How the Global Initiative Report's Indicators are Related to the Strong Sustainability Concept? - A Paraconsistent Approach

IF 0.7 Q4 GREEN & SUSTAINABLE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY Journal of Environmental Accounting and Management Pub Date : 2021-10-01 DOI:10.5890/JEAM.2021.09.007

E. S. Langa, F. Agostinho, Genguyan Liu, C. Almeida, B. Giannetti

{"title":"How the Global Initiative Report's Indicators are Related to the Strong Sustainability Concept? - A Paraconsistent Approach","authors":"E. S. Langa, F. Agostinho, Genguyan Liu, C. Almeida, B. Giannetti","doi":"10.5890/JEAM.2021.09.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The pressure imposed by human-dominated systems on the natural environment and the search for more balanced social systems are current concerns worldwide. Among scales of attention and shared responsibilities, companies are also in the radar of and interested in to be more sustainable. An efficient way in disclosing information on companies’ sustainability is through sustainability reports, such as the global reporting initiative (GRI) framework. Although recognized as an important alternative, the GRI is receiving criticisms about its ability in accurately express the meaning of sustainability. This work applies the paraconsistent annotated evidential logic (PAEL) on opinions of experts in the sustainability theme to verify whether the GRI indicators are aligned to the concept of ‘strong’ sustainability. A survey applied to twenty-two experts from different field areas, backgrounds and work experiences on sustainability-related issues provided their beliefs and disbeliefs, in a quantitative way, about the ability of each of the 91 GRI indicators in expressing sustainability. Results show high dispersion (coefficient of variation >30%) among the experts opinions for 77 of the GRI indicators, in which the social category appears with the worst performance with its total 48 indicators with high dispersion. This is an indicative of different understandings by experts about the meaning of sustainability concept and/or the meaning and reach of GRI indicators in achieving sustainability. The PAEL reports that all three categories (economic, environmental and social) fall into the ‘paracomplete’ region of the Cartesian unitary square’s graph, indicating an inconclusive result about whether these three categories are able to capture and/or express the concept of strong sustainability. The overall performance (barycenter with beliefs of μ = 0.26 and disbeliefs of λ = 0.17) also fall into the paracomplete region, rejecting the initial hypothesis that GRI may show strong sustainability. Recognizing the increasing importance of sustainability reports, this work contributes in identifying and suggesting improvements to the GRI developers on indicators that may better represent the strong sustainability and achieve its main goals. GRI’s framework should be based on a clear sustainability model and provide through a simple, fast and understandable way, information about the purposes of each indicator. Focus for improvements should be especially directed to: EC4-6; EN18, 20, 21 and 34; LA2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 14; SO3-8, 11; PR1-5, 7-9; HR3, 8-10. ©2021 L&H Scientific Publishing, LLC. All rights reserved.","PeriodicalId":43043,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Accounting and Management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Accounting and Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5890/JEAM.2021.09.007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GREEN & SUSTAINABLE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

Abstract

The pressure imposed by human-dominated systems on the natural environment and the search for more balanced social systems are current concerns worldwide. Among scales of attention and shared responsibilities, companies are also in the radar of and interested in to be more sustainable. An efficient way in disclosing information on companies’ sustainability is through sustainability reports, such as the global reporting initiative (GRI) framework. Although recognized as an important alternative, the GRI is receiving criticisms about its ability in accurately express the meaning of sustainability. This work applies the paraconsistent annotated evidential logic (PAEL) on opinions of experts in the sustainability theme to verify whether the GRI indicators are aligned to the concept of ‘strong’ sustainability. A survey applied to twenty-two experts from different field areas, backgrounds and work experiences on sustainability-related issues provided their beliefs and disbeliefs, in a quantitative way, about the ability of each of the 91 GRI indicators in expressing sustainability. Results show high dispersion (coefficient of variation >30%) among the experts opinions for 77 of the GRI indicators, in which the social category appears with the worst performance with its total 48 indicators with high dispersion. This is an indicative of different understandings by experts about the meaning of sustainability concept and/or the meaning and reach of GRI indicators in achieving sustainability. The PAEL reports that all three categories (economic, environmental and social) fall into the ‘paracomplete’ region of the Cartesian unitary square’s graph, indicating an inconclusive result about whether these three categories are able to capture and/or express the concept of strong sustainability. The overall performance (barycenter with beliefs of μ = 0.26 and disbeliefs of λ = 0.17) also fall into the paracomplete region, rejecting the initial hypothesis that GRI may show strong sustainability. Recognizing the increasing importance of sustainability reports, this work contributes in identifying and suggesting improvements to the GRI developers on indicators that may better represent the strong sustainability and achieve its main goals. GRI’s framework should be based on a clear sustainability model and provide through a simple, fast and understandable way, information about the purposes of each indicator. Focus for improvements should be especially directed to: EC4-6; EN18, 20, 21 and 34; LA2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 14; SO3-8, 11; PR1-5, 7-9; HR3, 8-10. ©2021 L&H Scientific Publishing, LLC. All rights reserved.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

全球倡议报告的指标与强大的可持续性概念有何关联？-Paraconsistent方法

人类主导的系统对自然环境施加的压力以及寻求更平衡的社会系统是目前全世界关注的问题。在关注和分担责任的范围内，公司也在关注范围内，并对更具可持续性感兴趣。披露公司可持续性信息的一种有效方式是通过可持续性报告，如全球报告倡议（GRI）框架。尽管GRI被认为是一种重要的替代方案，但它在准确表达可持续性意义方面的能力却受到了批评。这项工作对可持续性主题专家的意见应用了准一致性注释证据逻辑（PAEL），以验证GRI指标是否符合“强大”可持续性的概念。一项针对来自不同领域、背景和工作经验的22名专家的关于可持续性相关问题的调查，以定量的方式提供了他们对91项GRI指标中每一项在表达可持续性方面的能力的信念和不信任。结果显示，专家对77项GRI指标的意见存在高度分散性（变异系数>30%），其中社会类别表现最差，共有48项指标具有高度分散性。这表明专家们对可持续性概念的含义和/或GRI指标在实现可持续性方面的意义和范围有不同的理解。PAEL报告称，所有三个类别（经济、环境和社会）都属于笛卡尔酉方图的“半完全”区域，这表明这三个类别是否能够捕捉和/或表达强可持续性的概念还没有定论。整体性能（重心信念为μ=0.26，不信念为λ=0.17）也属于亚完全区域，否定了GRI可能表现出强大可持续性的最初假设。认识到可持续性报告日益重要，这项工作有助于确定并建议GRI开发人员改进指标，以更好地代表强大的可持续性并实现其主要目标。GRI的框架应基于明确的可持续性模型，并通过简单、快速和可理解的方式提供有关每个指标目的的信息。改进的重点应特别针对：EC4-6；EN18、20、21和34；LA2、4、5、7、8、11、12、14；SO3-8，11；PR1-5，7-9；HR3，8-10。©2021 L&H科学出版有限责任公司。保留所有权利。

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

Journal of Environmental Accounting and Management GREEN & SUSTAINABLE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY-

CiteScore

1.80

自引率

12.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： This peer-reviewed Journal publishes original research results in the field of environmental and ecological science, with focus on sustainable management of natural, human-dominated, and man-made ecosystems through appropriate resource use, quality assessment and recovery. The aim of the Journal is to provide a place for a deep exchange of new ideas and concepts in the fields of environmental accounting, human and systems ecology, environmental management and environmental policy making. Manuscripts on environmental accounting and managements are solicited, including: mathematical modeling; computational and management techniques in environmental, ecological, energy and information science; environmental technology and engineering; human managed ecosystems such as agricultural, urban, coastal, riparian, and wetland ecosystems. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to: Topics of Interest: -Environmental and ecological economics, environmental accounting (Life Cycle Assessment, emergy, footprints, etc), environmental impact assessment, ecosystem services and natural capital assessment, energy and resource use, social factors and impacts, circular economy. -Modeling in environmental conservation and restoration, eco-hydrology and water resources management, ecological processes and patterns, climate change effects, environmental engineering and technology. -Planning and management in human dimension-institutions and patterns for socio-economic systems, industrial ecology, ecological informatics, landscape design, and urban metabolism and planning. -Environmental policy, legislation, and innovations with environmental and strategic impact assessment, project appraisal and auditing, and environmental protection. No length limitations for contributions are set, but only concisely written manuscripts are considered for publication. Brief papers can be published on the basis of Technical Notes. Discussions of previous published papers are welcome.