Search results

Community rail is a grassroots movement that spans Britain, made up of hundreds of community groups and partnerships that engage people with their railways and stations and provide a bridge between the rail industry and the public at a local level. The movement has grown up from the grassroots, but it has also been increasingly supported and nurtured by the rail industry, with train operators proactively encouraging its spread and development. They, and national and devolved governments, recognise the value of community rail, and its contribution to social inclusion, sustainable development and the railway’s ability to prosper and serve passengers and communities well, now and in the future. This idea is supported by passenger data showing that railway lines with community rail partnerships – working to enhance, promote and aid access to those lines – outperform comparable lines. A swathe of qualitative evidence shows community rail partnerships and station groups having a demonstrable impact on their localities and people’s lives, and appreciation of this role by industry leaders. The many examples of community rail volunteers and practitioners bringing about positive change resonate with academic research exploring how civic engagement and local efficacy and communications can support change, particularly with regard to sustainable behaviours and development. A range of researchers argue that localised, interactive engagement and communications may be the key, when it comes to bringing about the major shifts in behaviour needed to address the global, existential threat posed by the climate crisis, which unsustainable behaviours and policies have brought about. In this way, evidence suggests that engaging communities with their railways, and local transport networks generally, is critical, both to these networks operating in a truly sustainable manner and to achieving inter- and intra-generational equity within the communities they serve.

This paper aims to evaluate non-financial reporting (NFR) frameworks insofar as risk reporting is concerned. This is facilitated through analysis of the adequacy of climate- and pandemic-related risk reporting in three industries that are both significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and are at risk from climate change. The pervasiveness of pandemic and climate-change risks have been highlighted in 2020, the hottest year on record and the year the COVID-19 pandemic struck. Stakeholders might reasonably expect reporting on these risks to have prepared them for the consequences.

The current debate on the “complexity” of sustainability and NFR frameworks/standards is critically analysed in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and calls to “build back better”. Context is provided through analysis of risk reporting by the ten largest airlines and the five largest companies in each of the hotel and cruise industries.

Risk reporting on two significant issues, pandemics and climate change, is woefully inadequate. While very little consideration has been given to pandemic risks, disclosures on climate-related risks focus predominantly on “risks” of increased regulation rather than physical risks, indicating a short-term focus. The disclosures are dispersed across different corporate reporting media and fail to appreciate the long-term consequences or offer solutions. Mindful that a conceptual framework for NFR must address this, the authors propose a new definition of materiality and recommend that sustainable development risks and opportunities be placed at the core of a future framework for connected/integrated reporting.

For sustainable development risks to be perceived as “real” by managers, further research is needed to determine the nature and extent of key sustainable development risks and the most effective mitigation strategies.

This paper highlights the importance of recognising the complexity of the issues facing organisations, society and the planet and addressing them by encouraging robust consideration of the interdependencies in evolving approaches to corporate reporting.

This study contributes to the current debate on the future of corporate reporting in light of two significant interconnected crises that threaten business and society – the pandemic and climate change. It provides evidence to support a long-term oriented and holistic approach to risk management and reporting.

The purpose of this paper is to review the contributions of the special issue papers while presenting four broad research avenues.

The paper is based on a review of current literature on climate change and carbon accounting.

The authors propose four broad avenues for research: climate change as a systemic and social issue, the multi-layered transition apparatus for climate change, climate vulnerability and the future of carbon accounting.

The authors connect this study with the requested institutional changes for climate breakdown, making the paper relevant for practice and policy. The authors notably point to education and professions as institutions that will request bold and urgent makeovers.

The authors urge academics to reconsider climate change as a social issue, requiring to use new theoretical lenses such as emotions, eco-feminism, material politics and “dispositifs” to tackle this grand challenge.

This paper switches the authors’ viewpoint on carbon accounting to look at it from a more systemic and social lens.

The purpose of this chapter is twofold. First, to give a concise account of the current global climate situation, its previous history according to the palaeoclimate record, and climate scientists’ predictions of the consequences of various scenarios of global climate change. Then to explain why so many people continue to be oblivious to the enormous risks of continuing with business as usual.

The approach is through a comprehensive study of the relevant evidence and the scientific and scholarly literature, interwoven with philosophical reflections on their significance.

The findings are as follows: the evidence for the anthropogenic nature of global warming is overwhelming, and the prognoses for continued burning of fossil fuels (sea level rise, extreme weather, etc.) are dire. The denial stems in large part from the undue influence of climate scepticism movements, lavishly funded by the fossil fuel industries, combined with a variety of psycho-social and economic factors.

The implications are several. Given the complex nature of global warming, scientists need to do a better job of communicating their findings to the general public, and scholars and academics need to find ways to expose the machinations of the fossil fuel industries. And given the global impact of climate change, citizens of the developed nations need to see that a radical change in their behaviour is demanded not only by considerations of social justice but also even by their own self-interest.

The value of this philosophical approach is that it affords a more comprehensive view of the situation around global warming than we get from the more specialised disciplines.

The purpose of this paper is to reflect on how climate change risk reporting might evolve in various world regions in the post COVID-19 pandemic era.

Using a multiple-case study approach and adopting an institutional theory lens, we assess whether the pandemic is likely to strengthen or weaken institutional pressures for climate change risk disclosures and predict how climate-related risk reporting will evolve post-pandemic.

The authors find that climate change risk reporting is likely to evolve differently according to geographical location. The authors predict that disclosure levels will increase in regions with ambitious climate policy and where economic stimulus packages support sustainable economic recovery. Where there has been a weakening of environmental commitments and economic stimulus packages support resource intensive business, climate change risk reporting will stagnate or even decline. The authors discuss the scenarios for climate change risk reporting expected to play out in different parts of the world.

The authors contribute to the nascent literature on climate change risk disclosure and identify future directions in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The climate crisis is frightening for many people because of evident and often dire impacts. Although these impacts are alarming, it's often not clear what one person, or one community, can do to drive down greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. For this reason, the Episcopal Diocese of California initiated the development and rollout of an Internet accessible tool – sustainislandhome.org – that can help people and communities be part of climate solutions. This chapter focuses on why sustainislandhome.org was developed, its design principles and how it works, and lessons the Episcopal Church is learning from rollout of this tool across Episcopal dioceses in the United States. It's my hope that our effort can serve as a model for other faith communities in educating and mobilizing their members for climate action and advocacy.