Reporting on Sustainable Development Goals in the European Union: what drives companies’ decisions?

IF 2.9 Q2 BUSINESS Competitiveness Review Pub Date : 2022-08-16 DOI:10.1108/cr-12-2021-0179
Joanna Krasodomska, Paweł Zieniuk, Jadwiga Kostrzewska
{"title":"Reporting on Sustainable Development Goals in the European Union: what drives companies’ decisions?","authors":"Joanna Krasodomska, Paweł Zieniuk, Jadwiga Kostrzewska","doi":"10.1108/cr-12-2021-0179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis paper aims to identify the changes in the share of large public interest entities (PIEs) in European Union (EU) Member States providing Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) reporting prior to (2017) and after (2019) the implementation of Directive 2014/95/EU and the factors that influence their decisions to provide SDG reporting in 2019.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe authors use the multilevel theory of social change in organizations as the theoretical background. The sample consists of 341 PIEs based in the EU Member States, for which reports published in 2017 and 2019 are available in the global reporting initiative sustainability disclosure database. The authors analyzed the data using the statistical significance test of equal proportions and the logistic regression model.\n\n\nFindings\nThe study findings allow to identify a significant positive change in the share of companies providing a reference to SDGs in 2019 compared with 2017. The research confirms that companies’ engagement in United Nations Global Compact and previous experience in sustainability reporting positively influences the decision to report on SDGs in 2019. Contrary to the expectations, industry, size, SDG implementation score, future orientation of government and corporate governance score do not seem to be relevant factors influencing PIEs’ disclosures.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe paper adds to the understanding of the differences in SDG reporting within the EU, which is seen as a frontrunner in implementing the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs.\n","PeriodicalId":46521,"journal":{"name":"Competitiveness Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Competitiveness Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/cr-12-2021-0179","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to identify the changes in the share of large public interest entities (PIEs) in European Union (EU) Member States providing Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) reporting prior to (2017) and after (2019) the implementation of Directive 2014/95/EU and the factors that influence their decisions to provide SDG reporting in 2019. Design/methodology/approach The authors use the multilevel theory of social change in organizations as the theoretical background. The sample consists of 341 PIEs based in the EU Member States, for which reports published in 2017 and 2019 are available in the global reporting initiative sustainability disclosure database. The authors analyzed the data using the statistical significance test of equal proportions and the logistic regression model. Findings The study findings allow to identify a significant positive change in the share of companies providing a reference to SDGs in 2019 compared with 2017. The research confirms that companies’ engagement in United Nations Global Compact and previous experience in sustainability reporting positively influences the decision to report on SDGs in 2019. Contrary to the expectations, industry, size, SDG implementation score, future orientation of government and corporate governance score do not seem to be relevant factors influencing PIEs’ disclosures. Originality/value The paper adds to the understanding of the differences in SDG reporting within the EU, which is seen as a frontrunner in implementing the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
欧盟可持续发展目标报告:是什么推动了公司的决策?
目的本文旨在确定在实施2014/95/EU指令之前(2017年)和之后(2019年),提供可持续发展目标(SDG)报告的欧盟(EU)成员国中大型公共利益实体(PIE)所占份额的变化,以及影响其在2019年提供SDG报告的决定的因素。设计/方法/方法以多层次社会变革理论为理论背景。样本由欧盟成员国的341个PIE组成,2017年和2019年发布的报告可在全球报告倡议可持续性披露数据库中获得。作者采用等比例统计显著性检验和逻辑回归模型对数据进行了分析。研究发现,与2017年相比,2019年提供可持续发展目标参考的公司份额发生了显著的积极变化。该研究证实,企业参与《联合国全球契约》以及之前在可持续发展报告方面的经验对2019年报告可持续发展目标的决定产生了积极影响。与预期相反,行业、规模、可持续发展目标实施得分、政府未来方向和公司治理得分似乎不是影响PIE披露的相关因素。原创性/价值该论文增加了对欧盟内部可持续发展目标报告差异的理解,欧盟被视为实施2030年议程和可持续发展目标的领先者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
17.20%
发文量
50
期刊介绍: The following list indicates the key issues in the Competitiveness Review. We invite papers on these and related topics. Special issues of the Review will collect papers on specific topics selected by the editors. Definition/conceptual framework of competitiveness Competitiveness diagnostics and rankings Competitiveness and economic outcomes Specific dimensions of competitiveness Competitiveness and endowments Competitiveness and economic development Location and business strategy International business and the role of MNCs Innovation and innovative capacity Clusters and cluster initiatives Institutions for competitiveness Public policy (e.g., innovation, cluster development, regional development) The Competitiveness Review aims to publish high quality papers directed at scholars, government institutions, businesses and practitioners. It appears in collaboration with key academic and professional groups in the field of competitiveness analysis and policy, including the Microeconomics of Competitiveness (MOC) network and The Competitiveness Institute (TCI) practitioner network for competitiveness, clusters and innovation.
期刊最新文献
A TOPSIS analysis of regional competitiveness at European level Evaluating Uganda’s preferential market access; trade intensity, comparative advantage and the potential for trade Nexus between corporate governance and FinTech disclosure: a comparative study between conventional and Islamic banks Mapping the intellectual landscape of financial inclusion and sustainable development: a bibliometric analysis Comparative computer simulation and empirical analysis of MIDAS and artificial neural network-UMIDAS models for short- and long-term US GDP forecasting
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1