Sustainability Reporting in Latvia: Management Views

2017 ◽  
pp. 77-85
Author(s):  
Dzineta Dimante ◽  
Agnese Alksne
Keyword(s):  
Sustainability Reporting

ON SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING: DO STAKEHOLDERS MATTER?

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 26
Author(s):  
M MATTERA. ◽  
I HILLIARD. ◽  
A SHAPOVAL. ◽  
H AIGBEDO. ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sustainability Reporting

Sustainability Reporting

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Hijink ◽  
Lars Veld
Keyword(s):  
Sustainability Reporting

Impact of Sustainability Reporting on Firm Performance of Companies in India

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Priyanka Garg
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Sustainability ◽  
Rural Livelihoods ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Annual Reports ◽  
Marginal Lands ◽  
Great Ability ◽  
Reporting Practices ◽  
Long Run ◽  
Short Run ◽  
Core Idea

The core idea of sustainability is that current decisions should not impair the prospects for maintaining or improving future living standards (Repetto, 1986). GRI (2006) defined sustainability as meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. The challenges of sustainable development are many and it is widely accepted that organizations have not only a responsibility but also a great ability to exert positive change on the state of the worlds economy, and environmental and social conditions. Further, the issue of environmental sustainability is intertwined with that of poverty and inequity. The causative relationship runs both ways- increased poverty and loss of rural livelihoods accelerates environmental degradation as displaced people put greater pressure on forests, fisheries, and marginal lands. The present study has made an attempt to investigate the relationship between sustainability reporting and financial performance of companies in India. Data have been collected with the help of annual reports of selected companies and Prowess Database. Collected data have been analyzed with the help of SPSS 16.0. The study shows that sustainability reporting practices of companies has improved over the time. Further, research reveals that sustainability reporting practices of a firm impact its performance negatively in short run while positively in long run.

scholarly journals A Framework for Evaluating and Disclosing the ESG Related Impacts of AI with the SDGs

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (15) ◽  
pp. 8503
Author(s):  
Henrik Skaug Sætra
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development Goals ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Modern Society ◽  
Ripple Effects ◽  
The Core ◽  
Social Governance ◽  
Ai Ethics ◽  
Development Goals ◽  
Negative Impacts ◽  
Corporate Social

Artificial intelligence (AI) now permeates all aspects of modern society, and we are simultaneously seeing an increased focus on issues of sustainability in all human activities. All major corporations are now expected to account for their environmental and social footprint and to disclose and report on their activities. This is carried out through a diverse set of standards, frameworks, and metrics related to what is referred to as ESG (environment, social, governance), which is now, increasingly often, replacing the older term CSR (corporate social responsibility). The challenge addressed in this article is that none of these frameworks sufficiently capture the nature of the sustainability related impacts of AI. This creates a situation in which companies are not incentivised to properly analyse such impacts. Simultaneously, it allows the companies that are aware of negative impacts to not disclose them. This article proposes a framework for evaluating and disclosing ESG related AI impacts based on the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). The core of the framework is here presented, with examples of how it forces an examination of micro, meso, and macro level impacts, a consideration of both negative and positive impacts, and accounting for ripple effects and interlinkages between the different impacts. Such a framework helps make analyses of AI related ESG impacts more structured and systematic, more transparent, and it allows companies to draw on research in AI ethics in such evaluations. In the closing section, Microsoft’s sustainability reporting from 2018 and 2019 is used as an example of how sustainability reporting is currently carried out, and how it might be improved by using the approach here advocated.

scholarly journals Why “Less is More” in Non-Financial Reporting Initiatives: Concrete Steps Towards Supporting Sustainability

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Georgina Tsagas ◽  
Charlotte Villiers
Keyword(s):  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Corporate Sustainability ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Integrated Reporting ◽  
Less Is More ◽  
Csr Reporting ◽  
Corporate Reporting ◽  
Long Run ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Key Aspects

AbstractCalls are repeatedly made on corporations to respond to the challenges facing the planet from a sustainable development perspective and governments take solace in the idea that corporations' transparency on their corporate activity in relation to sustainability through voluntary reporting is adequately addressing the problem. In practice, however, reporting is failing to deliver truly sustainable results. The article considers the following questions: how does the varied reporting landscape in the field of non-financial reporting impede the objectives of fostering corporations' sustainable practices and which initiative, among the options available, may best meet the sustainability objectives after a decluttering of the landscape takes place?The article argues that the varied corporate reporting landscape constitutes a key obstacle to fostering sustainable corporate behaviour, insofar as the flexible and please all approach followed in the context of corporate sustainability reporting offers little to no real incentive to companies to behave more sustainably and ultimately pleases none in the long run. The case made is that “less is more” in non-financial reporting initiatives and hence the article calls for a revision of key aspects of the European Non-Financial Reporting Directive, which, as is argued, is more likely to achieve the furtherance of sustainable corporate behaviour. Although the different reporting requirements offer the benefits of focussing on different corporate goals and activities, targeting different audiences and allowing for a level of flexibility that respects the individual risks to sustainability associated with each industry, the end result is a landscape that lacks overall consistency and comparability of measurements and accountabilities, making accountability more, rather than less, difficult to achieve.The article acknowledges the existence of several variances relating to the notion of sustainability per se, which continues to remain a contested concept and variances between companies and industries in relation to how each is operating sustainably or unsustainably respectively. Such variances have so far inhibited the legislator from easily outlining through tailored legislation the individual risks to global sustainability in an all-encompassing manner. The end product is a chaotic system of financial reporting, CSR reporting, non-financial reporting and integrated reporting and little progress to increase comparability and credibility in order for companies to be held accountable and to behave in ways that do not harm the planet. A “clean up” of the varied initiatives in the terrain of non-financial reporting is recommended.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document