Hard and soft sustainability disclosures: Australia’s resources industry

2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 198-217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tricia Ong ◽  
Terri Trireksani ◽  
Hadrian Geri Djajadikerta
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Sustainability ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Annual Reports ◽  
Global Reporting Initiative ◽  
Environmental Aspects ◽  
Environmental Index ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Social ◽  
Sustainability Reports ◽  
Scoring Index

Purpose Although studies in corporate sustainability have been vastly growing, there has been an increasing demand for more industry-specific sustainability reporting studies to develop a greater understanding of industry differences in sustainability reporting practice. This study aims to measure the quality of sustainability disclosures in the current leading environmentally sensitive industry in Australia – the resources industry. Design/methodology/approach A scoring index was developed to measure economic, social and environmental aspects of sustainability by integrating the fundamental principles of the hard and soft disclosure items from Clarkson et al.’s (2008) environmental index into the social and economic aspects of the Global Reporting Initiative framework. Subsequently, the index was used to assess sustainability disclosures in the annual and sustainability reports of resources companies in Australia. Findings The main findings show that companies report more of soft disclosure items than the hard ones. It is also found that companies report most sustainability information in the economic aspect rather than the social and the environmental aspects of sustainability. Most companies disclose sustainability information in their annual reports with few companies producing stand-alone sustainability reports. Originality/value This study addresses the need for more industry-specific sustainability studies by focusing on Australia’s resources industry. It also contributes to the lack of an existing tool to measure disclosures based on companies’ true contributions to sustainability by developing a new scoring index for hard and soft sustainability disclosures, which includes all three aspects of sustainability (i.e. economic, environmental and social).

Corporate sustainability disclosure’s importance in China: financial analysts’ perception

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (8) ◽  
pp. 1169-1189
Author(s):  
Jhunru Zhang ◽  
Hadrian Geri Djajadikerta ◽  
Terri Trireksani
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Sustainability ◽  
Financial Analysts ◽  
Health And Safety ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Global Reporting Initiative ◽  
Environmental Aspect ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Sustainability Disclosure ◽  
The Social ◽  
Level Of Importance

Purpose Corporate sustainability in China has become a subject of increasing international concern. Corporate sustainability disclosure (CSD) is considered a useful tool to facilitate the empowerment and acknowledgement of stakeholders in the quest for sustainability. However, the degree of cultural and political influences for being sustainably orientated can be significantly different between countries. This study aims to examine the perception of financial analysts, as CSD report users, in China about the level of importance of various indicators of corporate sustainability described in the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Sustainability Reporting Guidelines. Design/methodology/approach A set of questionnaires was developed based on GRI G4 guidelines to measure the perception of financial analysts in China on the level of importance of each sustainability indicator described in the GRI G4. A five-point Likert scale was used to measure the report users’ perceptions of each of the indicators. Findings The findings of this study increase our understanding of how Chinese CSD report users perceive corporate sustainability differently from the GRI guidelines. The main results show that the environmental aspect of sustainability was seen to be important in China, followed by the social and economic aspects. Indicator-wise, “water”, “effluents and waste”, “emissions”, “compliance” and “energy” were perceived as vital in the environmental category, while “customer health and safety”, “customer privacy” and “compliance” were considered significant in the social category. Originality/value This study addresses the need for differing corporate sustainability guidelines for different nations and cultures, specifically within the Chinese context. It also contributes to the corporate sustainability literature by adding to our understanding of how financial analysts in China, as CSD report users, perceive aspects of sustainability.

The state of disclosures on stakeholder engagement in sustainability reporting in Australian local councils

2014 ◽  
Vol 26 (1/2) ◽  
pp. 54-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanpreet Kaur ◽  
Sumit K. Lodhia
Keyword(s):  
Stakeholder Engagement ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
The State ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Annual Reports ◽  
Global Reporting Initiative ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Key Stakeholders ◽  
Engagement Process ◽  
Sustainability Reports

Purpose – This study aims to examine the state and extent of disclosures on stakeholder engagement in sustainability reporting in Australian local councils. Design/methodology/approach – Content analysis was used to analyse 23 sustainability/state of environment/annual reports out of a total of 563 local councils (city, shire, district, borough and regional) in Australia for the year 2009-2010 – those found to be using stakeholder engagement in the development of sustainability reports. A stakeholder engagement index was developed on the basis of the literature review to examine the extent of disclosures on stakeholder engagement. Findings – This study identifies: the Australian local councils that are engaging with their stakeholders in the development of sustainability reports; key stakeholders for sustainability reports; extent of engagement; media and approaches used for engagement; and difficulties in the engagement process. The results suggest that stakeholder engagement is an essential component in the development of sustainability reporting as it informs reporters of material concerns, issues and aspirations of key stakeholders. Research limitations/implications – The focus of this paper is the state of disclosures on stakeholder engagement in sustainability reporting. The findings of the paper are limited to only one level of governance of the public sector, that is, local councils. Originality/value – International standards such as Global Reporting Initiative and AccountAbility (AA) 1000 have signified the role of stakeholder engagement in the development of sustainability reports. However, there has been a little research that demonstrates whether or not organisations engage with their stakeholders for reporting purposes. This paper provides evidence of stakeholder engagement in sustainability reporting in Australian local councils.

Assessing current company reports according to the IIRC integrated reporting framework

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 305-333 ◽  
Author(s):  
Merve Kılıç ◽  
Cemil Kuzey
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Sustainability ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Annual Reports ◽  
Global Reporting Initiative ◽  
Integrated Reporting ◽  
Adherence Level ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Reporting Practices ◽  
Reporting Framework ◽  
The Impact

Purpose This paper aims to investigate the adherence level of current company reports to the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) integrated reporting framework through analysis of whether and to what extent those reports include the content elements of this framework. This study also aims to examine the impact of corporate sustainability characteristics on the adherence level of current company reports to the integrated reporting framework. Design/methodology/approach The sample for this research comprises the non-financial companies which were listed on Borsa Istanbul, the Turkish stock exchange, as of 31 December 2015. The authors constructed a disclosure index based on the content elements of the IIRC reporting framework. They then measured the integrated reporting disclosure score (IRS) of each company through a manual content analysis of its annual reports and stand-alone sustainability reports. To test the hypotheses, the authors performed a number of statistical analyses. Findings The authors determined that current company reports mainly present generic risks rather than company-specific; provide positive information while dismissing negative information; present financial and non-financial initiatives separately; lack a strategic focus; and include backward-looking information rather than forward-looking information. Consistent with the predictions, the authors found that the IRS is significantly and positively associated with sustainability reporting, Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) adoption, sustainability index listing and the presence of a sustainability committee. Originality/value This study contributes to the literature by enhancing the understanding of integrated reporting practices through the application of a checklist based upon the IIRC integrated reporting framework. Further, this study contributes to the literature by evaluating the impact of corporate sustainability characteristics on IRS.

scholarly journals Understanding sustainability for socially responsible investing and reporting

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marianne Bradford ◽  
Julia B. Earp ◽  
Paul F. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Sustainability ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Global Reporting Initiative ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Corporate Behavior ◽  
Good Citizen ◽  
Responsible Investing ◽  
Reporting Structure ◽  
Sustainability Reports

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to determine what types of sustainability activities companies are reporting and whether persons external to the companies understand how those reported activities correspond to the companies’ narratives about sustainability. That is to ascertain how people interpret the meaning of the activities included in the sustainability reports. Design/methodology/approach From a sample of sustainability reports prepared by Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) guidelines, the authors identified the distinct activities reported. The authors prepared a survey comprised of these activities and asked a sample of people knowledgeable about business and investing to evaluate each activity on the extent to which they are relevant to sustainability performance. The responses were then factor analyzed to identify the most important dimensions of sustainability these persons employed to relate the activities to sustainability. Findings The dimensions employed by the subjects differed in some significant ways from those dimensions used to construct the GRI format. Subjects evaluated sustainability efforts as primarily efforts of being a good citizen with sustainability an end in itself rather than as constraint to be respected in achieving profitability goals. Research limitations/implications The study is a first attempt so results are preliminary, i.e. suggestive but not definitive. Though preliminary an intriguing implication is that closure on a sustainability reporting structure would be premature. More effort needs to be devoted to provide more clarity on the concept of corporate sustainability and what its implications are for corporate behavior. Practical implications Given the results that sustainability be regarded as a corporate end, what is the role of the corporation in society seems still to be disputatious. Sustainability may not be something achievable without changes in corporate law. Originality/value The study is an early attempt to assess the potential alternative narratives about corporate sustainability. Its value lies in providing insights into the age-old question of what should be the role of the corporation in a free society.

Characteristics of UK higher education institutions that disclose sustainability reports

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (7) ◽  
pp. 1279-1298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Remmer Sassen ◽  
Dominik Dienes ◽  
Johanna Wedemeier
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Higher Education Institutions ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Corporate Sustainability ◽  
Public Funding ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Sustainability Reports ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Uk Higher Education

Purpose This study aims to focus on the following research question: Which institutional characteristics are associated with sustainability reporting by UK higher education institutions? Design/methodology/approach To answer the aforementioned research question, this study uses logistic regression. Findings The results show that 17 per cent of the UK higher education institutions report on their sustainability (July 2014). In line with legitimacy and stakeholder theory, logistic regressions provide evidence that the larger the size of the institution, the higher the probability of reporting. By contrast, high public funding decreases this probability. Research limitations/implications The findings show characteristics of higher education institutions that support or hamper sustainability reporting. Overall, the findings imply a lack of institutionalisation of sustainability reporting among higher education institutions. Originality/value Although a lot of research has been done on corporate sustainability reporting, only a small number of studies have addressed the issues of sustainability reporting of higher education institutions. This study covers all sustainability reports disclosed among the 160 UK higher education institutions. It is the first study that investigates characteristics of higher education institutions that disclose a sustainability report.

scholarly journals Coverage of G4-indicators in GRI-sustainability reports by electric utilities

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 359-378 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Slacik ◽  
Dorothea Greiling
Keyword(s):  
Stakeholder Theory ◽  
Stock Exchange ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Electric Utility ◽  
Electricity Sector ◽  
Global Reporting Initiative ◽  
Bottom Line ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Sustainability Reports ◽  
Coverage Rates

PurposeElectric utility companies (EUC) are expected to play a key role toward implementing ambitious climate change aims being under critical scrutiny by regulators and stakeholders. However, EUC provide an under-researched field regarding sustainability reporting with the focus on economic, social and ecological concerns. This paper aims to gain insights of the sustainability reporting practice of EUC and the coverage of indicators based on the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)-Guidelines.Design/methodology/approachA twofold documentary analysis of 186 GRI-G4 sustainability reports by EUC globally is conducted to investigate the coverage rates of G4-indicators. Neo-institutionalism and strategic stakeholder theory serve as theoretical lenses. A regression analysis is used to examine ownership, stock-exchange listing, area of activity and region as potential drivers of sustainability reporting.FindingsResults show that the coverage of indicators based on triple-bottom-line dimensions is moderate in EUC leaving room for improvement. The coverage of sector-specific indicators lacks behind the coverage of standard disclosure indicators. Results show that private and listed EUC show better coverage rates than public and not-listed EUC.Research limitations/implicationsNeo-institutionalism shows limited homogenization in the sector. Strategic stakeholder theory demonstrates insufficient stakeholder compliance of public and not-listed EUC.Originality/valueThis study contributes to sustainability reporting research by focusing on the under-researched electricity sector. It provides practical reporting insights for EUC, the GRI and regulators.

scholarly journals The Role of Disability and Accessibility in Corporate Sustainability Reporting

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Vogelauer ◽  
David M. Herold ◽  
Elmar Fuerst
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Sustainability ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Social Dimension ◽  
Management Tool ◽  
Critical Elements ◽  
Corporate Reporting ◽  
The Social ◽  
Sustainability Reports ◽  
Flexible Management

Abstract Although companies increasingly focus on the social dimension in corporate sustainability, there seems to be a lack of understanding how and to what extent disability and accessibility frameworks and activities are integrated in corporate sustainability reports. In this article, we aim to close this gap by (a) analysing the disability and accessibility (D&A) activities from the largest 50 companies in Europe based on their corporate sustainability reports, and (b) advancing a simplified conceptual framework for D&A that can be used in corporate reporting. In particular, we provide an overview about corporate D&A reporting and associated activities according to three identified areas: (a) workforce, (b) workplace, and (c) products and services. Our findings are twofold: First, the majority of the companies address D&A in their corporate sustainability reports mainly under the diversity umbrella, but lack a detailed debate about the three identified areas. Second, we found that existing frameworks for D&A are hardly used because either they are not focused on corporate reporting or seem too difficult or complicated to complete. Thus, our framework not only represents a first opportunity to foster the implementation of a D&A framework within the social dimension of corporate sustainability reports, but also presents a holistic yet flexible management tool that takes into account the most critical elements while shaping implementation, directing evaluation and encouraging future planning of D&A initiatives. As such, this study contributes to and extends the limited amount of research of D&A activities in the social dimension in corporate sustainability reporting.

Assessing the materiality of university G4-sustainability reports

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 364-391 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melanie Lubinger ◽  
Judith Frei ◽  
Dorothea Greiling
Keyword(s):  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Global Reporting Initiative ◽  
Sociological Institutionalism ◽  
Content Type ◽  
External Stakeholder ◽  
Stakeholder Groups ◽  
Content Selection ◽  
Reporting Practice ◽  
Sustainability Reports ◽  
The University

Purpose Materiality, as a content-selection principle, is an emerging trend in sustainability reporting for making sustainability reports (SRs) more relevant for stakeholders. The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether materiality matters in the reporting practice of universities which have adopted the Global Reporting Initiative G4 Guidelines. Design/methodology/approach Strategic stakeholder theory and sociological institutionalism serve for deriving conflicting expectations about the compliance of universities with the materiality principle. In the empirical section of this paper, content analyses are conducted on the documented material aspects, followed by a correlation analysis for examining to which extent the identified material aspects are reported in the SRs. Findings Although universities document G4-19 stakeholder-material aspects according to different relevance levels and for internal and external stakeholder groups, the identified material aspects are not appropriately reported in the SRs. The adoption of the materiality principle is a superficial one and therefore more in line with the expectations of sociological institutionalism. Research limitations/implications The main limitation for this study is the small number of university SRs available. The chance to make SRs more relevant by focusing on stakeholder-material aspects is not used. Originality/value This paper reports the first study looking at the compliance between the documented material aspects and the content of SRs in a particular challenging organisational field, the university sector. This paper also adds to the emerging theoretical discussion about the extent universities implement materiality in SRs.

scholarly journals Corporate Sustainability Reporting in the BIST Sustainability Index

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (10) ◽  
pp. 21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Burcu Demirel ◽  
Murat Erdogan
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Corporate Sustainability ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Development Stage ◽  
Global Reporting Initiative ◽  
Sustainability Index ◽  
Sustainability Reports ◽  
Working Day ◽  
Sustainability Report ◽  
Day By Day

<p>In recent years, there is a growing focus on corporate operations especially since the publication of the first environmental reports in 1989. Companies have started to publish information about its environmental, social and sustainability policies. The study examines the sustainability reporting elements of Borsa Istanbul Sustainability Index (BIST) in Turkey and to evaluate which elements is most vital in this context. This study will begin with the sustainability reporting that will be examined under the roof of corporation sustainability and end with the examination of sustainability reports of 15 firms, which are included in the BIST Sustainability Index in Turkey, and a content analysis. The reports of companies under study were taken from special web site and GRI (Global Reporting Initiative) database of companies. Being the first study in examining the sustainability report of companies in BIST Sustainability Index, it is expected to contribute in literature about sustainability reporting recently started to gain importance in Turkey. Overall our findings suggest that the sustainability index established in Turkey is still in development stage, but the enterprises in the endeavor are working day by day to develop the sustainability qualities.</p>

scholarly journals Sustainability Reporting in Turkey: Analysis of Companies in the BIST Sustainability Index

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tuğçe Uzun Kocamiş ◽  
Gülçin Yildirim
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
Corporate Sustainability ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Global Reporting Initiative ◽  
Management Approach ◽  
Sustainability Index ◽  
Reporting Framework ◽  
Sustainability Reports ◽  
Voluntary Basis

Sustainability reporting is a responsibility practice that towards sustainable development goals as related to corporate performance measurement, explaining and being accountable to internal and external stakeholders. Non-financial information relating to operating activities can be disclosed through sustainability reports. Sustainability reporting is a vital step of managing change towards a sustainable global economy—one that combines long-term profitability with environmental care and social justice. Sustainability reports developed using the GRI Reporting Framework covers results and consequences the emerged in the context of organization's commitments, strategy and management approach during the reporting period. Through the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Sustainability Reporting Framework, the GRI works to increase the transparency and exchange of sustainability-related information. The Borsa Istanbul Sustainability Index, published since 2014 is an important development for the business in Turkey which is aimed sustainable development. Sustainability reports have been prepared on a voluntary basis in Turkey and in many countries. In line with global developments the number of business is increasing who prefer to explain activities of economic, environmental and social dimensions through corporate sustainability reports in Turkey as well. This study conceptually reviews sustainability reporting and its benefits for the business. In order to see the effectiveness of the sustainability reports, sustainability reports of business in the BIST sustainability index will be subjected to content analysis basis GRI Reporting Principles on voluntary basis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document