The Organizational and Operational Boundaries of Triple Bottom Line Reporting: A Survey

Archel, Pablo; Fernández, Manuel; Larrínaga, Carlos

doi:10.1007/s00267-007-9029-7

Cited by 96 publications

(103 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, recent literature also critique the TBL framework (Archel et al, 2008;Henriques and Richardson, 2013;Milne et al, 2005;Zadek, 2001;Norman and MacDonald, 2004 (Norman and Macdonald, 2004).…”

Section: Support and Criticismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a triple bottom line stakeholder satisfaction model

Amarah

Langston

2017

JCRE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainable development is a goal of modern society, and to a large extent it is governed by the actions of business organisations in trying to improve value to their stakeholders. Enlightened businesses know that 'stakeholder' does not equal 'shareholder', and there is more to value than financial returns and profits. Social and environmental value is also important. Using a triple bottom line philosophy, it is possible to strike an effective balance between economic, social and environmental objectives to release outcomes that are sustainable in the wider sense. To date, the quantification of these outcomes as a single decision metric has been problematic, given there is no common unit to integrate performance.This thesis combines a review of underpinning literature on the relationship between sustainable development and stakeholder satisfaction with an explanation of quantification models and a detailed case study of a stakeholder-driver approach to the procurement of sustainable built infrastructure for Energex in Brisbane.Using grounded theory, a conceptual framework is developed from these sources to not only integrate the various stakeholder perspectives of sustainability success, but to also measure this success in an objective way. The framework is a six-point star rating scheme to assess stakeholder satisfaction in terms of economic, social and environmental criteria to measure organisational decision-making performance. This framework is validated by an expert panel using focus group discussion and together with subsequent analysis a number of improvements are recommended.The refined framework reflects a stakeholder satisfaction model (SSM) that has commercialisation potential. It is found that the SSM can be used to assess the sustainable procurement of built infrastructure, such as a high performance green building, with four of the six stakeholder groups considered as generic and iv applicable to any sustainability initiative. The remaining two groups (namely "staff" and "environment") will need a modified assessment strategy for non-built environment initiatives.This research makes a contribution to knowledge through presentation of a model, grounded in practice, that can assess the economic, social and environmental performance of organisational decision-making from a stakeholder satisfaction perspective. It is acknowledged that there are a number of metrics that can be used to assess the star rating of each stakeholder group, although the ones chosen in this research are drawn from existing tools developed and validated by others. The final stage, which is beyond the scope of this thesis, is to commercialise the SSM in the construction and property industry in Australia.[401 words] v

show abstract

Section: Support and Criticismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a triple bottom line stakeholder satisfaction model

Amarah

Langston

2017

JCRE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is an exploration of the fields and pressures that shape reporting and the social norms and pressures that encourage organisations to report. We acknowledge that the GRI has a number of limitations, including its ability to disguise unsustainable aspects of company operations (Milne & Gray, 2013) and that improvement is needed in how it frames sustainability (Archel, Fernández, & Larrinaga, 2008;Gray & Bebbington, 2007).…”

Section: Research Approach and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Sustainability Reporting Becoming Institutionalised? The Role of an Issues-Based Field

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Among the environmental aspects, "Energy" was reported most often by private and governmental organizations, whereas "Biodiversity" and "General aspects" were the least reported ones. Archel et al (2008) also found a low level of disclosure on indirect impact indicators in GRI reports published in 2005. Non-profit organizations reported most on "Materials", and paid the lowest attention to "Other environmental aspects" in their reports.…”

Section: Environmental Management and Sustainable Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic and Environmental Performance Indicators in Belgian GRI Reports

Cappuyns

Vandenbulcke

Ceulemans

2015

EMSD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the upsurge in sustainability reporting worldwide, there is still a large gap between the reporting rates of different countries and sectors around the world. This paper analyzes how Belgian organizations report the economic and environmental performance indicators in their sustainability reports, with the aim to evaluate the quality and completeness of this information. Besides a detailed content analysis of Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) reports of Belgian organizations, synergies with new developments, such as the GRI G4 guidelines and integrated reporting are sought. Economic aspects are generally reported through Environmental Management and Sustainable Development ISSN 2164-7682 2015 www.macrothink.org/emsd 207 disclosure of a larger number of indicators, as compared to environmental aspects, most likely because of financial reporting obligations. Nevertheless, huge differences exist between organizations (mainly between private and non-profit organizations) with respect to the amount and quality of information that is provided on these economic indicators in the GRI reports. Environmental performance indicators are often only reported on a basic level, but in a more consistent way, with limited differences between organizations. Moreover, there was no significant correlation between the use of a certified environmental management system (ISO 14001 or EMAS) and the quality of environmental reporting. There is also a clear difference with respect to the reporting behavior of service suppliers and manufacturers or distributors of goods, mostly in terms of number of indicators reported on. Finally, the possible application of existing indicators that integrate economic and environmental aspects in sustainability reporting is discussed. Including "integrated indicators" within the GRI framework may be a step forwards to integrated reporting.

show abstract

The Organizational and Operational Boundaries of Triple Bottom Line Reporting: A Survey

Cited by 96 publications

References 39 publications

Development of a triple bottom line stakeholder satisfaction model

Development of a triple bottom line stakeholder satisfaction model

Is Sustainability Reporting Becoming Institutionalised? The Role of an Issues-Based Field

Economic and Environmental Performance Indicators in Belgian GRI Reports

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About