Search results

Higher education institutions (HEIs) are critical in the sustainability agenda, not only as catalysts for promoting sustainability practices but also because their activities have substantial social, economic and environmental impacts. Yet there is limited research that examines their sustainability performance. This paper aims to investigate the factors that are associated with sustainability performance in HEIs. Specifically, drawing from the stakeholder theory and exploiting Ullmann’s (1985) conceptual framework, this study examines the association between sustainability performance and stakeholder power, strategic posture and financial slack resources.

The authors draw the sample from the People & Planet University Green League Table for the period 2011–2019 and use the generalised estimating equations for the modelling approach.

This study finds that stakeholder power, in particular, funding grant income, tuition fee income and student and staff numbers, are positively associated with sustainability performance. In relation to strategic posture, this study finds that sustainability performance is negatively associated with governing body independence and gender diversity, and positively associated with internal structures. Finally, regarding financial slack resources, this study finds that surplus income (staff costs) is positively (negatively) associated with sustainability performance.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this research contributes to several existing literature focusing on the not-for-profit sector by documenting, for the first time, the role of stakeholder power, strategic posture and slack financial resources on sustainability performance.

The paper includes relevant implications for HEI managers and regulators for promoting sustainability.

These results contribute to the literature on the factors influencing sustainability performance.

Reacting to the calls in the contemporary literature to further examine the relationship between board attributes and firms’ decisions to obtain corporate social responsibility assurance (CSRA) through the use of pioneering techniques, this study aims to analyse the influence of such attributes together with the existence of a corporate social responsibility (CSR) committee on the adoption of CSRA using fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (Fs-QCA).

Fs-QCA was performed on a sample of nonfinancial European companies listed on the STOXX Europe 600 index over the period 2016–2018.

The study findings indicate that the decision to obtain a CSRA report depends on a complex combination of the influence of the CSR committee and certain board attributes, such as size, experience, independence, meeting frequency, gender and CEO separation. These attributes play essential contributing roles and, if suitably combined, stimulate the adoption of CSRA.

The study findings are important for policymakers, professionals, organisations and regulators in forming and modifying the rules and guidelines related to CSR committees and board composition.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study represents the first examination of the impact of board attributes and CSR committees on the adoption of CSRA using Fs-QCA method. It also offers a novel methodological contribution to the board-CSRA literature by combining traditional statistical (logistic regression) and Fs-QCA methods. This study emphasises the benefits of Fs-QCA as an alternative to logistic regression analysis. Through the use of these methods, the research illustrates that Fs-QCA offers more detailed and informative results when compared to those obtained through logistic regression analysis. This finding highlights the potential of Fs-QCA to enhance our understanding of complex phenomena in academic research.

This study aims to explore whether firms that have a sustainability committee operating on the board, publish separate sustainability reports that are externally assured by an independent external audit and have large and active boards are more likely to be engaged in environmental practices and have better environmental performance.

Based on a sample of firms listed on the Saudi Stock Exchange, covering the period 2014–2021, this study applies panel data models to examine the research hypotheses.

The findings show significant positive associations between the existence of a sustainability committee, the publication of separate sustainability reports and the independent external assurance of these reports and environmental performance. This study also finds that the composite internal governance index is significant and positively associated with environmental performance.

Policymakers should support the creation of a sustainability committee on the boards of Saudi firms and review its role and responsibilities. The findings of this study inform regulators of the importance of the existence of independent external assurance of the sustainability reports of Saudi firms to enhance the credibility and reliability of these reports. Managers need to establish devoted committees committed to sustainability-related tasks that help coordinate communications between the firm and stakeholders.

The Saudi Arabian Government has implemented a range of policies and initiatives aimed at improving environmental performance, which is a main focus of Saudi Vision 2030 to achieve environmental sustainability. Therefore, this study provides unique evidence and new insights on the impact of internal governance on corporate environmental performance in the Saudi context.

By providing a critical analysis of a recent literature review concerning environmental, social and governance (ESG) and corporate social responsibility (CSR) research in finance which was published in the Journal of Corporate Finance (Gillan et al., 2021), examining it in the light of several reviews on the same or similar lines of research, this paper aims to serve those who wish to do research in the CSR/ESG/corporate sustainability and the reporting thereof areas in finance.

This note serves to comment on Gillan et al.’s review.

Irrespective of the merits of the review, it should not be used by newcomers to the research on CSR in corporate finance given that it provides a very biased view of it.

This commentary serves the purpose of cautioning those interested in becoming acquainted with CSR-related research in corporate finance that the review on which it focuses should be used only as an entry point, given that it offers an incomplete and biased picture.