Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether the introduction of water security, in 2015, as a category in the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) Climate A-List, increases the use of impression management (IM) strategies. The purpose is to analyze how companies reacted to programmes of voluntary disclosure of environmental information.

Mixed-methods research was developed, combining a qualitative and quantitative approach. This study first used a qualitative content analysis of 15 companies’ reports, from the materials sector, which was scored in the CDP Climate A-List, in 2017, to identify the IM strategies adopted. Next, this study conducted a quantitative analysis to test the mean differences of water references between years, industry and region.

Three types of IM strategies are identified (justification and commitment, self-promotion and authorization). The references identified as self-promotion strategy increased in 2016. This indicates companies reacted to the programmes for voluntary disclosure of environmental information by increasing strategies of legitimization and image promotion.

Further research can be developed, focusing only on sustainability reports and extending the number of companies, the period and sectors under analysis.

This paper shows how the inclusion of a topic such as water security in an environmental ranking of companies, namely, CDP A-List, affects the use of IM strategies in voluntary disclosures.

The purpose of this paper is to describe how sustainable development has been initiated in a country (Sweden) in which sustainable development has priority and has produced observable results – essentially, the definition and reshaping of contents (p. 107) referred to in the Zhang and London (ZL) paper, therefore adding some validity to the model.

The research is both exploratory and qualitative in nature and uses an in-depth case study approach to the Swedish international economy as might be reflected by ZL’s modified Porter model. Information drawn from current secondary sources is complemented by personal contemporaneous observations of individuals in the country of interest.

The task of implementing Sweden’s strategy for sustainable development is holistic, and the State has played a major role in its development. That is, sustainability is the responsibility of the Government Offices as a whole, which produces proactive programs in each of the interactions analyzed in the ZL modified model. As an aside, the country has sustained a high level of competitiveness while producing a pleasant environment in which to live.

Limitations in the study follow the same criticisms made of Porter’ seminal treatment – (still) lack of a formal model construction (although ZL make a meaningful contribution), (still) lack of clear definitions (although ZL make a meaningful contribution), problematic research methodology (although an attempt has been made at improvement) and lack of empirical testing among others (and it is thought that this paper is a step in the right direction).

Insofar as Sweden might be a model for other countries interested in extending their efforts in sustainable development, observations here provide some insights into possible approaches and results.

The approach basically followed Siggelkow’s (2007) definition of the use of cases as illustrations, which is useful when the underlying development depends upon constructs. It follows that the association of real-world observations with theory well serves the underlying foundation and cannot help but build credibility of those concepts and theory.

This paper, based on an interview with Richard Freeman, describes the creation and development of the City Disputes Panel (CDP). It is the initiative of Richard Freeman, a solicitor and former merchant banker. The Panel will offer arbitration, mediation and expert determination procedures for dealing with wholesale markets disputes such as may arise in the context of many financial services transactions. Current methods for dealing with such disputes comprise compliance investigations followed by resort to litigation which is costly and time‐consuming. The CDP will offer a suitable forum of financial and legal experts to deal with such disputes effectively and expeditiously.

The purpose of this paper is to comparatively analyze how top corporations in New Zealand, Australia and the Global Fortune 500 group communicate about climate science.

A combination of keyword count and quantitative content analysis is used to develop a reliable set of indicators to measure corporate communication about climate science.

Just a few corporations mention or explicitly agree with scientific consensus on climate change and few report science-based targets. They report more frequently on societal risks of climate change, as well as business contribution and responsibility. New Zealand based corporations generally do poor reporting compared to Australian corporations, who do as well as the biggest corporations in the world.

There is a further need for cross-country research and for more longitudinal analysis to understand how organizations communicate about scientific issues to its stakeholders.

This paper can inform communication managers about the need to pay attention to how their communication, individually and in comparison with their peers, is likely interpreted by the stakeholders. Managers may attend to scientific consensus messaging to gain stakeholder approval for ambitious business actions on climate change.

Organizations are powerful social and economic drivers. Understanding how they interpret and communicate a scientific issue has implications for public and policy discourses and outcomes.

This is the first paper to comparatively identify common and contextual drivers of business communication of complex scientific issues. A reliable scale to measure climate science communication by corporations will be helpful for future researchers to replicate in other sectors.

This paper aims to highlight the increasing importance corporate responses to climate change will play in corporate reputation.

Review of the relevant secondary literature

Companies that develop active responses to climate change will see positive impact on their corporate reputation.

The review of the secondary literature is not comprehensive and subject to the author’s qualitative interpretation of it.

Companies that follow the recommendations will see a benefit in stakeholder appreciation.

The more companies embrace a proactive stance on climate change, the more likely society is to meet the 2 per cent goal.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first treatment of climate change from the perspective of corporate reputation.

This paper aims to explore current trends in how companies disclose climate-related risks and opportunities in their financial statements. As part of the authors’ analysis, they examine: whether forward-looking assumptions and judgements are typically considered in reporting climate-related risks/opportunities; whether there are differences in the reporting practices of firms in carbon-intensive industries versus non-carbon-intensive industries; and whether negative media reports have an influence on the levels of disclosure a firm makes.

The authors chose content analysis as their methodology and examined the financial statements published by firms listed on the UK’s FTSE 100 between 2016 and 2020. This analysis is framed by Suchman’s three dimensions of legitimacy, being pragmatic, cognitive and moral.

Climate-related disclosures in the notes and financial accounts of these firms did increase over the period. Yet, overall, the level the disclosures was inadequate and the quality was inconsistent. From this, the authors conclude that pragmatic legitimacy is not a particularly strong driving factor in compelling organisations to disclose climate-related information. The firms in carbon-intensive industries do provide greater levels of disclosure, including both qualitative and quantitative (monetary) content, which is consistent with cognitive legitimacy. However, from a moral legitimacy perspective, this study finds that firms did not adapt responsively to negative media coverage as a way of reflecting their accountability to broader public norms and values. Overall, this analysis suggests that regulatory enforcement and a systematic reporting framework with adequate guidance is going to be critical to developing transparent climate-related reporting in future.

This paper contributes to existing studies on climate-related disclosures, which have mainly examined the ‘front-half’ of annual reports. Conversely, this study aims to shed light on these practices in the “back-half” of these reports, exploring the underlying reasons for reporting climate-related risks and opportunities in financial accounts. The authors’ insights into the current disclosure practices make a theoretical contribution to the literature. Practitioners can also draw on these insights to improve how they report on climate-related risks and opportunities in their financial statements.

The main purpose of this chapter is to understand climate change disclosures to achieve sustainable development goals (SDGs) by discussing in the context of developed and emerging countries’ company cases. Therefore, companies have been selected from the Forbes Global (2000–2021) list by looking at their climate change disclosures in their official websites and their corporate reports. Climate change disclosures have been discussed based on impression management perspective. The results of the study are that some of the tactics used in the reports are at a level that can affect the stakeholders of the enterprises. Therefore, it has been observed that climate change and the steps taken in the issue of climate change are at the top of the priority lists of companies in these four countries. This study is valuable to understand how country perspective changes in climate change disclosures to enhance SDGs by implementing impression management tactics.

This paper aims to exploit the varying level of responses to the carbon disclosure project (CDP) to assess the economic consequences of carbon emission disclosure by disclosure level. Economic theory suggests that increased disclosures by a firm should lower the information asymmetry component of the firm’s cost of capital. Using CDP disclosures by US firms, the authors study the effect of voluntary carbon emission on the information asymmetry risk in capital markets.

The authors conduct cross-sectional analyses to examine whether, from the investor perspective, firms with varying CDP disclosure levels experience differential information asymmetric risk. The authors also conduct a pre- and post-disclosure comparison to examine whether the market responds to first-time carbon emission disclosure with decreases in the relative bid-ask spread.

In the cross-sectional analysis, the authors find that firms that decline to disclose carbon emission information, firms that provide incomplete information and firms that do not respond to the CDP survey have higher information asymmetry than firms that provide complete information and opt to make it available to the public. Using a pre- and post-disclosure comparison, the authors find that the market responds to first-time carbon emission disclosure with decreases in the relative bid-ask spread. Additionally, only firms that participate, provide complete disclosures and opt to make it available to the public enjoy the largest reduction in bid-ask spreads, which is followed by firms that provide incomplete information. Other firms do not experience a reduction in information asymmetry.

This study examines the impact of CDP disclosures on information asymmetry using a US sample. The results of the study may not be generalizable to other countries that have different institutional arrangements and settings.

The study has important social and policy implications. The findings on the role of carbon emission disclosures in reducing information asymmetry in the capital markets suggest the need for policymakers to promote greater carbon emission disclosures in the USA and other countries where such disclosures have been traditionally less emphasized. As to stakeholders, bringing corporate carbon emission disclosure in line with recommended guidelines will require them to exercise more direct stakeholder pressure to encourage firms to fully participate in the CDP project. This is particularly critical in settings of regulatory inaction and weak enforcement with respect to environmental policies and disclosure such as the USA.

The results span the current gap between two broad perspectives on corporate social responsibilities. The traditional shareholder perspective argues that companies only participate in socially responsible activities which increase shareholder value, while an alternate perspective argues that companies also undertake social responsibilities to benefit society even at the cost of shareholders (Moser and Martin, 2012). The study demonstrates that the two perspectives are not always at odds, carbon emission disclosure not only provides important information on the corporate social responsibility of the firm but also contributes to enriching the information environment leading to reduced information asymmetry in the equity markets for US firms. Thus, from both a stakeholder and capital market perspective, firms have incentives to provide carbon emission disclosures voluntarily. More direct stakeholder pressure may be helpful to encourage more firms to provide complete carbon emission information and opt to make it available to the public.

Few studies investigate the impact of CDP disclosure on the information environment of public companies. The lack of research on this key connection between new disclosures on carbon emissions and information asymmetry in the capital markets is the primary motivation for the paper. The study also provides important insights on disclosure level; just participating in the CDP survey is not enough, the degree of participation is also important. The results of the study suggest that the varying level of disclosure matters, the greatest benefits in terms of reduction of information asymmetry accrue to firms that provide complete information and opt to make it available to the public.

This paper aims to trace subsequent steps of the sustainability reporting evolution in terms of changes in the organisation fields and professional jurisdictions involved. As such, it highlights the (interrelated) organisational and professional challenges associated with the progressive incorporation of “sustainability” within corporate reporting.

The paper draws on Suddaby and Viale’s (2011) theorisation of how professionals reshape organisational fields to highlight how organisational spaces, actors, rules and professional capital evolve alongside the incorporation of sustainability within corporate reporting.

The paper shows organisational spaces, actors, rules and professional capital mobilised during the recent evolution of sustainability reporting, starting from a period in which there was no space for sustainability, to more recent periods in which sustainability gained increasing momentum beyond initial niches, and culminating in more integrated forms of sustainability reporting.

Although the analysis is limited to empirical evidence collected by prior research and practice on sustainability reporting, the paper offers a view to imagine how the incorporation of sustainability within corporate reporting relies on and affects organisational fields and professional jurisdictions.

The paper offers a lens to interpret corporate and professional challenges associated with the more recent evolutions of sustainability reporting practice and standard setting. It also allows framing the papers accepted in the special issue on “new challenges in sustainability reporting” and concludes by suggesting an agenda for future research.

The research objectives of this chapter are threefold. First, we explore what is the current status of corporate water accounting tools and methodologies. Second, we develop a framework for analyzing corporate water accounting and reporting. Third, we investigate what French CAC 40 companies account for and report in relations to the water challenge.

We collected annual and sustainability reports from all CAC 40 companies as well as their water Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) responses when available. We also collected all publically available corporate water accounting methodologies to assess the international water accounting field. We coded the data according to our designed framework via qualitative data analysis software.

Although water is seen as equally important to climate change (Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA), 2009), French multinationals have a very immature reporting on this topic. Most still do not report to the water disclosure questionnaire of CDP in 2014 and rely on basic figures such as global water consumption. We analyzed the multiple water accounting, reporting, and risk assessment frameworks that have mushroomed since 2000, and question the impact of this fragmented field on the maturity of the water performance reporting by French companies.

The developed framework for analysis of water reporting can be used for sustainability teaching at university level.

We developed the first comprehensive analytical framework for water corporate reporting assessment. Moreover, this research is the first comprehensive study of water reporting in Europe. We therefore contribute to extend our comprehension of corporate maturity in water stewardship and water performance reporting.