The language of US corporate environmental disclosure

Cho, Charles H.; Roberts, Robin W.; Patten, Dennis M.

doi:10.1016/j.aos.2009.10.002

Cited by 639 publications

(577 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

492

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Sustainability reporting and corporate communication in general is often used as a tool for managing impressions among stakeholders and improving corporate image (Cho et al 2012;Bansal and Kistruck 2006;Bansal and Clelland 2004). From this critical perspective, the information disclosed in sustainability reports could reflect what the stakeholders would like to hear rather than the actual commitment and performance in this area (Cho et al 2010(Cho et al , 2012Owen et al 2000;Boiral 2013). As a result, the information disclosed by companies on biodiversity measures and stakeholder involvement can hardly be considered objective and unbiased.…”

Section: Limitations and Avenues For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Second, the information disclosed in GRI reports is generally positive and is based on optimistic rhetoric rather than transparent and reliable information about performance (Cho et al 2010;Boiral 2013). As a result, the difficulties encountered by companies in biodiversity and stakeholder management are very rarely mentioned.…”

Section: Limitations and Avenues For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, these limitations also apply to the many empirical studies on sustainability reporting and have been widely recognized in the literature (e.g., Cho et al 2010Cho et al , 2012Unerman et al 2007;Owen et al 2000;Hahn and Lülfs 2014). Moreover, this paper does not focus on sustainability performance or negative aspects that could be hidden by organizations but rather on measures generally perceived to be a desirable and ethical behavior, namely collaboration with stakeholders to protect biodiversity.…”

Section: Limitations and Avenues For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, the transparency and reliability of the sustainability reports on which the study is based has been roundly criticized in the literature (e.g., Unerman et al 2007;Owen et al 2000;Cho et al 2010;Boiral 2013). Sustainability reporting and corporate communication in general is often used as a tool for managing impressions among stakeholders and improving corporate image (Cho et al 2012;Bansal and Kistruck 2006;Bansal and Clelland 2004).…”

Section: Limitations and Avenues For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Managing Biodiversity Through Stakeholder Involvement: Why, Who, and for What Initiatives?

Boiral¹,

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increasing pressures to conserve biodiversity-particularly for industries based on the exploitation of natural resources-have reinforced the need to implement specific measures in this area. Corporate commitment to preserving biodiversity is increasingly scrutinized by stakeholders and now represents an important aspect of business ethics. Although stakeholder involvement is often essential to the management of biodiversity, very few studies in the literature have focused on the details of this involvement. The objective of this paper is to analyze how mining and forestry companies can manage biodiversity issues through stakeholder involvement based on a content analysis of 430 sustainability reports using the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) framework. The paper elucidates the reasons for such involvement, the nature of stakeholders involved, and the types of measures employed to manage biodiversity. Stakeholders' motives for becoming involved revolve around four main issues: complexity and knowledge management; self-regulation and relationships with public authorities; legitimacy and social responsiveness; and commercial and strategic objectives. The stakeholders involved in biodiversity initiatives are essentially non-governmental organizations, experts and universities, public authorities, and coalitions of companies. In the end, the initiatives identified can be grouped into three categories: management practices, socio-political actions, and research and conservation measures. The paper provides various examples of these initiatives and shows how they can be implemented in collaboration with different stakeholders depending on the company's objectives. The contributions the study makes to the literature on biodiversity management and the managerial implications of the study are analyzed in the discussion section.

show abstract

Section: Limitations and Avenues For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Limitations and Avenues For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Limitations and Avenues For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Limitations and Avenues For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Managing Biodiversity Through Stakeholder Involvement: Why, Who, and for What Initiatives?

Boiral¹,

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While the disclosure of social and the use of environmental data have no tradition in HRM research, it has a long tradition in sustainability reporting research (e.g. Cho, Roberts, & Patten, 2010;Gray, Kouhy, & Lavers, 1995;Wagner, 2004Wagner, , 2005b. For this paper, the GRI indicators are selected as appropriate indicators on the basis of (1) the high level of adoption among the largest companies (KPMG, 2011(KPMG, , 2013 and (2) their potential approximation to sustainable practices, including HRM practices.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reporting on sustainability and HRM: a comparative study of sustainability reporting practices by the world's largest companies

Ehnert

Parsa

Roper

et al. 2015

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

350

279

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As a response to the growing public awareness on the importance of organisational contributions to sustainable development, there is an increased incentive for corporations to report on their sustainability activities. In parallel with this has been the development of 'Sustainable HRM' which embraces a growing body of practitioner and academic literature connecting the notions of corporate sustainability to HRM. The aim of this article is to analyse corporate sustainability reporting amongst the world's largest companies and to assess the HRM aspects of sustainability within these reports in comparison to environmental aspects of sustainable management and whether organisational attributes -principally country-of-origin -influences the reporting of such practices. A focus in this article is the extent to which the reporting of various aspects of sustainability may reflect dominant models of corporate governance in the country in which a company is headquartered. The findings suggest, first and against expectations, that the overall disclosure on HRM-related performance is not lower than that on environmental performance. Second, companies report more on their internal workforce compared to their external workforce. Finally, international differences, in particular those between companies headquartered in liberal market economies and coordinated market economies, are not as apparent as expected.

show abstract

The Financial Materiality of Climate Change

2022

Climate Investing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The language of US corporate environmental disclosure

Cited by 639 publications

References 41 publications

Managing Biodiversity Through Stakeholder Involvement: Why, Who, and for What Initiatives?

Managing Biodiversity Through Stakeholder Involvement: Why, Who, and for What Initiatives?

Reporting on sustainability and HRM: a comparative study of sustainability reporting practices by the world's largest companies

The Financial Materiality of Climate Change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About