Search results

Implementing the sustainable development goals (SDGs) has proven a significant challenge for companies. While multinational enterprises (MNEs) have shown a real intention to contribute to these goals, they face major barriers in implementing the SDGs in their core business strategies. Extant academic studies on this phenomenon have primarily explored why companies “should” address the SDG agenda but have not (yet) explored what “works,” what does not “work,” and why. Therefore, evidence of a sizable gap between intention and realization is growing. Besides, there is a limited explanation for the existence of this gap and no validated implementation models that could help overcome it. Additionally, management research remains relatively fragmented. The diversity of existing theoretical and empirical frameworks makes it difficult to consolidate scientific and practical insights on “how” to guide companies to accelerate the global goals through their core operations.

This study is one of the first attempts to draw lessons from extant research on effective SDGs’ implementation strategies. For that, we upgrade the “SDG Compass,” which has been recognized as a leading framework for SDGs implementation in companies’ core activities. A critical assessment of the literature on the SDGs implementation has been conducted through a systematic literature review (SLR) and bibliometric analysis. This has helped us identify gaps in the SDG implementation practice and accumulate relevant insights supporting a more integrated and upgraded implementation framework: the SDG Compass+. This framework can advance coordinated theoretical and practical research by identifying the antecedents and critical factors of impactful SDG implementation strategies.

Implementing the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) unarguably demands huge financial investments. However, the United Nations has acknowledged the huge financial gap militating against the implementation of the SDGs worldwide, leading experts to question the possibility of complete implementation of the goals by their terminal dateline of 2030. While the bulk of the finance currently outlaid on the SDGs comes from traditional sources including foreign direct investments (FDIs), there is the need to focus more attention on developing and exploiting impact investments that are more suitable for financing development programmes and projects. In this chapter, the SDG implementation profiles of the 12 Arab West Asia countries concerning the five most targeted SDGs were evaluated and sustainable finance issues were discussed. Secondary data were retrieved from World Bank's DataBank. The data were descriptively analyzed. Based on the profiles generated, debt relief is put forward as a possible impact investment mechanism suitable for funding the SDGs. Specifically, this chapter recommends that outright cancellation of debts based on the debt-for-SGD swap could serve as some of the impact investments needed to boost the global drive for a developed, peaceful, and just world.

This paper aims to present an approach for business organizations, especially multinational enterprises (MNEs), to pivot their focus from the United Nations sustainable development goals (UN SDGs) to simple doable goals (SDoGs) so that the probability of impactful and sustainable outcomes increases significantly.

Through multilevel analyses, the paper identifies the current challenges in the firm-level implementation of the SDGs. Consequently, it synthesizes an integrated solution that can help MNEs create sustainable business models, contributing to realizing the SDGs.

The sporadic and chaotic adoption of SDGs and ambiguous outcomes reported by businesses are due to the following: SDG adoption choices are driven by the materiality effect; the differences between the UN-defined government targets and business-level targets, often chosen by businesses on their own, make an aggregation of performances infeasible; lack of validation of the firm-level reporting leads to “greenwashing”; focusing less on business model transformation and more on reporting hinders the achievement of true sustainability; and lack of coordination and integration in actionizing among stakeholders limits the holistic change that the SDGs are expected to bring to society. Based on the Prêt à faire – Gestalt matrix, the proposed framework shifts the organization’s focus to the fundamental aspects of the purpose, strategy and business sustainability, and demonstrates how the resultant SDoGs effectively contribute to the realization of the SDGs. The matrix in the framework classifies an MNE based on its overall organizational readiness to seize business opportunities and helps pursue a course of action toward true sustainability.

The guidelines from the proposed framework offer different strategic paths for the MNE to achieve parity, temporary advantage, and, finally, sustained competitive advantage. This transformative approach enables businesses to develop their roadmaps for achieving business sustainability and supporting the realization of the SDGs.

The purpose of this study is to examine the existence of greenwashing and sustainable development goal (SDG)-washing processes by comparing ex ante (SDG Compass) and ex post (SDG Compliance) indicators and investigating whether the limitations associated with these indicators encourage companies to engage in washing processes.

The authors use a sample of 1,154 companies included in the S&P Sustainability Yearbook (formerly the RobecoSAM Yearbook). The authors test for the presence of greenwashing by comparing ex ante and ex post indicators for each SDG, whereas to test for SDG-washing, the authors compare the two ex ante and ex post approaches considering the full set of SDGs.

The results show that there is no consistency between the two types of indicators to measure the level of SDG implementation in organisations. This lack of consistency may facilitate both greenwashing and SDG-washing processes, which is due to the design and limitations of these measurement tools.

Companies may choose those indicators that paint their commitment to the SDGs in the best light, but they may also select indicators based on the SDGs they want to report on. These two options would combine greenwashing and SDG-washing.

The shift towards improved standards and regulations for measuring SDG achievement is the result of several social factors such as investor scrutiny, regulatory reform, consumer awareness and increased corporate accountability.

Few previous studies have analysed in detail the interaction between greenwashing and SDG-washing. They focus on the use of ex ante or ex post indicators separately, with samples composed of local companies, and without considering the whole set of SDGs.

The study aims to empirically investigate whether the disclosure of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) affects the level of integrated thinking and reporting (ITR) on a sample of European listed companies.

The sample focusses on companies listed to the STOXX Europe 600 Index. Data have been gathered from Refinitiv DataStream for the period 2019–2020 for the measures of ITR level and SDG disclosure. Then, a multivariate regression analysis is developed to test whether or not, and if so, to what extent, SDG disclosure affects the level of ITR.

SDG disclosure has been increased over time and companies have primarily focussed on SDG 8, SDG12 and SDG 13 demonstrating their awareness on sustainability issues close to the core business and on the climate urgency. Furthermore, SDG disclosure leads to a higher level of ITR meaning that SDG disclosure is an important pillar contributing to ITR.

The empirical analysis has not deeply investigated each component of ITR and SDG disclosure.

The research can be useful for companies aiming to improve their commitment towards the SDG implementation with an integrated approach. Moreover, the study sheds light on the importance of the SDG disclosure as a determinant of ITR.

The research contributes to literature in the stream of sustainability accounting, by adding new insights on ITR linked to SDG disclosure. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the originality of the study lies in the inclusion of SDG disclosure as a determinant for ITR that has not been analysed by academics yet.

This study aims to empirically analyze a sound commitment and a consistent integration of sustainable development goals (SDGs) in the corporate reporting and management systems of companies that have a leading position in sustainability.

The study applies a content analysis procedure based on a proposed analytical framework to codify the commitment and the SDG integration. In order to analyze the consistency of the integration, this study has provided a “SDG integration” score based on fuzzy inference systems methods. The companies in the sample have been identified as benchmarks in terms of sustainability in a specific region of Spain.

The findings show a lack of formality regarding the SDG commitment at the highest decision-making level and a low level of SDG integration in the reporting and management systems. These results are mainly explained because the most companies do not prioritize according to the materiality analysis and those SDGs more reported have not been deployed along targets and KPIs in a consistent way.

The results provide practical implications that help to overcome the limitations in terms of comparison and consistency of the SDGs-reported information. It also illustrates how the leading sustainable companies are doing the SDG reporting and suggests which elements could be improved to promote a consistent integration of the SDGs in the management systems.

This study provides new work lines in the promotion of an effective SDG-business reporting based on a robust management structure that allows an alignment among the SDG-business decisions based on a normative, strategic and operational approach.

This paper aims to contribute to existing academic work and business practice by presenting original empirical findings and by providing insights into priority setting on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in organizations. From an academic viewpoint, it not only adds to previous work on the topic of SDG materiality (e.g. Van Tulder and Lucht, 2019) but also aims to contribute new insights into the steps that are crucial and influence the adoption of the SDGs in materiality assessments. It may also add to the literature by providing new knowledge on the strategic considerations that organizations may make and institutional dynamics that encourage organizations to implement the SDG materiality method.

By executing a national survey research in Belgium through a collaboration between academics of Antwerp Management School, Louvain School of Management (UCLouvain) and the University of Antwerp, and supported by Belgium’s Federal Institute of Sustainable Development, the authors have obtained several insights into the SDG landscape in Belgium for various types of organizations, including companies, governmental and nongovernmental organizations and educational institutions. This research builds further on a first national survey (SDG Barometer Belgium, 2018) on the adoption and implementation of the SDGs. However, an important aim of this research is to shift the emphasis to more prominent new elements, such as whether or not organizations use the SDGs in materiality assessments. While the main part of the data for this research were collected through an online questionnaire, document analyses were conducted based on the sustainability reports of BEL 20 companies, the benchmark stock market index of Euronext Brussels consisting of 20 companies traded at the Brussels Stock Exchange, and seven interviews were held to obtain additional insights.

A total of 386 organizations across sectors responded to the question “Does your organization perform a materiality analysis”, of which 210 organizations completed the question “Does your organization align the materiality analysis with the SDGs,”after an “exit route” based on a positive answer to the first question. When diving into the survey results, the authors see that no more than 12% of the 210 organizations performing a materiality analysis align their materiality analysis with the SDGs, while 14% indicate that they do not account for the SDGs at all in their materiality analyses. The results show that 41% of the organizations take into account the SDGs to a certain degree when performing their materiality analysis. Speculating on an explanation for these results, it may be the case that organizations do not yet think about coupling the SDGs to their materiality assessment, experience difficulties in practice or generally lack the knowledge for relating the SDGs to the sustainability topics that are relevant to them. This seems in line with other research (e.g. Van Tulder and Lucht, 2019), as the results of this study indicate that it seems to be difficult for organizations to relate the SDGs to the existing sustainability priorities or materiality analyses of companies.

The real contribution of this paper essentially lies in the description of the Janssen Pharmaceuticals case. The company recognized that today’s internally focused approach to goal setting is not enough to address global challenges. Hence, looking at what is needed externally from a global perspective, taking into account sustainability thresholds and setting ambitions accordingly, is needed to bridge the gap between current performance and required performance. From the Janssen Pharmaceuticals case, the authors learned that external stakeholders are an extremely useful source of information to address the required performance by using the SDG framework. For sure, SDG materiality analyses are still in an early phase of development and knowledge on how to conduct such an analysis may be lacking. Future efforts – or the lack thereof – may indicate whether or not companies consider such analyses as sufficiently relevant. Although the uptake of the SDGs is in progress, it remains to be seen which, if any, materiality method will eventually turn out as a new dominant way of defining material issues. The findings presented in this study hopefully serve as a basis for further investigation of the topic.

A cascade of crises that materialized in particular over the 2019–2022 period, increases the relevance for international business (IB) scholarship to address the following question: whether, to what extent and under what circumstances can multinational enterprises (MNEs) rescue the sustainable development goals (SDGs) and make sure that nobody is left behind in a globalized world where the opposite seems to be the case? For many MNEs, slow progress in implementing the SDGs in a more strategic and transformational manner does not necessarily hint at a lack of interest with management, but also at a lack of solid knowledge and/or experience in how to implement general development ambitions like the SDGs. This introductory chapter defines the intellectual and managerial challenges ahead. It refers to relevant efforts already done in the IB community – with reference to IB journals that issued special editions on the topic – and explains why five angles have been chosen to cluster the contributions in this volume which are also aimed to enhance further progress in the study of MNEs and the SDGs: (1) general, (2) strategic, (3) operational, (4) contextual and (5) misbehavior.

This paper aims to examine whether the position of universities in the times higher education (THE) impact rankings (IR) is related to the different dimensions of academic quality of universities according to the THE world universities ranking.

The research, based on universities ranked in the top 100 of THE IRs, uses a regression model obtained by the panel data method, using the fixed effects approach, to identify the relationship of academic quality dimensions with that ranking.

The results show an increase in the dissemination of information on sustainable development goals (SDGs) by universities. In addition, it is shown that research, number of citations and international outlook are positively associated with a higher score obtained by universities in THE IRs, which implies a higher impact on the SDGs by these universities.

Based on multifaceted theories, the study highlighted the universities that are best positioned in the THE IRs in relation to their contribution to the SDGs.

The profound impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic are being exacerbated by political, economic, social, and environmental crisis and have set back almost all Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In order to re-focus our energy to make progress according to the SDGs, education, research, innovation, and leadership will be essential in helping societies address the challenges outlined in Agenda 2030 and the SDGs. Universities, with their broad remit around the creation and dissemination of knowledge and their unique position within society, have a critical role to play in the achievement of the SDGs. Arguably none of the SDGs will be achieved without this sector. Engaging with the SDGs can also benefit universities by helping to demonstrate university impact, capture demand for SDG-related education, build new partnerships, access new funding streams, and define a university that is responsible and globally aware. This chapter’s thesis is that the SDGs will not be achieved without the strategic engagement by the academic sector and that aligning a university’s learning and teaching goals, research, and operational incentives with the SDGs can provide new opportunities and business models. The author will also provide background on higher education’s role in the formation of the SDGs and how this process has framed higher education’s role in achieving the SDGs.