Search results

In recent years, international bodies and public opinion have recommended that governments adopt social responsibility practices to inform and be accountable to citizens about their sustainability actions in environmental, social and economic fields (Galera et al., 2014) and restore citizens' confidence in public authorities (Crane et al., 2008; Shepherd et al., 2010). This chapter reviews the literature on measuring and reporting sustainable performance in the public sector. Analyzing 35 studies published in a period of 10 years (from 2012 to 2021), we address two specific research questions: How and to what extent have public organizations changed to integrate sustainability reporting (SR) systems? What are the enabling organizational factors in adopting SR in public organizations?

Companies must no longer just report on corporate sustainability (CS) performance but also demonstrate that they are aligning their strategies with sustainability. However, suitable management control systems (MCS) are required to implement a sustainability strategy. Thereby, sustainability reporting (SR) can also be employed for control purposes. On the other hand, existing MCS can be used to develop SR that goes beyond accountability. Accordingly, this paper explores how this interplay can be designed.

For the study, 20 semi-structured interviews were conducted with persons from ATX and DAX companies. Since the interplay should be examined from a holistic control perspective, the authors used the MCS package of Malmi and Brown as an analysis framework.

Nowadays, merely focusing on reporting is too narrow a view. It is therefore not surprising that the investigation was able to reveal various possible linkages between MCS and SR that span the full range of the MCS package of Malmi and Brown.

Future research should also consider non-listed companies to investigate potential differences and take a closer look at the proposed reciprocal nature of the interplay.

The findings expand the knowledge of how companies can use SR for control purposes and how existing MCS can help develop a reporting that goes beyond accountability.

The study contributes by highlighting the potential of SR to control CS performance from a holistic MCS perspective and likewise the impact of existing MCS on reporting. In addition, different theoretical perspectives are used to explain why the interplay can be designed differently in practice.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the extent and determinants of sustainability performance disclosures reported by publicly traded companies in Kazakhstan by using the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) framework. Among the different possible determinants, stand-alone sustainability reporting (SR), reporting language, leverage, cash flow capacity, profitability, size, age and auditor type were selected to investigate their impacts on the quality and scope of sustainability information.

The study analyzes data from publicly traded companies at the Kazakhstani Stock Exchange for the years 2013–2015. To investigate the extent, nature and quality of sustainability reports, the study measures and analyzes economic, environmental and social performance parameters, as suggested in the GRI guidelines.

The results indicate that determinants such as stand-alone reporting, reporting language, firm profitability, firm size and auditor type substantially influence the extent, nature and quality of sustainability-reporting practices of Kazakhstani companies.

The findings of the study suggest that managers, practitioners, regulators and policy makers in emerging economies should adopt the GRI guidelines to report sustainability performance disclosures and focus on specific factors to improve the quality of sustainability disclosures.

This study is one of the first studies to investigate the extent, nature and possible determinants of corporate SR in central Asian-emerging economies.

This paper aims to investigate the role of field-configuring events (FCEs) and situational context in the institutionalisation of sustainability reporting (SR) in Pakistan.

This paper uses insights from the institutional logics perspective and qualitative research design to analyse the interplay of the institutional logics, FCEs, situational context and social actors’ agency for the institutionalisation of SR among leading corporations in Pakistan. A total of 28 semi-structured interviews were carried out and were supplemented by analysis of secondary data including reports, newspaper articles and books.

The emerging field of SR in Pakistan is shaped by societal institutions, where key social actors (regulators, enablers and reporters) were involved in the institutionalisation of SR through FCEs. FCEs provided space for agency and were intentionally designed by key social actors to promote SR in Pakistan. The situational context connected the case organisations with FCEs and field-level institutional logics that shaped their decision to initiate SR. Overall, intricate interplay of institutional logics, FCEs, situational context and social actors’ agency has contributed to the institutionalisation of SR in Pakistan. Corporate managers navigated institutional logics based on situational context and initiated SR that is aligned with corporate goals and stakeholder expectations.

For corporate managers, this paper highlights the role of active agency in navigating and integrating institutional logics and stakeholders’ expectations in their decision-making process. For practitioners and policymakers, this paper highlights the importance of FCEs and situational context in the emergence and institutionalisation of SR in developing countries. From a societal point of view, dominance of business actors in FCEs highlights the need for non-business actors to participate in FCEs to shape logics and practice of SR for wider societal benefits.

From a societal point of view, dominance of business actors in FCEs highlights the need for non-business actors to participate in FCEs to shape logics and practice of SR for wider societal benefits.

This paper focuses on the role of FCEs and situational context as key social mechanisms for explaining the institutionalisation of SR.

This study aims to explore the social sustainability reporting (SR) of top European business schools to illustrate and discuss their practices and the associated challenges.

For the top 20 European business schools, content and thematic analyses were used to investigate reports concerning social sustainability and data from semi-structured interviews. Reports from the past three years (typology, framework, channels of communication and frequency) were analysed, including content on social issues in the past period and the challenges faced by managers regarding social SR.

Social SR in the top 20 European business schools is heterogeneous and the main challenges are the lack of specific frameworks and resources, the amount of data that must be collected and the complexity of measuring social impact. Diversity and equality, society issues, ethical integrity and human rights with respect to students, partners and organizations are the most relevant social contents.

Business schools need to debate ways of promoting social sustainability and to adapt procedures and technology to communicate their social sustainability strategies and impacts. It offers an improved understanding to regulatory institutions that can allow them to establish standards and a foundation for future research that can refine or generalize the findings of this study.

Measuring and reporting social sustainability issues are relevant challenges for business schools that are working on social sustainability aspects.

The originality of this study lies in the discussion on current social SR practices at business schools, and their responsibilities regarding the development of a more sustainable society in a changing regulatory context.

The purpose of this paper is to critically examine sustainability reporting (SR) practices of top 10 Indian banks, on parameters derived from a Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)-G4-based persuasive communication framework.

SR metrics from GRI-G4 guidelines were mapped to persuasive communication parameters to develop a blended analytical framework. Content analysis (CA) technique was used to assess SR of top 10 banks on this framework.

The study has three key findings. First, most of the top 10 Indian banks are yet to adopt adequate disclosure and transparency practices in SR. Second, even though environmental and social goals are broadly reported, there are glaring omissions on metrics like “equal remuneration,” “occupational health and safety” and “customer privacy.” Third, stakeholder engagement focus is weak as reflected in low persuasive appeal of SR content of most banks.

The blended framework provides a theoretical and analytical pathway for operationalizing the sustainability context principle, which has been inadequately addressed even within the GRI framework implementation.

The paper provides a “health check” and identifies “red flags” in SR of top 10 Indian banks, enabling them to undertake a critical review of their sustainability metrics and reporting practices.

The paper establishes the significance of evaluating non-financial reporting practices addressing broader sustainability metrics in the banking sector, in an emerging economy context.

This paper develops a GRI-G4-based persuasive communication framework for SR assessment, and conducts an evaluation of top 10 Indian banks using CA technique.

There are still many different theoretical approaches and practical interpretations about what an integrated report is. Starting from this premise, the overall purpose of this chapter is to critically analyze the relationship between integrated reporting (IR) and social/sustainability disclosure. Indeed, although some scholars considered IR as a tool to improve the sustainability approach of the companies allowing to disclose more relevant social information, others are more critical about the potentiality of IR to improve social disclosure. Therefore, the general research question is: Is there a natural link between IR and social disclosure (true love) or is the IR a practice to “normalize” the social disclosure and accounting (forced marriage)?

In the attempt to provide a preliminary answer to the research question, the chapter analyzes what is the approach of three categories: (1) academics; (2) soft-regulators; and (3) companies. From the methodological point of view, a mixed method of analysis has been adopted.

From the analysis of the three different points of view, IR can be considered as a “contested concept” because of the heterogeneous and sometimes conflicting interpretations and implementation that are done on this type of report. This leads to relevant theoretical and practical implications.

As of 2022, the scope of the engagement and interest of debt capital providers in ESG reporting is mainly untapped. However, a vast amount of literature has produced conflicting findings about the importance of debt capital (leverage) as a factor in sustainability reporting (SR). This is the first meta-analysis reconciling the mixed results of 85 single country studies containing 131 effect sizes across 24,482 firms conducted over past three decades (1999–2022) investigating the influence of leverage on SR. The study emphasizes the significance of contextualizing research by identifying the macro-environmental elements modifying debt's impact on SR, through the use of the institutional theory. Eleven country variables were tested on the collected dataset, spread across 36 countries.

Meta-analysis technique for aggregation of existing extant empirical work. Continuous and categorical variable-based moderator analysis to demystify the influence of country characteristics affecting the leverage–SR relationship.

Results show positive significant impact of debt capital providers on SR. Country's level of development, GDP, extent of capital constraints in a country, financial sector development within a nation, country governance factors and corruption levels, country's culture, number of sustainability reporting instruments operational in a country and geographical location proved to be significant moderators.

The study details relevant meaningful research gaps, worthy of uptake by researchers to produce targeted research.

Governments must increasingly go beyond their mandated disclosure role and acknowledge the important institutional factors that have contributed to the expansion of ESG reporting through the creation of nation-specific tools, incentive structures and disclosure-encouraging regulations. To secure a steady flow of funding and prevent negative effects on company value and cost of capital in the midst of prolonged global economic upheaval, businesses must address the information requirements of lenders. The limited total effect size emphasizes the necessity for debt providers to step up their ESG activism and exercise their maximum power and potential in stimulating extensive SR firm-level practices.

The present study is the first meta-analysis reconciling the mixed results of 85 single-country studies containing 131 effect sizes across 24,482 firms conducted over the past three decades (1999–2022) investigating the influence of leverage on SR and demystifying the macro-environmental factors affecting the leverage–SR association.

As the comparability concept has recently garnered increased attention of policymakers and standard setters in the sustainability reporting (SR) arena, this paper aims to provide a reflexive viewpoint of this concept in this context.

To inform the authors’ viewpoint and disentangle the concept of comparability into different facets, the authors review policymakers’ and standard setters’ (including the Global reporting initiative) comparability principles, as well as relevant studies in the field. To provide insights into the different ways in which the comparability facets can be approached, the authors use multi-perspective reflexive practices and focus on the multiple purposes that reporting can serve. To empirically animate the authors’ reflection on the facets, the authors analyse the sustainability disclosures of two Italian banks over three years.

This study reveals that three facets form valuable starting points for extending the understanding of the meanings the comparability concept can carry in the SR arena. These facets are materiality and comparability, benchmarking/monitoring and comparability and operationalisation and comparability.

This study is intended to elicit policymakers’ and standard setters’ thoughts on the role of comparability and its complexities in SR.

By taking a critical and reflexive approach, the authors encourage policymakers and standard setters to reconsider the comparability principle, so it effectively embeds the accountability purpose of SR.

In this paper, the authors propose three facets for disentangling the concept of comparability.

The increasing awareness among the stakeholders demands the companies to be more transparent in their annual reporting. In the absence of standardized reporting norms, companies are free to structure sustainability report as per their understanding, willingness and intent. Although some voluntary guidelines have been issued by the regulatory authorities in India, the norms are still not clear as to what to report and how to report. This paper aims to look in to sustainability reporting practices by top companies listed in Bombay stock exchange and its impact on financial performance.

Using this sample of 68 companies from top 100 in the list of ET500 for 2016, self-constructed sustainability reporting score has been computed for each company for the financial year 2012-2013 and 2015-2016. The two periods represent pre- and post-disclosure reform periods in India. A sustainability reporting scale has been constructed using 16 parameters of sustainable performance based on social, environment and governance aspects as reported in the annual report, sustainability report and business responsibility report.

It has been found that there is a significant improvement in sustainability reporting by Indian companies after the introduction of disclosure reforms. Different sectors show significant difference in the sustainability reporting during pre-reform period but as the sustainability reporting improves after the reforms, sector difference reduces. Sustainability reporting is a significant predictor of financial parameters of return on sales, return on equity and Tobin’s Q in pre-reform period, but in the post-reform period, no significant impact was found on financial performance.

Disclosure reforms have made a significant impact on sustainability reporting by Indian companies. Companies need to identify the core areas of social responsibility, to implement Indian model of mandatory 2 per cent spending on corporate social responsibility. Disclosure of carbon foot prints should be mandatory and more number of independent directors should be appointed for successful implementation of these reforms. Market regulators should be made more powerful and given a free hand to prosecute the companies involved in frauds and high penalties should be imposed for non-compliance.

Sustainability reporting has drawn increased strategic attention in India to make reporting more transparent and responsible toward society and environment. The structural changes and introduction of disclosure reforms make an interesting case to investigate their implications on Indian companies. Accordingly, this research studies the sustainability reporting by Indian companies before and after the introduction of disclosure reforms. No previous research has investigated the impact of these reforms considering two different periods.