Search results

Over the past years, business strategies have been designed to improve ‘firms' financial and non-financial performances and achieve sustainable development, leading to corporate sustainability. This article is a bibliometric analysis of two decades of the relationship between corporate sustainability and firm performance, identifying the research focus and the gaps for future research.

The bibliometric review of corporate sustainability and performance research is between January 2004 and June 2023. As per the Web of Science database, the theme's research commenced around 2004, growing gradually till 2023. Five hundred thirty-nine published articles by peer-reviewed ABDC-indexed A and A* journals in English have been reviewed. The bibliometrix package in R software is used with VOSviewer for the bibliometric analysis.

The study's findings indicate a lack of research on the theme from developed and underdeveloped nations. Further, the analysis reveals five clusters of research: (1) business sustainability, (2) corporate sustainability reporting, (3) corporate sustainability, strategy, and innovation, (4) stakeholder and corporate sustainability, and e) corporate sustainability assessment.

The future research areas proposed are on two major themes, namely, corporate sustainability and organizational competitive advantage, including sub-themes such as “Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) and financial performance” and “greenhouse-gas emissions” and “market orientations,” respectively. There is a need for more research in developing markets, a comprehensive definition of corporate sustainability, and further exploration of the theme linking strategy and innovation.

This chapter discusses how businesses can create alignment between their corporate sustainability (CS) efforts that focus on the triple bottom line of the financial, environmental, and social, and the 10 principles of the UN Global Compact in the four core areas of environment, human rights, labor standards, and anticorruption.

Based on the literature review, the relationship between CS and corporate responsibility is presented. Creating alignment between CS management and Global Compact initiatives requires knowledge of the Global Reporting Initiative (G4-GRI), third-party CS rankings, green supply chain management, and anticorruption strategies.

UN Global Compact is an international forum to promote and self-report CS and corporate social responsibility [Bitanga & Bridwell, 2010. CS is achieved through a triple bottom line – financial, environmental, and social (Hutchins & Sutherland, 2008). For CS management, businesses use four strategies including defensive, cost-benefit, strategic, and innovation/learning [Buchholtz & Carroll, 2008; Egbeleke, Journal of Management and Sustainability, 4(2), 92–105 (2014); Epstein, 2008; Epstein, Buhovac, & Yuthas, 2010]. The UN G4-GRI is the most widely used comprehensive sustainability reporting standard in the world (G4-GRI, 2013). Third-party, industry sector-specific CS ratings reinforce the self-reported sustainability reports. Each firm has to conduct their own CS cost-benefit analysis to determine how CS practices can lead to value creation for sustained competitive advantage. Creating alignment with Global Compact initiatives offers firms a marketing advantage. Conducting business in accordance with the Global Compact is a value-increasing business strategy [Kaspereit & Lopatta, 2011; Lopatta & Kaspereit, 2014; Michelon, Corporate Reputation Review, 14(2), 79–96 (2011)]. Green supply chain management is essential for CS (Penfield, 2014). Four prevailing anticorruption frameworks or intervention policy approaches include law enforcement, economics, moralism, and cultural relativism (Bellows, 2013). There is little sustainability reporting in the government and public-sector organizations (Adams, Muir, & Hoque, 2014).

It is difficult to quantify the financial and social benefits of aligning the CS efforts with the 10 principles of UN Global Compact [Parisi, Journal of Management and Governance, 17(1), 71–97 (2013); Nilipour & Nilipour, Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(9), 1084–1092 (2012)]. The environmental impact can be easily quantified.

As the primary driver of globalization, businesses and other organizations can help ensure that markets, commerce, technology, and finance advance in ways that benefit environment, economies, and societies in both developed and developing countries leading to sustained development.

The role of green supply chain management and anticorruption strategies in CS management is explored.

This bibliometric analysis underscores the increasing importance of corporate sustainability in the post-COVID-19 era. Despite existing confusion and a dearth of studies on measuring corporate sustainability, the study identifies a significant methodological gap and endeavors to address it by proposing a comprehensive measure. The primary goal is to bridge this gap by conducting a bibliometric analysis on the scale of corporate sustainability, examining 126 documents spanning from 2001 to 2022. The study employs an expert opinion survey to identify and finalize dimensions and sub-dimensions of corporate sustainability, followed by a literature mapping process to formulate questionnaire items. A pilot survey is then conducted to ensure the reliability of the questionnaire. The study proposes utilizing the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) index construction methodology to establish the Corporate Sustainability Index (CSI). The key findings reveal that corporate sustainability comprises economic, environmental, and social sustainability. Environmental sustainability encompasses aspects such as air, water, land, biodiversity, ocean preservation, waste prevention, and environmental management. Social sustainability involves the satisfaction of various stakeholders, including employees, shareholders, customers, community, government, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and suppliers. Economic sustainability is characterized by long-term profits, cost efficiency, trade-offs, sustainable investments, and spin-offs. Rooted in stakeholder theory, the proposed scale holds theoretical significance for researchers and is pertinent to policymakers striving to achieve sustainable development goals (SDGs) by 2030. Additionally, it serves as a crucial tool for practitioners and companies to assess their level of corporate sustainability.

Business collective action (BCA) is often necessary to address sustainability issues, which are generally complex and multi-layered issues that cannot always be properly addressed by individual businesses. Firms participating in BCA for corporate sustainability have access to clearer rules and guidelines for managing sustainability issues, are more efficient in managing multiple stakeholder demands due to enhanced opportunities for learning, benefit from individual and joint reputation management, and are better able to capture weak signals about opportunities and threats in the external environment. Despite these benefits, our understanding of BCA for corporate sustainability is still limited. Most of the existing work in this area has examined different forms of BCA for corporate sustainability – for example, multi-stakeholder initiatives, trade associations, and other forms of business membership organizations – individually. In this chapter, the authors provide an overview of BCA for corporate sustainability. The authors start the chapter by discussing the importance of BCA in general and BCA for corporate sustainability, in particular to research and practice, and its benefits to firms and society. The authors then present a typology of the different forms of BCA for corporate sustainability, discussing their differences and similarities from an issues management perspective. The authors conclude the chapter with a brief discussion of future research in this area.

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) reporting has been widely accepted as a vital tool for communicating with stakeholders on a range of social, environmental, and governance issues, but how companies define, interpret, apply, integrate, and communicate their CSR efforts and impacts in corporate reporting is anything but a straightforward task. The purpose of this chapter is to explore the concept of materiality in CSR reporting and demonstrate practical examples of good CSR and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) reporting practices. We chose the aviation industry because of its economic relevance, constant growth, and future expected changes in the aftermath of COVID-19. In addition, airlines affect many of the SDGs directly and indirectly with contending results. This chapter is timely because of the growing willingness by companies to integrate CSR and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) thinking into the corporate strategy and business operations using materiality assessment and enhancing their competitive advantage and ability to maintain long-term value and because ESG and ethical investing have become part of the mainstream investing. Thus, this chapter contributes to an understanding of the wide range of existing and new reporting frameworks and regulations and reinforces the importance of discussing how this diversity of approaches can affect the work toward worldwide comparability of CSR and sustainability reporting.

In recent years, growing concerns about the environment and climate change, poverty problems, growing inequality among societies, and tensions brought about by social injustice have increased the popularity of sustainability, which is considered a multidimensional concept, among scientists, decision-makers, academics, and companies. The perception of these different groups of sustainability issues and the tools they suggest/use for corporate sustainability implementations differ from each other. It can be difficult to look for and understand sustainability tools that are handled with different perspectives in many sources. In this chapter, the tools used in sustainability implementation are discussed with certain classifications – environmental management tools, sustainability reporting, and corporate social performance – and their relations with each other. In short, this study aims to present a holistic perspective to the sustainability (or of corporate sustainability) implementations carried out by companies trying to survive in a dynamic and complex economic environment. Accordingly, the literature was reviewed, and the concept of sustainability was explained, the reasons that push companies to sustainability implementations were evaluated, and sustainability implementations were detailed under environmental management tools, sustainability reporting, and corporate social performance.

The United Nations Global Compact initiative is presented for businesses and nonbusiness as a universally accepted set of principles. The aim of the 10 principles in the areas of Human Rights, Labor, Environment, and Anticorruption is to encourage businesses to align their operations and strategies with committed values. The Global Compact network involves not only companies but also governments, labor, and civil society organizations. Corporations, community, and environment are integral parts of a system that correlate to each other. In light of the assumption that business operations have increasingly observable effects on the environment, economy, and social life on a global scale, it is necessary to have accountable and sustainable firms. The Global Compact is a voluntary strategic policy initiative, and it has become more important in where interactions between organizations and stakeholders to be more dynamic. On the other hand, sustainability has economic, social, and environmental dimensions, and in accordance with these dimensions, it is necessary for firms to take into account the influence of their operations on their stakeholders. Thereby, from theoretical perspectives, the primary objective of this chapter is to illustrate the role of Global Compact in corporate accountability and sustainability.

An extensive literature research is conducted in order to understand the relationship between Global Compact principles and corporate accountability and sustainability.

From a theoretical point of view, there are some conditions for the advancement of the corporate accountability and sustainability. For instance, there is need for stakeholders’ insistence about incorporating social and environmental values into the business economic decisions. Thus firms could contribute to not only worlds’ economic but also social as well as environmental future.

The research is a theoretical study, but for further studies, empirical studies can be conducted to understand the interactions between Global Compact principles and corporate accountability and sustainability.

This study may be useful for managers to realize the role of Global Compact principles on corporate accountability and its contribution to being a sustainable firm.

There is a lack of studies that analyze the role of Global Compact principles on corporate accountability and sustainability. Examining the principles in light of corporate accountability and sustainability will add a value to the literature in this area.

This paper aims to verify whether the integration of sustainability in executive compensation positively affects firms’ non-financial performance and whether corporate governance characteristics enhance the relationship between sustainability compensation and firms’ non-financial performance and to expand the domain of the impact of sustainability on non-financial performance.

This analysis is based on a sample of companies listed on the Milan Italian Stock Exchange from the Financial Times Milan Stock Exchange Index over the 2016–2020 period. Regression analysis was used by using data retrieved from the Refinitiv Eikon database and the sample firms’ remuneration reports.

The findings of this paper show that embedding sustainability in executive compensation positively affects firms’ non-financial performance. The results of this paper also reveal that specific corporate governance features can improve the impact of sustainability on non-financial performance.

This analysis is limited to Italian firms included in the Financial Times Milan Stock Exchange Index; however, the findings are highly significant.

The findings provide regulators with useful insights for considering the integration of sustainability goals into executive remuneration. Another implication is that policymakers should require – at least – listed firms to fulfil specific corporate governance structural requirements. Finally, the findings can provide investors and financial analysts with a greater awareness of the role played by executive remuneration in the long-term value-creation process.

This paper contributes to addressing the relationship among sustainability, remuneration and non-financial disclosure, drawing on the stakeholder–agency theoretical framework and focusing on Italian firms. This issue has received limited attention with controversial results in the literature.