Search results

This paper investigates the influence of political connections on sustainability disclosure in the context of China's Regulation 18.

The study employs a quasi-experimental approach, utilizing difference-in-difference (DiD) analysis, dynamic DiD and propensity score matching to analyze the effects of politically connected independent directors on sustainability disclosure following the implementation of Regulation 18.

Companies with politically connected independent directors show an improvement in sustainability disclosures after Regulation 18. This effect is stronger for firms facing high political pressure or lacking alternative political power. Additionally, the increase in value from sustainability disclosures compensates for the loss of politically connected independent directors, indicating a positive value impact of sustainability disclosures.

This study provides novel insights into the corporate disclosure policy in China by investigating the impact of politically connected directors on sustainability disclosure. Additionally, it sheds light on the limitations of political power and its substitution effects within companies.

Sustainability is increasingly at the forefront of the public debate in Europe and the world. However, despite this increased interest, research seems to have partially ignored the importance of its social dimension and the issues related to social equity, people care, protection and personal development at all stages of society and, consequently, of business. Accordingly, this paper aims at investigating the “soft” dimensions of sustainability, integrating its mainstream “technical storyline” with a “human/social storyline”.

In this paper a taxonomy of the main key drivers of the soft dimension of sustainability is proposed and tested on a sample of Italian companies. Through interviews with their managers, actions and needs in terms of sustainability soft drivers are identified.

The achieved results demonstrated that the case companies differently integrated the soft dimensions of sustainability within their companies. All the sample companies are aware of the role of social sustainability. According to the proposed taxonomy, the systemic drivers of soft sustainability are the main shared ones.

The paper provides new insights into the essence of the organizational soft dimensions and their centrality in the overall achievement of sustainability for companies. It also offers managerial insights into how to effectively manage these dimensions and policy implications about the need for clearer consideration.

The purpose of this study was to examine the global perceptions of social equity in the fine dining business model as a result of the surprise announcement for the 2024 planned closure of the Michelin three-star restaurant, Noma.

This study used critical discourse analysis to inductively analyze 91 source documents retrieved through a lexical database search. The analysis yielded five overarching themes and six subthemes.

Findings from this study serve as a benchmark in retrospect for capturing a rapidly accelerating global conversation from January to March 2023 around the long-term viability and social sustainability of the fine dining business model.

Against the backdrop of labor challenges in the restaurant industry due to the Covid-19 pandemic and its aftermath, the announced closure of Noma precipitated criticism of the stage (unpaid intern) system and the intense pressures of attaining and maintaining Michelin star status.

Results from the discourse analysis suggest certification for fine dining restaurants, perhaps through the Michelin Guide, for demonstrating a commitment to social sustainability as a qualifier to achieve a Michelin star.

Findings from this research reveal a palpable change in societal tolerance for a more socially sustainable fine dining restaurant business model that advances equitable solutions for its workers while assuring the economic sustainability of restaurants.

This study drew upon a foodscape lens to reveal a juxtaposition between well-executed environmentally sustainable initiatives in the fine dining business model and the threats to the social sustainability among its workers.

Sustainability is a pressing challenge of governance and public financial management. One key element of sustainable governance is the role of citizens. Participatory budgeting (PB) is a participatory tool with which citizens can influence public administration. PB is a democratic process that grants people real power over real money and it has spread around the world. This special issue explores the role of PB in the context of sustainable governance. In this editorial, the authors aim to approach PB as a form of sustainable governance.

In this editorial, the authors collaborate in the analysis of how PB is implicated in the public management of complex social, economic and ecological issues. The authors identify key dimensions of internal and external sustainability based on prior research. The authors approach these dimensions as an internal–external nexus of sustainable governance in which organizational and financial sustainability are the internal dimensions and socio-political and environmental sustainability are the external dimensions.

Even though PB can be seen as one tool for citizen participation, it has the potential to foster sustainability in multiple ways. PB, as a form of sustainable governance, requires a financially and administratively sustainable organizational process that results in the institutionalization of PB. It also includes thorough consideration of socio-political and environmental sustainability impacts of PB.

Academics are actively studying PB from various perspectives. However, most of this work has approached PB from the viewpoints of design and results of PB, and less is known about its institutional settings. PB has not yet been adequately studied in the context of sustainability, and there is a need to scrutinize PB as a form of sustainable governance.

The awareness of the environment, climate, and nature that emerged worldwide in the 1970s has paralleled the actions taken in the European Union (EU) under the United Nations. In the EU, the environmental title was given a legal basis for the first time with the entry into force of the Single European Act, and action on the environment and climate change became the main priorities of the EU in all areas with the amendments in the founding treaties. This study examines environmental and climate policy in the EU and the process known as the green transition in the EU. The study consists of three sections. The first section discusses the environment and the development of climate change awareness in the world and the EU, while the second section underlines the EU's environmental and climate change approaches and policies. The third and final section highlights the development and green transition strategy adopted by the EU in 2019 and the “Green Deal” strategy paper. The study concludes that the “Green Deal” is at the heart of the so-called green transition process in the EU, that the goals sought by the Deal are very ambitious, that it is almost impossible to achieve the corresponding goals without an effective/coercive political mechanism, and that the EU is planning a green transition rather than a green transformation.

The Brundtland Commission report has been widely cited in debates about sustainable development (SD), but disagreements still exist about what SD is and the role or importance of ecology are central to the debate. SD is a movement that seeks to address social and economic issues to meet the needs of the entire community through alternative methods of development. The Kyoto Protocol, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), World Summit on Sustainable Development, and Rio+20 have all been significant initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This book focused on the development of sustainable infrastructure, which is linked to seven of the recently established Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Researchers emphasized the importance of developing an objective definition of SD. The most used definition of SD is proposed in the World Conference on Environment and Development (WCED) report, which emphasizes harmony among the three pillars: social, ecological, and economic. However, Lehtonen (2004) contends that separating the terms ‘social’ and ‘economic’ will isolate economic problems from their larger social context. This SD model recognizes that economic activities must be carried out for the benefit of society and that initiatives affecting humanity’s social context must be completed within ecological bounds. Mebratu (1998) classified SD definitions and origins into three categories: functional, conceptual, and intellectual. Hopwood et al. (2005) demonstrated the many ecological, social, and economic implications of SD. O’Riordan (1988) and Robinson (2004) define sustainability as an integral concept with a strong emphasis on nature. SD is a conservationist approach to natural resource allocation that focuses on technology to address pollution and resource depletion issues. To achieve development, current institutions must be transformed, with an emphasis on meeting people’s wants and interests in a way that is consistent with economic, equitable, and environmental concerns. It is frequently used to describe outdated economic development that disregards the environment. SD is viewed differently by different authors. Mitcham (1995) discovered ‘investigated or creative ambiguity’ in the term, which is a strength, not a flaw. O’Riordan (1988) admitted that the ambiguity surrounding the concept’s definition has sparked debate. Dresner (2008) demonstrated that the confusion surrounding SD does not render it ineffective. The Forum for the Future’s 5-capitals model and the triple bottom line (TBL) model are two examples of SD models that promote SD, but technological and scientific progress has been slow. The definition of SD is ambiguous, with various perspectives and insights from various authors. This section examined the body of knowledge on sustainability and its underlying concepts and principles, with references and a discussion of the TBL.

How can students become transformational leaders if they are left alone to grapple with the emotional toll of climate change, preparing for careers while scientists sound the alarm that business as usual is untenable? Ecoanxiety, solastalgia, and climate grief are the affective undercurrents in sustainability and environmental science classrooms. This case study discusses strategies used to support students' emotional well-being in an introductory sustainability class and a co-curricular climate change support group program at Oregon State University. Psychologists and sustainability educators created space for students and faculty to engage in authentic dialogues confronting the emotional uncertainty of the climate crisis and working together to define their roles building a resilient future.

Higher education institutions (HEIs) offer courses and programmes focusing on sustainability in economics, as courses on sustainable development (SD), which examine the economic, social and environmental dimensions of SD. This paper aims to examine sustainability integration in economics degree programmes.

Through an extensive literature review in Web of Science (WoS) and information search in Google, conducting to 28 relevant case studies, this paper elucidates the emphasis given to sustainability as part of economics degree programmes in HEIs.

The results suggest that, whereas the inclusion of sustainability components in this field is a growing trend, much still needs to be done to ensure that matters related to SD are part of the routine of university students studying economics.

It is worth noting that the literature review conducted in WoS was primarily aimed at assisting in the selection of university case studies. The 28 university case studies scrutinised in this study may lack sufficient representation from numerous developing countries.

This study highlights challenges in integrating the SD into economics degree programmes, suggesting the need for curriculum adjustments as underscoring operational issues, acting as barriers. The inclusion of sustainability in economics programmes must navigate operational issues stemming from packed timetables and busy schedules, requiring innovative solutions.

As far as the authors are aware, this study holds substantial importance in its emphasis on implementing sustainability within HEIs’ economics programmes, assisting in pursuing SD.

The novelty of this study lies in addressing sustainability with the specific economics focus programmes within the HEIs context.