVMH) was “not good enough.”²⁰ This research also draws on articles in academic journals that focus on LVMH as well as respected weekly newspapers such as The Economist.

This article contributes to the literature on the corporate communication of luxury corporations in several ways. Firstly, it shows that narratives – commonly studied in the context of advertising, including the promotion of luxury brands²¹ – also emerge in other corporate communications directed at stakeholders, including consumers. Secondly, this research analyzes the narratives authored at the corporate level and, therefore, complements research on narratives in brand communication²² and user-generated content related to brands or consumption experiences.²³ Thirdly, it critiques corporate narratives that give the impression of telling the “whole story” by reviewing multiple non-corporate articles and evaluations that question the veracity of corporate accounts and highlighting the partiality of corporate storytelling. Finally, this article is the first to interrogate the corporate reports of a luxury corporation through the lens of the fairy tale narrative structure and seeks to address the question: How is the fairy tale narrative form deployed in the sustainability and environmental reporting of LVMH? In so doing, we elaborate on how luxury corporations manage climate crisis through narrative accounts of their activities and achievements.

The narrative structure of fairy tales

The narrative turn ushered in by Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure²⁴ initiated intense academic interest in narratives in many disciplines, including organizational behavior and business.²⁵ A narrative meaningfully connects a series of characters and events. These connections are central to the process of narrativity, the shaping of information into a story that provide a way of interpreting and infusing events with meaning.²⁶ Narrativity arises from four theoretical constructs: narrative content, discourse, transportation and persuasion.²⁷ Narrative content refers to a story’s structural elements, including the characters working their way through different experiences. Content communicates who did what, where and when.²⁸ Narrative discourse represents how the story is told – the techniques authors use,²⁹ such as changes in emotional tone and the sequencing of events to create dramatic tension. The higher the quality of narrative content and discourse, the greater the likelihood that a narrative’s reader is engaged and persuaded. Narrative transportation is the engrossing and transformational experience of being swept away by a story³⁰. In a corporate narrative context, narrative transportation evokes direct experience, which increases the accessibility and perceived truthfulness of novel information.³¹ Narrative persuasion is the effect of narrative transportation, reflected in an alignment between the ideologies of the narrative and those of its readers.³² In a corporate narrative context, narrative persuasion refers to stakeholders’, including consumers’, positive attitudes toward the experiences described in the narrative, and, ultimately, the corporation itself.

Modern narratives, including corporate ones, draw on the fairy tale, a narrative form derived from the ancient literary genre of folklore. Fairy tales are a useful model for the structuring of corporate narratives,³³ as their structure and rhetoric can be effective in lulling an audience into an uncritical reception of the tale, discouraging questions or criticism in favor of being carried along by the storyline and supporting the “hero” in their quest to stamp out the “villain.”

Fairy tales follow a common trajectory and include recurring characters. According to Propp’s³⁴ classic analysis of folk tale structure, eight archetypes regularly appear in fairy tales, with some characters embodying more than one archetype: The Hero (who seeks to accomplish a task), the Villain (who opposes the hero), the Donor (who provides a magical object to the hero to accomplish the quest), the Dispatcher (who sends the hero on their way), the False Hero (who attempts to usurp the role of the hero), the Helper (who appears when the hero needs support), the Princess (who is often the hero’s reward for a successful quest or needs protection from the villain), and the Princess’s Father (who ensures that the successful hero receives their reward). Importantly, not all archetypes appear in every fairy tale.

Furthermore, fairy tale plots adhere to a dramatic structure, comprising (1) the inciting, (2) rising action because of complications, (3) the turning point or climax, (4) falling action, which refers to changes made (reversal), and (5) the denouement or moment of release.³⁵ Similar conceptualizations propose three acts: (1) introduction of setting, characters, status quo and the catalyst, (2) rising conflict and the turning point and (3) climax and problem resolution.³⁶ At the center of a narrative’s character web is the hero, whose external quest is matched by an inner journey that adheres to the following stages³⁷: (1) limited awareness of the problem, (2) increased awareness of the need for change (3) fear and resistance to change, (4) overcoming fear, (5) committing to change, (6) experimenting with new conditions, (7) preparing for major change, (8) an epiphany about life and death, (9) accepting the consequences of a new life, (10) new challenge and rededication, (11) final attempt(s) and last-minute dangers and (12) mastery.

Relevant to corporate storytelling and subsequent stakeholder perceptions, is the dialogic nature of narrative and storytelling in corporate communications.³⁸ Dialogical analysis, indebted to Bakhtin’s concept of polyphony³⁹ – a feature of narrative, which includes a diversity of simultaneous points of view and voices, unpacks dialogues among actors within and beyond the corporate world, such as the organization, its stakeholders, the government and neutral or interested third parties. The novel, with its polyphony, is an ideal site of heteroglossia, which refers to the combination of existing statements or speech-genres in the construction of a text.⁴⁰ Bakhtin used the works of Dostoevsky to illustrate the dialogic nature of narrative, highlighting how various discourses are coordinated within the form of the novel, none are subordinated to the author’s voice, each discourse has its validity and authority; novels, therefore, operate in contrast to a monological principle in which one voice controls the ultimate truth and articulates the last word.⁴¹

Kristeva introduced the notion of intertextuality,⁴² based on Bakhtin’s concept of polyphony and the carnivalesque,⁴³ which embraces the perspective that every text consists of multiple texts vis-à-vis implicit or explicit allusions, citations and repetition. The notion of texts within texts has since then been taken for granted as a mechanism to emphasize the fact that no text is uniquely original.⁴⁴ There is no singularity, only multiplicity and manifold, intricate connections to other texts, society, history and culture.

Viewed through a Bakhtinian lens, the LVMH corporate report represents one of many voices, however authoritatively and monoglossically dominant the corporation presents itself. Polyphony, generated by the inclusion of other accounts that deconstruct that of the hegemonic central authority, is needed to illuminate facts. Public attention regarding climate change and sustainability puts LVMH into a polyphonic context insofar as its reports are forced into a dialogic relationship with texts on sustainability. This gives rise to a situation of heteroglossia in which the LVMH corporate report is defamiliarized and repositioned as one discourse among many. Building on the literature of fairy tales, we analyze LVMH’s reports on social and environmental responsibility, and counter accounts related to the corporation’s environmental activity.

Method

We use the dialogic approach to narrative analysis⁴⁵ to deconstruct LVMH’s Social and Environmental Responsibility Report for the years 2020 and 2021, focusing on the corporation’s environmental responsibility, to which most of the reports are dedicated.⁴⁶ This research applies the principle of dialogism that recognizes the legitimacy of multiple voices, acknowledging that voices interact and characters have their own final word. There is no single meaning, but a multitude of contested meanings, because “many standpoints exist, truth requires many incommensurable voices.”⁴⁷ Importantly, the dialogism of the literary world emerges in society, as people struggle against being defined by others in the ascendant discourse of the dominant social group.⁴⁸ A Bakhtinian perspective holds that “[T]his is a world of many worlds, all equally capable of expressing themselves and conceptualizing their objects.”⁴⁹ Dialogism can be understood in tandem with heteroglossia. Within heteroglossia, a text is defamiliarized – made strange or new – by other texts or perspectives. The resulting refusal of closure is productive to critical inquiry.⁵⁰

The fairy tale serves as a useful model for corporate environmental reports,⁵¹ because fairy tales change as they are retold, despite their link to tradition,⁵² yet also engage the audience because they follow a familiar trajectory, and – as well-known narratives with discursive legitimacy – are highly effective.⁵³ Using this genre, we can identify the hero and the hero’s challenges, goals and experiences (i.e. what actions the hero must take, how the quest is completed, and how the hero is celebrated after overcoming impediments and encounters with villains). The author(s)’ voices are also evident in the reflexive structuring of the story and therefore must be scrutinized.

The 2020 report claims that LVMH is guided by the 2015 UN SDGs⁵⁴ and provides a self-assessment in relation to these goals. By referencing and aligning itself with the UN SDGs, LVMH introduces a morally authoritative narrative that is nonetheless polyphonic, as Bakhtin would argue.⁵⁵ LVMH’s report also elicits counter accounts, consistent with the fairy tale genre that allows for the emergence of alternate accounts.⁵⁶ Among the elements of narrativity (i.e. narrative content, discourse, transportation and persuasion),⁵⁷ this research focuses on narrative content and discourse, the crafting and telling of the story.

By using one corporate example (LVMH) and multiple other accounts, we trace the trajectory of the story reflected in a corporation’s environmental reporting, questioning the dominant corporate narrative based on the error of claiming one singular form of truth.⁵⁸ By acknowledging the coexistence of different narratives, we underscore the importance of heteroglossia,⁵⁹ the co-existence of multiple meanings.

The selection of LVMH was based on the lead author’s familiarity with and prior research on this corporation. With its flagship brand Louis Vuitton (LV), along with the iconic Dior and the more recently acquired Stella McCartney and Tiffany brands – both strongly associated with sustainability, LVMH is an appropriate focus for this study. Moreover, Deloitte ranked LVMH as the largest luxury conglomerate in the world with luxury goods sales of $54,938 million for the financial year ending in 2021, significantly ahead of the second largest conglomerate Kering with luxury goods sales of $20,861 million for the same period.⁶⁰ Owning brands such as Gucci, Balenciaga and Yves St. Laurent, Kering is LVMH’s main competitor.⁶¹ Before we launch into a discussion of the LVMH environmental report, we provide a brief introduction to the conglomerate’s evolution and to its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Bernard Arnault.

Schumpeter details the rise of LVMH to prominence in the late 1980s and credits its founder Bernard Arnault, whom he describes as “soft-spoken but is no soft touch….” With a “charming smile but teeth apparently of steel.”⁶² Arnault has been referred to as a “wolf clothed in Cashmere” and the “Sun-Tsu of Luxury.”⁶³ When Arnault returned to Paris from New York in 1984, he deployed “barbarian tactics” emerging on Wall Street: first, through a leverage buyout, he acquired Christian Dior, which then became a symbol of success; and, second, he acquired Moët Hennessey in the late 1980s.⁶⁴ Arnault sought faltering smaller luxury brands to buy out and include within the conglomerate in which he and his family have majority shareholdings.

According to Donzé, the 1987 merger of LV and Moët Hennessy injected a lot of cash into the company.⁶⁵ Arnault also acquired the Parisian store Bon Marche along with Christian Lacroix and Celine in 1987 and the perfume and cosmetics company Guerlain in 1994. Arnault began the globalization of the company with the acquisition of the Japanese designer house Kenzo in 1993. This was followed by further overseas acquisitions: the Italian shoemaker Berlutti in 1996; the Spanish fashion company Loewe in 1996; and a majority stake in the American company Marc Jacobs in 1997. LVMH became global with more operations and employees outside of France mostly in Japan, PRC and South Korea. The acquisition of Bulgari in 2011 was a resounding success after doubling the company’s revenues with a new strategy.⁶⁶ Arnault hoped to replicate this success with the acquisition of Tiffany & Co, which was announced at the end of 2019 and completed in 2021.⁶⁷ While luxury is promoted as rare and exclusive, what Allérès refers to as accessible luxury⁶⁸ attracts high profit margins. Not surprisingly, then, Arnault passionately sells LVMH perfumes and handbags to mass markets – products that are accessible and a major source of revenue.⁶⁹ Also, in line with the assembly line operations of major brands, Arnault enforces a machine-like efficiency on the group, updating production methods, mainly selling through LVMH’s own stores rather than licensees, and engaging the best talent in the world. At the end of 2022 LVMH had a market capitalization value of €342 billion, employed 196,006 people in 81 countries and boasted 75 maisons, and 5,664 stores.⁷⁰ It is, then, no surprise that in 2023 Bernard Arnault was named the richest man in the world.⁷¹ With this brief introduction to the evolution of LVMH, we can now turn to the social and environmental reports that are crucial for the continuing success of this company.

LVMH’s environmental responsibility reporting

Narrator, timeline and characters

A corporation’s image is influenced by what is highlighted and what is omitted in its communication⁷² and shaped by story making, storytelling and story reception.⁷³ In considering corporate environmental reporting through the lens of the fairy tale, narrative content⁷⁴ – composed of characters and a timeline of events⁷⁵ – plays a central role.

LVMH’s 2020 Social and Environmental Responsibility report provides a story in that it narrates LVMH’s views regarding its interactions with society and the environment. Setting the scene, the report’s cover page shows an image of hands gathering grapes, which conveys the intimate caretaking of vineyards. The grapes are not clean, perfect in shape, or consistent in size or color, hinting at natural, organic, bio-dynamic viticultural practices. Combined with the tag line “committed to positive impact,” the use of green connotes sustainability. Although LVMH’s brand portfolio comprises several brands, the corporate report is important in the telling of the corporation’s collective story. Individual brands are used to accentuate the corporate brand’s values. For example, LVMH’s acquisition of the jewellery brand Tiffany & Co – known for its support of responsible mined gold and ethically sourced diamonds and precious stones and its conservation programs – demonstrates corporate commitment to environmental sustainability.

In the report, the corporation serves as narrator whose role it is to orchestrate story telling. The corporation’s report therefore comes across as authoritative, although intertextuality is implicitly acknowledged insofar as the report strategically refers to other texts, such as the 2015 UN SDGs.⁷⁶

The 2020 LVMH report utilizes a timeline of events to generate a coherent narrative, a meaningful story which resonates with its audience.⁷⁷ The report is temporally located in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. At a time when organizations scrambled to deal with the pandemic’s unpredictable trajectory and magnitude and its social and economic implications, the report’s opening statement by Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Bernard Arnault, situates environmental sustainability and social responsibility within the pandemic context:

Right from the start of the Covid 19 pandemic that hit the world in 2020 and continues to affect our lives today, my main priority has been to protect the safety of employees … as well as our customers, partners and all other stakeholders … They [employees] rapidly converted several Perfumes and Cosmetics facilities to produce hand sanitizer, jumpstarting our engagement and drive to play our part …

A deep awareness of our influence and a broader search for meaning … have always guided our actions and the pandemic served to further heighten this ethos. This constitutes what I would call our sense of duty.⁷⁸

As the narrator of the opening statement, Arnault, provides a compelling timeline, his temporal references spanning the beginning of the pandemic all the way to “our lives today.” He emphasizes his duty to protect employees, partners, customers and other stakeholders and conveys a reflexive understanding of the corporation’s role in society by referring to the corporation’s ethos, encouraging readers to view LVMH’s actions in light of this stated ideology. The report tacitly argues that LVMH’s actions are morally right, adhering to the corporation’s ethical character. This is the beginning of the story in which LVMH casts itself as a responsible world citizen, planning and undertaking actions to mitigate climate change and enhance sustainability. Such retrospection is essential to the corporation’s story about its concern for people and the planet.

Characters are also central to a narrative, by providing perspective, describing events, locations, or conditions,⁷⁹ and shaping action.⁸⁰ The main characters in LVMH’s story include the corporation, its employees, and Bernard Arnault, Chairman and CEO. Identifiability increases when the main characters’ thoughts, feelings and behaviors are understandable and create empathy⁸¹ and enhances persuasion.⁸²

In the opening statement, Arnault, who, as noted earlier, has been referred to as “a wolf clothed in Cashmere” – reminiscent of a character in the Hansel and Gretel fairy tale – positions himself as a narrator-hero, rising to the occasion to save the world. He also characterizes the corporation under his leadership as heroic in that the production shift to hand sanitizer led to collaboration with doctors, nurses and frontline workers in battling the villain (i.e. the pandemic). Indeed, the corporation’s response to the pandemic serves to raise its legitimacy and moral authority. The characters and timeline of events reflected in the report give rise to distinct narrative phases, in line with Propp’s and Morrison and Lowe’s analysis of (corporate) fairy tales.⁸³ The narrative phases trace a hero’s journey with a helper⁸⁴ and are illustrated in Figure 1. At the center of this figure is the depiction of LVMH’s heroic journey. This journey is embedded in the narrative stages, which are surrounded by the various aspects and actors influencing the progression of these stages and, ultimately, the hero’s inner journey. The presence of a diversity of actors challenging LVMH’s account demonstrates the multiple voices that have a part in shaping the narrative.

Figure 1 LVMH’s Hero Plus helper journey.

As we explore the various stages in LVMH’s narrative we will encounter not only characters internal to the company but also those that are external to the company including the UN, evaluators of ESG, customers and investor. Indeed, we will see that it is possible to align the various characters appearing in LVMH’s narrative to archetypes identifies by Propp.⁸⁵ So, while we pay particular attention to the hero and the helper in LVMH’s story, we can also identify the villain, the donor, the dispatcher, the false hero, the princess and the princess’s father.

The initial situation

The report begins with a focus on the COVID-19 pandemic and reflects the chairman’s concern for employees, customers and other stakeholders.⁸⁶ Against this backdrop, the opening statement notes LVMH’s longstanding and ongoing commitment to sustainability. Words and phrases, such as “always” and “for many years,” used to describe the corporation’s environmental sustainability efforts convey a history of sustainability,⁸⁷ connect to LVMH’s raison-d’être as a socially responsible luxury company, and have the potential to establish the corporation’s credibility up front. This strategy of establishing credibility early on in environmental reports emerges in other contexts and industries.⁸⁸ LVMH’s report states, for example, that:

[a] deep awareness of our influence and a broader search for meaning in everything we do have always guided our actions …

The emergency brought about by the pandemic did not sway us from the challenges we have been tackling for many years, including climate change and the need to protect biodiversity.⁸⁹

In the initial situation, then, LVMH is the hero fighting the villain of COVID-19, yet this is a distraction from the longer standing villain of climate change that the hero LVMH has been “tackling for many years.”

The challenge

The hero of the narrative, LVMH and its CEO, Bernard Arnault, faces the challenge of addressing the villain of climate crisis. LVMH is a signatory to the UN Global Compact, a voluntary initiative to implement the universal sustainability principles and to take steps to support the achievement of the UN SDGs goals.⁹⁰ The UN then, might be viewed as the dispatcher in the fairy tale narrative presented in LVMH’s report. Moreover, the UN not only sends LVMH on its way to overcome the villain, but it is also the donor, in the sense that it provides LVMH with the SDGs (a magic object or token in the fairy tale narrative) as a means to achieve its quest of overcoming the climate crisis and securing sustainability. Other methods for achieving success are offered by a range of ESG auditors and accreditors (donors) that can offer methodologies to help LVMH navigate and verify its path to sustainable development – these include MSCI ESG Ratings.⁹¹

LVMH’s 2020 report explicitly refers to “Facing climate change together” as a challenge.⁹² In response to the UN SDGs, LIFE 2020 (i.e. LVMH Initiative for the Environment) was established in 2016, aimed at mitigating the corporation’s environmental impact.⁹³ LIFE 2020 proposed goals related to environmentally friendly packaging, sustainable sourcing of materials, reduction of CO₂ emissions and environmental efficiency of operations.⁹⁴ In evaluating LIFE 2020, the 2020 report suggests that the program was successful, with many objectives being met or exceeded.⁹⁵ However, objectives related to the environmental performance index of packaging in the wine, spirits and champagne business group, sourcing standards for sustainable viticulture, cotton, fur and gold, and energy consumption and waste reduction were not met.⁹⁶

Ironically, the 2023 Global Sustainable Development Report (GSDR) has also noted that the global community has not really succeeded in meeting their SDGs because of, among other things, geo-politics.⁹⁷ Is the UN, in creating the SDGs, the “false hero” according to Propp’s fairy tale analysis?⁹⁸ Propp argues that a false hero appears to do the right thing and may be mistaken as the real hero. Did the UN set goals that are impossible to meet by even large businesses like LVMH? While the UN’s concern to save the world seems genuine, is it a little too late or are the SDGs doomed to fail given that they range across seventeen objectives some of which seem to be in conflict?⁹⁹ Perhaps the difficulties of achieving the UN SDGs raises the question of whether more radical change is essential that questions the viability of an economic system such as capitalism itself.¹⁰⁰

Other challenges pertain to the limitation of greenhouse emissions required by the 2015 Paris Agreement, a legally binding international treaty on climate change. In 2019, climate activist Greta Thunberg criticized political leaders and business executives for a lack of climate change action.¹⁰¹ Although Bernard Arnault dismissed Thunberg’s speech as failing to provide a concrete plan of action, he indicated that LVMH would reduce emissions and improve material sourcing, including that of animal fur.¹⁰² While LVMH’s report suggests progress in terms of carbon emission goals, sourcing objectives represented a major challenge, with several goals not being met.¹⁰³

Despite these shortcomings, the report emphasizes the corporation’s longstanding commitment to sustainability and climate change action, supported by a visual timeline of LVMH’s environmental policy involvement.¹⁰⁴ This timeline points to environmental goals being set as early as 1992 despite a limited understanding of global sustainability concerns at that time and more than two decades before the identification of the UN SDGs in 2015.¹⁰⁵ Nevertheless, references to the UN SDGs provide external validation for the importance of the corporation’s environmental sustainability engagement. The report also details LVMH’s Climate Week and its pledges in support of climate action.¹⁰⁶ During the event Valerie-Masson Delmotten, Co-chair of the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change agued that “LVMH has the potential to have a multiplying effect, catalyzing change among its customers by providing them with clear and accurate information that enables everyone to make informed choices in accordance with their values.”¹⁰⁷ This endorsement enhances the credibility of LVMH’s sustainability efforts.

References to important milestones (i.e. the 1992 Rio De Janeiro Earth Summit, the 2015 UN SDGs) demonstrate LVMH’s alignment with global organizations, garners readers’ sympathy for corporate actions, and bolsters its moral authority arising from shared lofty goals. Based on the framework of the hero’s inner journey,¹⁰⁸ it can be argued that LVMH committed to sustainability when it created an Environment Department in 1992. As environmental protection became more pressing, LVMH’s commitment manifested in actions, such as the luxury industry’s first ever-environmental report (2001) and attempts at carbon emission measurement.¹⁰⁹ One wonders if all of this was green washing or was LVMH a pioneer in environmental management?

The complication

The sustainability challenges arising from the UN SDGs and the Paris Agreement required LVMH to enhance its sustainability performance in several domains. Although LVMH announces a new set of goals (i.e. LIFE 360) and provides examples of improvements in goal setting and measurement (e.g. of carbon emissions),¹¹⁰ alternative accounts suggest that the corporation’s sustainability track record is underwhelming. The Deeper Luxury Report ranked LVMH third out of ten corporations and awarded a grade of C + for its sustainability actions.¹¹¹ This sustainability ranking was based on a compilation of company, media and non-government organization reports, and information provided by the Ethical Investment Research Service (EIRIS), a non-profit independent organization that monitors social, environmental and ethical research initiatives by publicly listed companies, supplemented with data from self-report questionnaires.¹¹² The rankings reflect corporations’ environment, human rights, corporate governance, and stakeholder relations initiatives.

The Deeper Luxury Report ranked luxury companies as follows: (1) L’Oréal, (2) Hermès, (3) LVMH, (4) Coach, (5) Tiffany, (6) Swatch, (7) PPR (now Kering), (8) Richemont, (9) Bulgari, and (10) Tods. Bulgari and Tods received an F, whereas L’Oréal, Hermès and LVMH scored the highest grade of C+, and Tiffany a D+.¹¹³ The report’s authors urged the luxury industry to become more sustainable in an increasingly resource-restrained and unequal world and proposed a new definition of luxury as an expression of deeper values through social and environmental excellence, with the reporting of sustainability performance being vitally important to this notion.¹¹⁴ The Deeper Luxury Report suggests that LVMH’s past performance in terms of sustainability was insufficient to address the UN SDGs.¹¹⁵

Recent performance can be evidenced by Corporate Knights, a leading sustainable-economy media and research B Corp founded in 2002. Since 2005, Corporate Knights has produced an annual global sustainability ranking of the top 100 companies across all sectors. In 2022, while Kering was ranked joint 12^th down from seventh in 2021, LVMH did not feature among the top 100 companies; indeed, LVMH has only featured in this ranking in 2013 when it was ranked 54^th.¹¹⁶ External assessments of this sort bring into question LVMH’s sustainability performance, particularly when compared to its most significant competitor.

So far, we have primarily focused on LVMH’s environmental sustainability, it is important, however, to note that in terms of social sustainability the company has not faired well either. Some observers have noted that the company has performed poorly in relation to worker compensation and gender parity. Sustainanlytics, a data-based firm that focuses on how companies perform in terms of ESG criteria, documents that there is high staff turnover (e.g. worker dissatisfaction) as well gender pay gaps. Yet, LVMH counters this with statements that they have made strides on both counts. Indeed, according to Sustainalytics, it seems LVMH uses its own methodologies to measure progress in sustainability and may be quite advanced compared to other firms.¹¹⁷

The request

Challenges and complications lead to requests being made of the hero.¹¹⁸ For LVMH, the request pertains to improved sustainability performance. LVMH acknowledges this call to action in the discussion of its Climate Week, which was organized to introduce the LIFE 360 program to employees and “encouraged everyone to take up the call for action and be a change maker.”¹¹⁹

However, in counter accounts, the request for greater sustainability is even more explicit. One such call for greater sustainability emerged in the evaluation of LVMH in the Business of Fashion’s 2021 Sustainability Index,¹²⁰ which rates organizations in terms of their compliance with the 2015 UN SDGs and the Paris Agreement along several dimensions (i.e. transparency, emissions, water and chemicals, materials, workers’ rights and waste). In the luxury category, LVMH scored 46, whereas Kering scored highest (68) in terms of transparency (i.e. supply chains tracing, disclosing impact). On reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, LVMH scored 39, whereas Kering scored 43. PVH Corporation’s (which owns brands like Calvin Klein, Tommy Hilfiger and Warner’s) score of 70 was the highest in this category. On the reduction of water usage and elimination of harmful pollutants, LVMH scored 32, in contrast to Kering’s 53. In terms of shift to regenerative and circular materials, LVMH scored 27, whereas Kering received the highest score of 64. On worker’s rights (i.e. protect human rights, equitable working conditions), LVMH received 17, whereas Kering and PVH Corporation received the highest score of 32. Finally, when it came to minimization of waste and establishment of a circular model, LVMH scored 18, whereas Kering had the highest score of 32. LVMH’s overall score was 30 (out of 100), compared to Kering’s 49 – the highest in the luxury category and the highest overall. Despite the limitations of the index scoring system, the scores were revelatory, showing that even among the fashion industry’s largest and highly resourced businesses, actions lag behind ambitions.¹²¹ In the Business of Fashion’s 2022 Sustainability Index, LVMH overall score (36) remained low, with its competitor, Kering, again performed better on all criteria and obtained an overall score of 47.¹²² Although LVMH is a minority stakeholder in the Business of Fashion, the scores suggest the magazine provides an unbiased assessment.

Similarly, Good On You, an independent organization that assesses the performance of companies on sustainability criteria, rated LVMH’s flagship brand LV as “not good enough,” based on environmental impact, labor conditions and animal welfare ratings and recommends greater transparency in these areas.¹²³ Rauturier noted that, although LV has a stated objective to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, it is not on target; in terms of environmental impact, it has failed to minimize textile waste, and has not set a timeline to eliminate hazardous chemicals; as for labor conditions across the supply chain, there is little evidence of payment of a living wage; and, finally, despite its formal policy to protect animal welfare, practices are misaligned with its purported principles.¹²⁴ Good On You’s evaluation of a range of LVMH’s brands is presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Evaluation of select LVMH “maisons” by “good on you.”

Name of House (Fashion & Leather Goods)	Animals	Environment	Labor	Overall rating January 2022
Louis Vuitton Christian Dior Loewe Loro Piana Fendi Celine	Rating: 1/5 Animal rating is ‘very poor’. Details might include*: Use of fur, leather, wool, down, exotic animal hair, and/or exotic animal skin. Traces some animal products to first stage of production	Rating: 2/5 Environment rating is ‘not good enough’ Details might include*: Does not use (or uses few) eco-friendly materials Does not minimize textile waste Has a target but not clear whether it meets greenhouse gas emissions Eliminated some hazardous chemicals but not all Complies with its own restricted substances list but no evidence of meaningful action to eliminate hazardous chemicals No evidence it implements water reduction initiatives in most of its supply chain	Rating: 2/5 Labor rating is ‘not good enough’ Score of 21-30 in the 2021 Fashion Transparency Index Details might include*: Final stage of production takes place in medium-risk countries for labor abuse Little of its supply chain is certified by labor standards which ensure worker health and safety, living wages or other labor rights No evidence of diversity and inclusion practices in its supply chain It does not publish a comprehensive list of suppliers or information about forced labor, gender equality or freedom of association Not clear if it pays a living wage in its supply chain Discloses inadequate policies or safeguards to protect suppliers and workers in its supply chain from the impacts of COVID-19	‘Not good enough’ (2/5)
Moynat Berluti Rimowa Emilio Pucci Givenchy Kenzo Marc Jacobs	Rating: 2/5 Animal rating is ‘not good enough’ Details might include*: Use of leather, wool, down, and/or exotic animal hair Uses down accredited by the Responsible Down Standard Traces some animal products to first stage of production
Patou	Rating: 3/5 Animal rating is ‘it’s a start’ Has a formal animal welfare policy aligned with Five Freedoms but has no clear mechanisms to implement Use of wool and exotic animal hair Traces some animal products to first stage of production	Rating: 3/5 Environment rating is ‘it’s a start’ Uses few eco-friendly materials including organic cotton Reuses some of its offcuts to minimize textile waste Has set a science-based target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions generated from its own operations and supply chain but it is unclear whether it is on track to meet its target Has a policy to protect biodiversity in some of its supply chain		‘It’s a start’ (3/5)

*Aggregated by rating value but details might differ between houses.

Compiled from information available at: https://goodonyou.eco/.

A recent sustainable benchmark study of LVMH using data from 2020, is more hopeful giving a “high” or “medium” score for environmental, social and economic components, and concluding that overall, LVMH receives a high score in terms of sustainability.¹²⁵ Nevertheless, the request for climate action is at the forefront of accounts published by alternative sources, and LVMH’s 2020 report acknowledges this. Antoine Arnault, son of LVMH founder Bernard Arnault, and Hélène Valade, Environment Development Group Director, state that “Covid 19 made people even more aware of the need to protect the environment and they expect action.”¹²⁶ To return to the fairy tale structure, the corporation – the hero in this story – is receptive to the request for action, at this key moment in the narrative arc.

The helper

In the corporate narrative concerning the urgency of progress toward the sustainability goals, a helper appears in the form of Stella McCartney. In 2020, Stella McCartney joined LVMH as special advisor on sustainable development issues, based on her long record of sustainability engagement. According to Kent:

McCartney’s brand, which launched in 2001 as a joint venture with what was then the Gucci Group, used no fur, feathers or leather from day one. It was a huge risk: leather goods, particularly handbags, are a major revenue driver for most luxury labels, and twenty years ago the idea shoppers would pay luxury prices for alternative materials was widely dismissed. Today, the approach is fashionable, as are the environmental initiatives she’s championed and embedded in her brand.¹²⁷

In 2018, McCartney received the Business of Fashion Global Voices Award for her commitment to moving fashion from a linear to a circular business model.¹²⁸ McCartney partnered with the RealReal, an online second-hand luxury retailer, to provide promotional codes and discounts on future purchases to consumers who sell their Stella McCartney pieces through the RealReal.¹²⁹ These strategies work to incentivize the resale of these items and prevent their disposal into landfills. Furthermore, the Stella McCartney brand partnered with Clevercare to educate consumers on how to extend their clothing’s life-cycle and reduce the need for new clothes.¹³⁰ The label banned the use of most animal products¹³¹ and committed to the exclusive use of renewable materials in a way that maintains quality and eliminates waste,¹³² for instance, incorporating ECONYL recycled nylon fibers into new designs. Moreover, Stella McCartney uses sustainably obtained biological materials from renewable sources¹³³ and is committed to regenerative agriculture practices, which have positive impacts on biodiversity. For example, the brand utilizes traceable viscose that is obtained from sustainable forests.¹³⁴ This practice prevents deforestation and its myriad negative effects and increases the transparency of the supply chain. Overall, Stella McCartney strives to achieve the highest levels of certification for sustainably sourced raw materials. For instance, it was the first fashion brand to obtain the gold-level cradle-to-cradle certification for one of its wools.¹³⁵

Even so, Stella McCartney has been criticized. In 2018, Good on You, rated the brand as “good” (i.e. 4 out of 5),¹³⁶ based on its performance in three categories: Planet, People and Animals. Although the brand had a proven commitment to the environment and animal welfare, the brand rating in the People category was a 3 (out of 5), because, despite being a member of the Ethical Trading Initiative, the brand did not guarantee living wages in their supply chain.¹³⁷ Moreover, while the brand discloses the location of suppliers, there is no publicly available list of specific suppliers,¹³⁸ which affects stakeholders’ perceptions of the label’s transparency. The brand was awarded a 4 out of 5 in the Planet category, due to its use of environmentally friendly materials and strategies to reduce waste and water consumption across the supply chain.¹³⁹ Lastly, Stella McCartney scored 4 out of 5 in the Animals category because it does not use leather, down, fur, angora, shearling or exotic animal skins or hairs, although the label still uses some wool and cashmere – although this was regenerated (recycled) thereby reducing the negative impact on the environment and animals.¹⁴⁰ But the company does not specify sources for their wool production.

McCartney assumed the role of LVMH’s sustainability advisor following LVMH’s acquisition of a minority stake in the Stella McCartney brand, which was possibly an attempt to improve the corporation’s green image.¹⁴¹ McCartney thus evolved from a helper to being part of LVMH’s leadership¹⁴² – a helper turned hero. Kent notes “LVMH is ‘much further ahead’ thanks to her involvement.”¹⁴³ After McCartney joined forces with LVMH, the corporation introduced a series of pilot projects in regenerative agriculture, including cotton growth in Turkey using exclusively organic fertilizers to improve soil yield and increase its capacity to store carbon dioxide.¹⁴⁴ The experimentation in the domain of regenerative and organic agriculture represented preparation for an overhaul of LVMH’s business model to include environmental sustainability, profitability and artification.¹⁴⁵

Yet despite all these positive strides, the fashion and leather brands of LVMH contributed to 60 percent of its total Scope 3 emissions in 2021, which is greater than similar business groups.¹⁴⁶ The company is also struggling to cut down its carbon footprint created by transportation and raw materials. Although it is moving toward a circular economy in terms of using recycled and upcycled fibers, it still has a long way to go.¹⁴⁷

The end

Fairy tale endings capture the “happily ever after” – a plot convention that is also reflected in corporate narratives on sustainability.¹⁴⁸ The LVMH report reflects the triumph of this common denouement in its projections of a promising future for the corporation’s sustainability efforts. Chairman Arnault states “after achieving the objectives set out in our LIFE 2020 program, we have begun a new chapter in our history with LIFE 360. … All our products, operations and initiatives must drive environmental and social progress.”¹⁴⁹ The launch of LIFE 360 indeed garnered positive responses from the media:

The … Life 2020 programme … has been replaced by Life 360, with deadlines set at three, six and 10 years (in 2023, 2026 and 2030). The new programme’s targets are ambitious and, besides climate action, they also include safeguarding biodiversity, regarded as the industry’s next major challenge.¹⁵⁰

LIFE 360 seeks to engage all stakeholders, and places the “alliance of nature and creativity” at the center of LVMH’s business model.¹⁵¹ A “bold new vision of luxury” sets an ambitious timeline of 10 years to accomplish multiple goals, including climate action and biodiversity, both major challenges for the fashion industry.¹⁵² 2023 projections include new circular services such as repairs and upcycling, environmental training for all LVMH employees, and research and innovation dedicated to sustainable luxury.¹⁵³ By 2026, LVMH foresees the phasing out of plastic from virgin fossil oil,¹⁵⁴ following its use of certified recycled content from mixed waste plastic for packaging (e.g. for Dior Addict Lip Maximizer released in 2021).¹⁵⁵ In terms of climate action, LVMH aspires to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to rely on renewable or low-carbon energy.¹⁵⁶ Other goals relate to environmental management systems at production and logistics sites, customer information systems for new products, and a certification to standards guaranteeing the preservation of ecosystem and water resources of ‘strategic’ raw materials.¹⁵⁷

By 2030, LVMH strives to generate new products via eco-design.¹⁵⁸ LVMH partnered with Weturn – a textile recycling company – to recycle unsold products protected by intellectual property through donation and reuse to create new eco designed textiles.¹⁵⁹ This generates an ecosystem around creative circularity that is orchestrated by LVMH in collaboration with other companies, including the start-up Nona Source, which markets fabrics and leather from LVMH’s unsold stock to designers, and thereby supports circularity.¹⁶⁰ Additionally, LVMH seeks to integrate traceability systems in strategic supply chains and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions attributed to transportation and raw materials.¹⁶¹ Furthermore, LVMH plans the restoration and preservation of five million hectares of flora and fauna habitat, announces regenerative agriculture programs for grapes, cotton, wool and leather, and refers to several pilot projects, such as sustainable jasmine farming in India, and organic cotton farming in Turkey.¹⁶² Also, LVMH highlights sponsorships in support of biodiversity, such as Guerlain’s partnerships with the GoodPlanet and ELYX foundations to save bees, or Loewe’s Knot on My Planet campaign in support of the Elephant Crisis Fund.¹⁶³

Some external accounts mirror LVMH’s pledges to biodiversity and climate action rather uncritically. For example, Pavarini highlights LVMH’s collaboration with Canopy, a not-for profit environmental organization, to save endangered forests by not cutting trees for viscose and rayon, as well as LVMH’s collaboration with UNESCO’s MAB (i.e. man and biosphere) program to reduce deforestation in the Amazon and to rehabilitate 5 million hectares of habitat worldwide.¹⁶⁴

Nonetheless, a counter account by Good On You points to a less optimistic ending to LVMH’s story.¹⁶⁵ As noted earlier, Louis Vuitton, LVMH’s leading fashion brand, was rated “not good enough,” as it uses few eco-friendly materials, does not minimize textile waste, and – although it has set targets to decrease greenhouse gas emissions and eliminate all hazardous chemicals in the production process – evidence of progress is lacking ¹⁶⁶ The brand also burns unsold products, generating damaging carbon dioxide, to maintain exclusivity.¹⁶⁷ From a labor standpoint, the brand lacks transparency about diversity, inclusion, and the payment of living wages in its supply chain, as well as protection of supply chain workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.¹⁶⁸ In terms of animal welfare, the brand has formal policies, but uses fur, leather, wool, down and exotic animal hair and skin in its products.¹⁶⁹ This recent counter account questions the effectiveness of LVMH’s sustainability actions initiated in 2020.

Another counter account to LVMH’s story ending emerges in the Business of Fashion’s coverage of LIFE 360 launch.¹⁷⁰ It reveals the corporation’s unwillingness to stop the use of animal furs, citing Hélène Valade, LVMH’s Environmental Development Director: “Our labels are free to choose their materials, provided animal well-being criteria in the supply chain are complied with. This is non-negotiable ….”¹⁷¹ This statement seemingly contradicts the corporation’s position on environmental sustainability and animal welfare, which draws on McCartney’s engagement with these issues, and casts doubt on the fairy tale ending presented in LVMH’s report.

Whereas the 2020 report presents the role of Bernard Arnault as a narrator-hero from the beginning (p. 2), the 2021 report starts by highlighting the role of multiple helpers including the Co-founders of Nona Source, Belvedere’s Health and Safety Manager, Sephora USA’s Chief People Officer, an LVMH Talent Acquisition Specialist, the Group’s Director of Diversity and Inclusion, the Hennessy Wine and Vine Manager, among other internal and external helpers.¹⁷² This gives more weight to the role of the helper, by moving it to the forefront of the narrative. While both the 2020 and 2021 reports include Stella McCartney as a helper (first mentioned on p. 83 and p. 77, respectively), the inclusion of photographs, names and descriptions of the work done by these helpers on pp. 5–11 of the 2021 report represent a shift in how the efforts of the group are highlighted.

Another important difference between both reports is the way environmental, social and governance (ESG) practices are presented. The 2020 report only touches on ESG on p. 110 while the 2021 report prioritizes this by presenting the section on p. 18. In addition, a new section, “ethics and compliance at the heart of our strategy,” is also presented at the beginning of the 2021 report (p. 20) to give emphasis to the corporation’s strategic commitment to ethics and environmental and social responsibility. This upfront mentioning of governance and strategic commitment might help in appeasing some of LVMH’s external critics, yet in the light of company score cards for 2018 and 2021, which report where LVMH is said to have improvement opportunities with regards to commitment and governance of their supply chain transparency and social responsibility,¹⁷³ some critics pointing to grandiose statements that might be seen as lip service or green washing.¹⁷⁴

For instance, the 2021 version of the company scorecard report shows LVMH as one of the apparel and footwear companies with more work to do to improve their supply chain transparency and social responsibility: LVMH is listed as ranking 29 out of 37 and having a score of 19 out of 100 (compared to companies like Lululemon scoring 89 and Adidas scoring 86).¹⁷⁵ The same report states that LVMH discloses significantly less information on its forced labor policies and practices than its peers. While it is acknowledged that from 2018 to 2021 LVMH improved its score by five points (from 14 to 19), the company is encouraged to work on improving its purchasing practices, recruitment approaches and mechanisms for worker’s engagement and empowerment.¹⁷⁶

With the LVMH 2020 report stating that the LIFE 2020 objectives were largely achieved and sometimes exceeded, the 2021 report builds on these achievements and presents more ambitious objectives. For example, whereas the 2020 report talks about “guaranteeing accurate traceability” (p. 100), the 2021 report talks about “striving for excellence in traceability and product safety” (p.96). Within the “protecting biodiversity” pillar, the 2021 report also builds on and adds more detail to past sections. “Taking care of ecosystems” (2020 report) becomes “protecting and regenerating ecosystems” and “avoiding and mitigating the impact on biodiversity” (2021 report) while “replenishing the resources we borrow from nature” (2020 report) can be seen as expanded into the more holistic “transforming our relationship with the living world” (2021 report).

Altogether, the 2021 report proposes more ambitious initiatives and objectives while keeping many of the same areas and presenting some incremental improvements in recurrent indicators (e.g. percentage of certified cotton grew from 51 percent in 2020 to 61 percent in 2021; percentage of certified crocodile skin grew from 86 percent to 100 percent). The 2021 report displays the expanding range of accreditation that the company has achieved in relation to ESG issues, listing twelve sources of recognition, up from ten in 2020.¹⁷⁷ Such accreditation demonstrates LVMH’s drive to acquire external validation of its commitment to ESG. In this way, LVMH is contesting the counter narratives that we encounter concerning its underwhelming climate action and sustainability performance and displaying its success in its fight against the villain of climate crisis. While some improvements have been evidenced and reported both internally (in the 2021 report) and externally,¹⁷⁸ there is still a lot of work to do for LVMH’s grandiose sustainability narrative presented in both reports to match the reality seen in the cold numbers and benchmarks presented by some external impartial stakeholders.

Nevertheless, LVMH has been financially very successful during this period. For examples, in the first half of 2023, the company reported revenue of $46.7 billion U.S, an increase of 15 percent just in the first half of 2023.¹⁷⁹ Consequently, it appears that negative assessments by independent organizations, such as “Good on you,” do not seem to affect LVMH’s overall performance. Moreover, according to Bloomberg data,¹⁸⁰ investment funds that claim to promote ESG favor LVMH and have developed a US$17 billion stake in the company. Additionally, consumers, particularly Gen Z consumers, increasingly desired demonstrably ethically produced luxury goods.¹⁸¹ Consequently, publishing ESG specific reports that demonstrate LVMH’s ethical stance and alignment with ESG is of vital importance to the attraction of investors and customers. In this sense, LVMH as the hero fighting to overcome the villain of climate crisis may be seen to gain its reward of strong economic performance and company valuation – the princess in the fairy tale. While the character of the Princess’s father does not seem to be present in the LVMH narrative, one could argue that in the wider global corporate narrative of climate crisis this role is taken by an individual like Larry Fink, the CEO of BlackRock,¹⁸² and, one of the most influential members of the global investment community. Fink wields his influence on the global financial markets to favor and, thereby, reward companies that comply with ESG.¹⁸³

Discussion, conclusions and limitations

Stories are powerful in shaping perspectives on reality, as they can shift perceptions.¹⁸⁴ Corporate actions have an important, and often negative, impact on the environment. Corporate communications therefore focus on corporate ethics, sustainability and actions taken to mitigate the environmental impact of operations. Storytelling in corporate reports may thus be a useful way to help stakeholders make sense of corporate values and actions. Although this article focused on one specific corporate report, it demonstrates that the narrative structure of fairy tales emerges in corporate narratives on sustainability efforts. Furthermore, by tracing the narrative the article identifies how the fairy tale narrative unfolds through a number of the characters identified by Propp,¹⁸⁵ including, heroes, the villain, the donor and dispatcher, the helper, the potential false hero, the princess or prize and even the princess’s father (Table 2), and stages, such as those found in studies of the fairy tale narrative form¹⁸⁶ (Figure 1). Moreover, through the example of LVMH, the deployment of the fairy tale narrative in a luxury corporation’s sustainability and environmental reporting is revealed.

Table 2. Propp’s (1968) fairy tale archetypes and the characters in LVMH’s environmental and social responsibility narrative.

Propp’s archetypes (Not all archetypes appear in all fairy tales)	Characters in LVMH’s environmental and social responsibility reports
The Hero	Bernard Arnault, CEO, and LVMH are the heroes in the LVMH story; the UN may be viewed as the hero in the wider global climate crisis narrative.
The Villain	Climate Crisis.
The Donor	UN provides the SDGs (a magic object or token) as a means of achieving an environmental and socially responsible future. Other, subsidiary, donors include ESG auditors and accreditors that offer methodologies to assess progress toward sustainability.
The Dispatcher	The UN through its Global Compact dispatches LVMH to achieve environmental and social responsibility.
The False Hero	By providing unrealistic and contradictory goals, the UN may be viewed as the False Hero in the global climate crisis narrative.
The Princess	The princess is the prize, which for LVMH is profitable growth performance and a strong share valuation – this is facilitated through attracting the key stakeholders of investors and customers. In the wider climate crisis narrative, the prize is an environmentally sustainable planet.
The Helper	For LVMH the helper is initially Stella McCartney, but as time progresses other helpers are drawn into the narrative from across the LVMH organization and beyond.
The Princess’s Father	While the character of the Princess’s father does not seem evident in the LVMH narrative, one could argue that in the wider global corporate narrative of climate crisis this role is taken by an individual like Larry Fink, the CEO of BlackRock, who shapes trends in the global financial markets in favor of companies that comply with ESG.

In the narrative context examined here, the story begins with the retelling of events, which reflects differences in the storyteller’s understanding of the situation and the construction of LVMH’s identity and role of the hero fighting against the villain of climate crisis. LVMH’s account of its actions toward the environment is filled with references to history and culture.¹⁸⁷ It introduces texts that advance remedial societal and environmental action (e.g. 2015 UN SDGs) into its narrative, in so doing, it confers credibility and respect on its own narrative and the quest it is on is clearly delineated by the presence of the UN SDGs, which it employs to assess its journey toward environmental sustainability. LVMH’s crafting of the 2020 Social and Environmental Responsibility Report is aimed at making readers sympathetic toward the corporation, as LVMH is cast as a hero characterized by longstanding moral consciousness. Such a telling of the corporate story reflects an authoritative narrative, with LVMH serving as the narrator and source of authority. Several media accounts support LVMH’s perspective on its mitigation of climate change and care for its community.¹⁸⁸

Counter accounts nonetheless provide a different perspective on LVMH’s narrative. As early as 2007, LVMH was criticized for its lack of environmental sustainability.¹⁸⁹ Subsequently, the Sustainability Index published by Business of Fashion highlights LVMH’s shortcomings concerning sustainability.¹⁹⁰ Other counter accounts by Good on You, Corporate Knights and Know the Chain also suggests that LVMH’s sustainability actions are insufficient.¹⁹¹ These counter accounts shift readers’ attention to what is omitted from LVMH’s account, create awareness of the twists and turns in the corporation’s story, and generate skepticism regarding LVMH’s tale. The counter accounts reflect Bakhtin’s polyphony where authority is circumvented and genuine dialogue, rather than monoglossic utterance, can take place.¹⁹² In this context, reality is subject to multiple interpretations.

As LVMH’s position on social and environmental sustainability invites questioning, helpers come to the rescue. The first is Stella McCartney, who joins LVMH as a special advisor and is instrumental in overcoming some of LVMH’s sustainability challenges, at least according to the 2020 report. Help also emerged in the form of the acquisition of Tiffany & Co, which allowed LVMH to publicly demonstrate its concern for environmental and social responsibility. By the 2021 report, LVMH is calling on multiple helpers from within and beyond the organization.

Given its economic performance and company valuation, as the hero of a fairy tale narrative, LVMH appears to be winning the battle against the villain of climate crisis. But is it climate crisis that is being truly addressed or merely the actions required of various ESG accreditation processes that satisfy the demands of stakeholders that LVMH demonstrates its credibility as a heroic warrior against climate crisis? As we all know, everything is not always as it seems in fairy tales. Hence, the story of LVMH’s environmental and social responsibility journey might not only be interrogated through the lens of the fairy tale narrative but, perhaps, after all, it is just a fairy tale?

We acknowledge that, as authors, we offer our interpretation of LVMH’s story, highlighting certain issues and omitting others. The purpose of this article was to demonstrate that there is no single authoritative account, but rather multiple stories surrounding corporations’ environmental responsibility. By focusing on the dialogical exchange of stories surrounding LVMH’s sustainability goals and actions, we highlighted the performative aspects of corporate texts and challenge their authority. This paves the way for future research to explore how corporate stories and counter accounts interactively impact stakeholders’ interpretation of corporate communication and actions. Moreover, it is important to note that this research focused on the narrative content and discourse present in the corporate reports, rather than their effect on consumer responses.¹⁹³ Further research is required to investigate the elements of narrativity concerning transportation and persuasion.

This research has several limitations and future directions. It considered a limited number of specific themes and issues arising in the LVMH report, yet corporate actions cannot be reduced to a focused but partial reading of a single report (albeit two editions), despite it being an important one. Likewise, the report is not LVMH’s only venue to narrate its sustainability story. Information on sustainability initiatives is available online, presenting LVMH’s sustainability journey in complementary ways. As communication occurs through multiple media, including advertisements, social media and movies, several questions emerge: Do multiple sustainability stories generate consonance or dissonance? Does the narrative medium affect perceptions of corporate sustainability?¹⁹⁴ This article opens avenues for further exploration of these issues so crucial to the future of luxury brands and the planet in these times of climate crisis.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Annamma Joy

Annamma Joy is Professor of Marketing in the Faculty of Management at the University of British Columbia. Her research spans the domains of art, fashion and wine. She has edited The Future of Luxury: Sustainability and Artification published by de Gruyter in 2022 and New Directions in Art, Fashion and Wine published by Lexington Books in 2023.

Joanne Roberts

Joanne Roberts is Emeritus Professor at Winchester School of Art, University of Southampton, UK. Her areas of expertise include creativity and innovation, knowledge management, luxury, and international business. Joanne's most recent book is The Oxford Handbook of Luxury Business, (Oxford University Press 2022) edited with P-Y. Donzé and V. Pouillard. [email protected]

Bianca Grohmann

Bianca Grohmann (MBA Ph.D. Washington State University) is Professor of Marketing and Concordia University Research Chair (Tier 1) at the John Molson School of Business in Montreal, Canada. Her research focuses on consumer psychology in the context of branding, corporate social responsibility, and gender. She is the director of the Sensory Lab at Concordia university.

Camilo Peña

Camilo Peña-Moreno is an Assistant Professor in the School of Management at the University of Bath. He holds a PhD from The University of British Columbia. His research interests are primarily in the areas of consumer culture and sustainability with a special focus on wine consumption, experiences of nature, new market development, and social movements.

Notes

1 Dion and Borraz, “Managing Heritage Brands”; Sádaba and Bernal, “History as Luxury Brand Enhancement.”

2 Kim, Lloyd, and Cervellon, “Narrative-Transportation Storylines in Luxury Brand Advertising”; Gurzki, Schlatter, and Woisetschläger, “Crafting Extraordinary Stories: Decoding Luxury Brand Communications.”

3 Kim, Lloyd, and Cervellon, 305.

4 Michelon, Trojanowski, and Sealy, “Narrative Reporting: State of the Art and Future Challenges.”

5 PWC, Beyond Compliance.

6 Brown, Stevens, and Maclaran, “What’s the Story, Allegory?”; Visconti, “Communicating Luxury Brands Through Stories.”

7 Escalas, “Self-Referencing and Persuasion.”

8 Geels et al., “A Critical Appraisal of Sustainable Consumption and Production Research.”

9 Pirages and Ehrlich, Ark II: Social Response to Environmental Imperatives.

10 Mittelstaedt et al., “Sustainability as Megatrend.”

11 United Nations, Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

12 Independent Group of Scientists Appointed by the Secretary-General, Global Sustainable Development Report, Times of Crisis, Times of Change, XVIII.

13 LVMH, 2020 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact; LVMH, 2021 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact.

14 Propp, Morphology of the Folktale.

15 Boje, Narrative Methods for Organizational and Communication Research.

16 Dillard and Vinnari, “Critical Dialogical Accountability”; Morrison and Lowe, “Into the Woods of Corporate Fairy Tales and Environmental Reporting”; Vinnari and Laine, “The Moral Mechanism of Counter Accounts.”

17 Wells et al., “How Legitimate Are the Sustainability Claims of Luxury Conglomerates.”

18 Okereke, “An Exploration of Motivations, Drivers and Barriers to Carbon Management: The UK FTSE 100.”

19 Bendell and Kleanthous, Deeper Luxury.

20 Rauturier, “How Ethical Is Louis Vuitton?”

21 Escalas, “Narrative Processing”; Escalas, “Self-Referencing and Persuasion”; Hamby and Jones, “The Effect of Affect: An Appraisal Theory Perspective on Emotional Engagement in Narrative Persuasion”; Kim, Lloyd and Cervellon, “Narrative-Transportation Storylines in Luxury Brand Advertising”; Gurzki, Schlatter, and Woisetschläger, “Crafting Extraordinary Stories.”

22 Hamby, Brinberg, and Daniloski, “It’s about Our Values.”

23 Delgadillo and Escalas, “Narrative Word-of-Mouth Communication”; Hamby, Daniloski, and Brinberg, “How Consumer Reviews Persuade through Narratives”; van Laer et al., “What Happens in Vegas Stays on TripAdvisor?.”

24 Herman, The Cambridge Companion to Narrative.

25 Czarniawska, Narratives in Social Science Research.

26 Gabriel, Storytelling in Organizations, Facts, Fiction, and Fantasies.

27 van Laer et al., “What Happens in Vegas Stays on TripAdvisor?”

28 Fludernik, An Introduction to Narratology.

29 Culler, The Pursuit of Signs: Semiotics, Literature, Deconstruction.

30 Green and Brock, “The Role of Transportation in the Persuasiveness of Public Narratives”; van Laer et al., “The Extended Transportation-Imagery Model.”

31 Marsh and Fazio, “Learning Errors from Fiction.”

32 Green and Brock, “The Role of Transportation in the Persuasiveness of Public Narratives”; van Laer et al., “The Extended Transportation-Imagery Model.”

33 Morrison and Lowe, “Into the Woods of Corporate Fairy Tales and Environmental Reporting.”

34 Propp, Morphology of the Folktale.

35 Monarth, “The Irresistible Power of Storytelling as a Strategic Business Tool.”

36 Economopoulou, “Aristotle’s Poetics in Relation to the Narrative Structure of the Screenplay.”

37 Nguyen, “Animation Narrative and the Differences of Narrative in Films between East Asian and Western.”

38 Morrison and Lowe, “Into the Woods of Corporate Fairy Tales and Environmental Reporting.”

39 Bakhtin, Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics; Bakhtin, The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays.

40 Bakhtin, Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics; Nesari, “Dialogism versus Monologism.”

41 Bakhtin, Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics; Bakhtin, The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays; Nesari, “Dialogism versus Monologism.”

42 Kristeva, “Word, Dialogue and Novel.”

43 Bakhtin, The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays.

44 Barthes, The Pleasure of the Text.

45 Morrison and Lowe, “Into the Woods of Corporate Fairy Tales and Environmental Reporting.”

46 LVMH, 2020 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact; LVMH, 2021 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact.

47 Bakhtin, The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays.

48 Ibid.

49 Robinson, “In Theory – Bakhtin: Dialogism, Polyphony and Heteroglossia.”

50 Ibid.

51 Morrison and Lowe, “Into the Woods of Corporate Fairy Tales and Environmental Reporting.”

52 Bronner, Folklore: The Basics.

53 Monin and Monin, “Hijacking the Fairy Tale.”

54 United Nations, The 17 Goals.

55 Bakhtin, Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics.

56 Morrison and Lowe, “Into the Woods of Corporate Fairy Tales and Environmental Reporting.”

57 van Laer et al., “What Happens in Vegas Stays on TripAdvisor?.”

58 Padgett et al., “Political Discussion and Debate in Narrative Time.”

59 Bakhtin, Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics.

60 Deloitte, Global Powers of Luxury Goods 2022, 19.

61 Armitage and Roberts. “Critical Luxury Studies: Defining a Field.”

62 Schumpeter, “How Bernard Arnault Became the World’s Richest Person.”

63 Subramanian, Zlatev, and Farook, “LVMH’s Bid for Tiffany & Co,” 2.

64 Schumpeter, “How Bernard Arnault Became the World’s Richest Person.”

65 Donzé, “The Birth of Luxury Big Business.”

66 Elliott, “LVMH Acquires a Majority Stake in Bulgari.”

67 Subramanian, Zlatev, and Farook, “LVMH’s Bid for Tiffany & Co.”

68 Allérès, Luxe, Stratégies-Marketing.

69 Thomas, DeLuxe: How Luxury Lost Its Lustre.

70 LVMH, 2022 LVMH Annual Report: Passionate about Creativity, 154 and 18.

71 Forbes. The 2023 List: Facts and Figures: Inside Forbes’ 37th-Annual Billionaires Ranking.

72 Czarniawska, Narratives in Social Science Research.

73 Visconti, “Communicating Luxury Brands Through Stories.”

74 Morrison and Lowe, “Into the Woods of Corporate Fairy Tales and Environmental Reporting.”

75 van Laer et al., “The Extended Transportation-Imagery Model.”

76 LVMH, 2020 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact, 21–2.

77 Escalas, “Narrative Processing”; Visconti, “Communicating Luxury Brands through Stories.”

78 LVMH, 2020 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact, 3.

79 Phelan et al., “Character.”

80 Margolin, “Character”; Simons, “Sacred Stories and Silent Voices.”

81 van Laer et al., “What Happens in Vegas Stays on TripAdvisor?.”

82 Escalas and Stern, “Sympathy and Empathy: Emotional Responses to Advertising Dramas.”

83 Propp, Morphology of the Folktale; Morrison and Lowe, “Into the Woods of Corporate Fairy Tales and Environmental Reporting.”

84 Campbell, Joseph. The Hero with a Thousand Faces; Nguyen, “Animation Narrative and the Differences of Narrative in Films between East Asian and Western.”

85 Propp, Morphology of the Folktale.

86 LVMH, 2020 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact, 2–3.

87 Ibid., 3.

88 Morrison and Lowe, “Into the Woods of Corporate Fairy Tales and Environmental Reporting.”

89 LVMH, 2020 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact, 3.

90 For information on the UN Global Compact see: https://unglobalcompact.org/about

91 MSCI ESG Ratings aim to measure a company’s management of financially relevant ESG risks and opportunities (see: https://www.msci.com/our-solutions/esg-investing/esg-ratings).

92 LVMH, 2020 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact, 14.

93 Ibid.

94 Ibid, 127.

95 Ibid, 126.

96 Ibid, 127.

97 Independent Group of Scientists Appointed by the Secretary-General, Global Sustainable Development Report. Times of Crisis, Times of Change: Science for Accelerating Transformations to Sustainable Development.

98 Propp, Morphology of the Folktale.

99 For example, action to address goals seven and thirteen “affordable and clean energy” and “climate action,” respectively, are manifesting itself through higher priced energy and therefore increased poverty and lower economic growth, thereby undermining the first and eighth goals of ‘no poverty’ and “decent work and economic growth.”

100 Mittelstaedt et al. “Sustainability as Megatrend: Two Schools of Macromarketing Thought.”

101 White, “Luxury Leader LVMH, in Green Mode, Laments Thunberg’s Pessimism.”

102 Ibid.

103 LVMH, 2020 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact, 127.

104 Ibid., 24–5.

105 Ibid., 24–5.

106 LVMH, LVMH Climate Week Opening Ceremony.

107 Ibid.

108 Economopoulou, “Aristotle’s Poetics in Relation to the Narrative Structure of the Screenplay.”

109 LVMH, 2020 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact, 24–5.

110 Ibid., 127.

111 Bendell and Kleanthous, Deeper Luxury.

112 Ibid., 32–33.

113 Ibid.

114 Ibid., 3.

115 Ibid.

116 See: https://www.corporateknights.com/rankings/global-100-rankings/2022-global-100-rankings/100-most-sustainable-corporations-of-2022/ retrieved September 7, 2023.

117 Schultz, “LVMH Does Sustainability Differently.”

118 Morrison and Lowe, “Into the Woods of Corporate Fairy Tales and Environmental Reporting”; Propp, Morphology of the Folktale.

119 LVMH, 2020 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact, 15.

120 Kent, “Can Stella McCartney Clean Up Fashion?”

121 Ibid.

122 Kent, “Widespread Inaction on Sustainability Eclipses Progress at Fashion’s Biggest Companies.”

123 Rauturier, “How Ethical Is Louis Vuitton?.”

124 Ibid.

125 Fiorani, Bosco, and Di Gerio, “Measuring Sustainability in the Luxury Fashion Sector,” 367.

126 LVMH, 2020 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact, 64.

127 Kent, “Can Stella McCartney Clean Up Fashion?”

128 Business of Fashion, The Sustainability Index 2021.

129 Turunen, “Luxury Resale Shaping the Future of Fashion.”

130 Stella McCartney, Circularity.

131 Stella McCartney, Sustainability Timeline.

132 Stella McCartney, Circularity.

133 Ibid.

134 Stella McCartney, Fibres from Forests.

135 Stella McCartney, Circularity.

136 Wolfe, “How Ethical Is Stella McCartney?”

137 Ibid.

138 Ibid.

139 Ibid.

140 Ibid.

141 Agnew, “LVMH Buys Minority Stake in Stella McCartney Brand.”

142 Kent, “Can Stella McCartney Clean Up Fashion?”

143 Ibid.

144 Muret, “LVMH Launches Life 360 Programme for a New Luxury at Group’s Climate Week.”

145 Joy et al., “The Artification of Wine”; Ozdamar-Ertekin, Atik, and Murray, “The Logic of Sustainability.”

146 Schultz, “LVMH Does Sustainability Differently.”

147 Ibid.

148 Morrison and Lowe, “Into the Woods of Corporate Fairy Tales and Environmental Reporting.”

149 LVMH, 2020 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact, 3.

150 Muret, “LVMH Launches Life 360 Programme for a New Luxury at Group’s Climate Week.”

151 LVMH, 2020 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact, 67 and 65.

152 Ibid., 66.

153 Ibid.

154 Ibid.

155 Caliendo, “New LVMH Packaging Using Eastman’s Molecular Recycling Technologies.”

156 LVMH, 2020 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact, 66.

157 Ibid., 66–67.

158 Ibid, 66.

159 Sommer, “Why LVMH Teams Up with Weturn.”

160 Sommer, “LVMH Launches Online Resale Platform for Luxury Fabrics.”

161 LVMH, 2020 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact, 66–7.

162 Ibid., 67, 75 and 84.

163 Ibid., 87.

164 Pavarini, “How LVMH Wants to Save the Forest.”

165 Rauturier, “How Ethical Is Louis Vuitton?.”

166 Ibid.

167 Ibid.

168 Ibid.

169 Ibid.

170 Muret, “LVMH Launches Life 360 Programme for a New Luxury at Group’s Climate Week.”

171 Ibid.

172 LVMH, 2020 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact; LVMH (2021), 2021 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact.

173 Know the Chain, Apparel and Footwear Benchmark Company Scorecard 2018; Know the Chain, Apparel and Footwear Benchmark Company Scorecard 2021.

174 Orava, High Fashion Going Green.

175 Know the Chain, Apparel and Footwear Benchmark Company Scorecard 2021.

176 Ibid.

177 LVMH, 2021 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact, 125.

178 Know the Chain, Apparel and Footwear Benchmark Company Scorecard 2021: LVMH Moët Hennessy – Louis Vuitton SE.

179 LVMH, LVMH: Excellent First Half for LVMH.

180 The Straits Times, “Louis Vuitton Owner Emerges as ESG Magnet with Almost $23 Billion Stake.”

181 Euromonitor International, World Market for Luxury Goods: Briefing.

182 BlackRock, Inc. is multinational investment company based in New York City. It is the world’s largest asset manager, with US$8.594 trillion in assets under management as of the end of 2022 (BlackRock, 2023). BlackRock positions itself as an industry leader in environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG).

183 BlackRock. Built For You: BlackRock 2022 Annual Report.

184 Fryer, “Storytelling That Moves People”; Lakoff, George “Why It Matters How We Frame the Environment.”

185 Propp, Morphology of the Folktale.

186 Propp; Economopoulou, “Aristotle’s Poetics in Relation to the Narrative Structure of the Screenplay”; Monarth, “The Irresistible Power of Storytelling as a Strategic Business Tool”; Nguyen, “Animation Narrative and the Differences of Narrative in Films between East Asian and Western.”

187 LVMH, 2020 LVMH Social and Environmental Report – Committed to Positive Impact.

188 See for example: Adegeest, “LVMH Releases First Comprehensive Social and Environmental Report.”

189 Bendell and Kleanthous, Deeper Luxury.

190 Business of Fashion The Sustainability Index 2021.

191 Rauturier, “How Ethical Is Louis Vuitton?”; Know the Chain, Apparel and Footwear Benchmark Company Scorecard 2018; Know the Chain, Apparel and Footwear Benchmark Company Scorecard 2021.

192 Bakhtin, The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays.

193 Gaiman, The Sleeper and the Spindle.

194 van Laer, Feiereisen, and Visconti, “Need for Narrative.”