Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the biodiversity and threatened species reporting of the top 150 Fortune Global companies. The paper has two main objectives: to explore the extent to which the top 150 Fortune Global companies disclose information about their biodiversity and species conservation practices, and to explore the effects of biodiversity partners and industry on companies’ biodiversity and threatened species reporting. Design/methodology/approach The study’s sample is the top 150 Fortune Global companies. Each company’s fiscal year ending 2014 annual report, its 2014 sustainability report, and its company website were content analyzed for evidence of biodiversity and threatened species reporting. This content analysis is supplemented by a detailed analysis that focusses on the sample’s top five reporters, including a phone interview with a senior sustainability manager working at one of these companies. Finally, a regression analysis was conducted to examine the associations between companies’ biodiversity and threatened species reporting and the presence/absence of biodiversity partners and a company’s industry F&C Asset Management industry category. Findings The reporting on biodiversity and threatened species by the top 150 Fortune Global companies is quite limited. Few companies (less than 15) are providing any substantial reporting. It was further observed that even among the high scoring companies there is a lack of consistent reporting across all index items. A subsequent empirical examination of these companies’ disclosures on biodiversity and threatened species showed a statistically positive association between the amount of reporting and companies’ holding of biodiversity partnerships. It was also observed that firms categorized as red- and green-zone companies made more disclosures on biodiversity and threatened species than amber-zone companies. Originality/value This is the first study to systematically analyze corporate disclosures related to threatened species and habitats. While some prior studies have included the concept of biodiversity when analyzing organizations’ environmental disclosures, they have done so by examining it as one general category out of many further categories for investigating organizations’ environmental reporting. In the present study, the focus is on the specific contents of biodiversity disclosures. As such, this study has the twin research objectives of seeking to illuminate the current state of biodiversity and threatened species reporting by the world’s largest multinationals and provide an appreciation for how certain organizational and industry variables serve to influence these reporting practices. These multiple insights offer companies, and potentially regulators, understanding about how to include (or extend) disclosures on biodiversity loss and species under threat of extinction.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine the impacts of board gender composition, board independence and the existence of a board sustainability committee on the corporate social and environmental performance of Australian firms. Design/methodology/approach The dataset comprises 2,188 Australian Securities Exchange listed firm-year observations (407 individual firms) from 2004 to 2015. The ASSET4 environmental, social and governance database is used to measure corporate social and environmental performance and their sub-dimensions. Findings Our results show that firms with higher board gender composition, greater board independence and sustainability committees tend to have better social and environmental performance. This paper also provides empirical evidence of the positive association of these variables on the sub-dimensions of social and environmental performance. The results are robust after controlling for self-selection and various forms of endogeneity. Originality/value This is the first study that examines the relationship between sustainability committees and corporate social and environmental performance in the context of Australia. This study also overcomes the relatively small sample size and shorter study period issues of similar studies in Australia that provide inconclusive evidence on the relationship between each of board gender composition, board independence and corporate social and environmental performance.

We examine whether the presence of female board members has any impact on the cost of debt among Australian listed companies. We find that female presence on the board is negatively associated with the cost of debt. Most importantly, our findings support the argument of critical mass theory that a certain threshold of gender balance is required for enhancing board effectiveness. Our results are valid irrespective of alternate model specifications and endogeneity issues. Overall, the results provide support to the ASX Corporate Governance Principles and Recommendation for the appointment of female directors on corporate boards.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the biodiversity reporting practices and trends of the top 50 Australian mining companies before and after the United Nations (UN) declared the period 2011-2020 as the “Decade on Biodiversity”. Design/methodology/approach Using content analysis and interviews, this study compares the extent and type of biodiversity disclosures made by the Australian Stock Exchange’s top 50 metals and mining companies both before and after the UN’s “Decade on Biodiversity” declaration in 2010. Findings A significant increase in the amount of biodiversity reporting is observed between the 2010 fiscal year preceding the UN’s declaration and the 2012 and 2013 fiscal years following the declaration. The findings reveal, however, that the extent of biodiversity reporting is quite variable, with some companies showing substantial increases in their biodiversity reporting and others showing modest or no increases. In particular, the larger companies in the sample showed a statistically significant increase in their disclosures on biodiversity in 2013 compared with 2010, while the increase in biodiversity disclosures by smaller companies was not significant. While interviewees spoke about their companies being more open and transparent, the biodiversity information that is being reported would not enable external parties to assess the company’s biodiversity performance. Research limitations/implications To minimise an organisation’s use of biodiversity reporting as an impression management tool, it is suggested that biodiversity reporting should be more impact based and organisations should provide a report of their activities and their direct and tangible impacts on short-term and long-term biodiversity in and around their operating sites. A possible limitation of the present study pertains to its focus on companies’ voluntary disclosures made in their annual reports and sustainability reports, as opposed to other possible formal or even informal disclosure mediums. Social implications Australia is one of 17 mega-diverse wildlife countries in the world. Finding ways to support the country’s biodiversity framework and strategy are crucial to this continued status. Due to the mining industry’s significant impact on Australia’s biodiversity, a strong need exists for biodiversity reporting by this industry. Furthermore, this reporting should be provided on a site-by-site basis. At present, the reporting aggregation typically conducted by mining companies produces obscure information that is neither useful for stakeholders who are impacted by the mining companies’ activities nor for policymakers who are vested with responsibility for protecting and sustaining the world’s biodiversity. Originality/value This study examines the biodiversity reporting and discourse practices of mining companies in Australia and develops a 50-item biodiversity reporting index to measure the biodiversity reporting practices.

No abstract