Corporations and Sustainability

Sjåfjell, Beate; Bruner, Christopher M.

doi:10.1017/9781108658386.004

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In legal scholarship, “sustainability” has slowly evolved from a broad general concept to a narrower one, and an object to be promoted by law (Salminen and Rajavuori, 2021). Sjåfjell and Bruner (2020) have described sustainability as an overarching societal goal – a state in which all human activity must be directed toward respecting planetary boundaries, protecting human rights and meeting fundamental social needs. The concept of “planetary boundaries” has been used to illustrate the safe operating space for humanity (Rockström et al , 2009).…”

Section: Legal Perspective On Sustainability and Sustainable Supply C...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They have argued that the major challenge of the 21st century is to secure the social foundations while ensuring that the overall pressure on Earth systems remains within planetary boundaries. Sjåfjell and Bruner (2020) have clarified that the social foundation is the minimum that humanity must strive for, while planetary boundaries represent the limits to how much pressure can be put on ecosystems to achieve this.…”

Section: Legal Perspective On Sustainability and Sustainable Supply C...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Are materiality determination practices evolving in the wake of increasing legislation on sustainability reporting? Findings from EU pharmaceutical companies’ reports

Miettinen

2024

IJLMA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This paper aims to contribute to the development of the European Union (EU) regulatory environment for sustainability reporting by analyzing how materiality is defined in the Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD) and Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and by examining the added value and challenges of legalizing reporting and materiality requirements from both regulatory and practical company perspectives. It provides insights on whether this is reflected by EU pharmaceutical companies and to what extent companies report information on their materiality analysis process. Design/methodology/approach Doctrinal analysis was used to examine regulatory instruments. Qualitative document analysis was used to analyze companies’ reports. The added value and challenges were examined using a governance approach. It focused on legalizing reporting and materiality requirements, with a brief extension to corporate management and organization studies. Findings Materiality has evolved from a vague concept in the NFRD toward double materiality in the CSRD. This was reflected by the industry, but reports revealed inconsistencies in materiality definitions and reported information. Challenges include lack of self-reflection and company-centric perceptions of materiality. Companies should explain how they identify relevant stakeholders and how input is considered in decision-making. Practical implications Managers must consider how they conduct materiality assessments to meet society’s expectations. The underlying processes should be explained to increase the credibility of reports. Sustainability reporting should be seen as a corporate governance tool. Originality/value This work contributes to the literature on materiality in sustainability reporting and to the debate on the need for a holistic, society-centric approach to enhance the sustainability of companies.

show abstract

Section: Legal Perspective On Sustainability and Sustainable Supply C...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Legal Perspective On Sustainability and Sustainable Supply C...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Are materiality determination practices evolving in the wake of increasing legislation on sustainability reporting? Findings from EU pharmaceutical companies’ reports

Miettinen

2024

IJLMA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This may be contrasted to the general and multifaceted purpose of advancing social welfare (Aglietta & Rebérioux, 2005; Johnston, 2009; Sjåfjell, 2009). Shareholder primacy does not have a company law basis; rather it is a short form for a complex mix of perceived market signals and economic incentives, informed by path‐dependent corporate governance assumptions and postulates from U.S.‐based legal‐economic theories (Bruner, 2013; Sjåfjell & Bruner, 2019; Smith, 1988; Sneirson, 2019). This is evidenced through a decade of multijurisdictional comparative company law analysis, which has demonstrated that company laws across jurisdictions give boards as the core decision‐makers discretion to govern the companies in the way they see fit, and that this space is constrained by shareholder primacy (Ireland, 1999; Sjåfjell et al, 2015; Sjåfjell & Bruner, 2019; Stout, 2012, 2013).…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Shareholder primacy does not have a company law basis; rather it is a short form for a complex mix of perceived market signals and economic incentives, informed by path‐dependent corporate governance assumptions and postulates from U.S.‐based legal‐economic theories (Bruner, 2013; Sjåfjell & Bruner, 2019; Smith, 1988; Sneirson, 2019). This is evidenced through a decade of multijurisdictional comparative company law analysis, which has demonstrated that company laws across jurisdictions give boards as the core decision‐makers discretion to govern the companies in the way they see fit, and that this space is constrained by shareholder primacy (Ireland, 1999; Sjåfjell et al, 2015; Sjåfjell & Bruner, 2019; Stout, 2012, 2013). Shareholder primacy has so far in aggregate proven to be stronger than competing norms, where the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (OECD, 1976) and the UN Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights (United Nations, 2011) are significant examples.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why policy coherence in the European Union matters for global sustainability

Ahlström

Sjåfjell

2022

Env Pol Gov

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The global economy is producing unequal economic exchanges between countries, including illegitimate transfer of wealth from low‐income countries, which ultimately undermine efforts towards securing robust social welfare systems. This puts policies on trade and finance, corporate governance and circular economy at the centre of the global development puzzle. Policy coherence for development must be understood in the context of the tension between the overarching societal goal of achieving sustainability and the functioning of the global economy. In this article, we focus on the political and legal challenges this puzzle presents, using the case of European Union policies on business, finance and circular economy, which have global impacts. We see these as core areas of law and policy where advances are made but which need to be better positioned within an overarching aim of sustainability.

show abstract

“…Corporate law and corporate governance set the regulatory structure for decision-making by companies, making it intertwined with the sustainability issues mentioned above. As a result, corporate law, corporate governance and sustainability are significant to be studied, considering the crises that have arisen globally (Sjåfjell and Bruner, 2019). Presently, the literature is lacking in deliberating the potential of corporate law and corporate governance to promote corporate sustainability by integrating non-financial factors into corporate law itself (Jebe et al , 2018; Monciardini et al , 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Addressing sustainability challenges as part of director’s duty in Malaysia

Khan

Ali

Alam

2023

IJLMA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The development of successful Sustainable Development Goals realization cannot be divorced from regulations governing sustainability information. Therefore, limited research on the regulatory environment regarding sustainability reporting in the Malaysian context requires further examination to ascertain the current framework. This study aims to critically assess the Malaysian Companies Act 2016 and Malaysian Code on Corporate Governance (MCCG) to examine the regulatory environment regarding the sustainability reporting framework. The examination is done to determine the extent of support provided under the Malaysian regulatory environment for the said practice. Design/methodology/approach A doctrinal methodology that relies on the extant literature, statutory instruments and case laws complemented by content analysis is adopted to explore the current regulatory environment regarding sustainability reporting. Findings The findings indicate that the Companies Act 2016 has already paved the way for the integration of corporate sustainability through the Business Review Report (BRR). However, the application is voluntary and hence could lead to inconsistent implementation. The MCCG has introduced the integrated reporting practice, but the application is limited to large companies on “apply and report” approach. This practice is voluntary to other types of companies, which diminishes the importance of sustainability reporting and gives rise to doubt about its efficiency in addressing sustainability in the long term. The current framework for sustainability reporting cannot be considered satisfactory, given the significance of sustainable development to the Malaysian economy and society, due to a lack of appropriate legal obligations. Originality/value This study is presently amongst the available legal literature on sustainability reporting practice in Malaysia, adding to its originality. This paper hopes to stimulate discussion among academicians on incorporating sustainability principles in the Companies Act 2016 and expanding directors’ duties.

show abstract

Corporations and Sustainability

Abstract: Corporations and sustainability BEATE SJÅFJELL AND CHRISTOPHER M. BRUNER * 1. Establishing the field of corporate law, corporate governance and sustainability * This chapter draws on research in the project Sustainable Market Actors for Responsible Trade (SMART).

Cited by 7 publications

References 18 publications

Are materiality determination practices evolving in the wake of increasing legislation on sustainability reporting? Findings from EU pharmaceutical companies’ reports

Are materiality determination practices evolving in the wake of increasing legislation on sustainability reporting? Findings from EU pharmaceutical companies’ reports

Why policy coherence in the European Union matters for global sustainability

Addressing sustainability challenges as part of director’s duty in Malaysia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About