Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/0969160X.2021.1889388
Thomas Cuckston
ABSTRACT Humanity aspires to live in harmony with nature. The difficult question is: how can such harmony be achieved? In the Anthropocene, nature is socio-ecological systems. This changes how we can think about the role played by accounting in achieving some kind of harmonious co-existence with nature. It is not just about tracking the deleterious impacts of one domain (i.e. human society) upon another domain (i.e. nature). Rather, accounting becomes a vital force in the organising of socio-ecological systems. Nature conservation can be understood to be the work of organising socio-ecological systems with the aim of protecting and sustaining ecological processes and biological diversity. The papers in this SEAJ special issue on Accounting and Conservation explore how all manner of accounting practices facilitate the organisational work involved in conserving the socio-ecological systems comprising nature on Earth.
{"title":"Editorial: Accounting and ConservationTo Live in Harmony with Nature, We Must Organise Nature","authors":"Thomas Cuckston","doi":"10.1080/0969160X.2021.1889388","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2021.1889388","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Humanity aspires to live in harmony with nature. The difficult question is: how can such harmony be achieved? In the Anthropocene, nature is socio-ecological systems. This changes how we can think about the role played by accounting in achieving some kind of harmonious co-existence with nature. It is not just about tracking the deleterious impacts of one domain (i.e. human society) upon another domain (i.e. nature). Rather, accounting becomes a vital force in the organising of socio-ecological systems. Nature conservation can be understood to be the work of organising socio-ecological systems with the aim of protecting and sustaining ecological processes and biological diversity. The papers in this SEAJ special issue on Accounting and Conservation explore how all manner of accounting practices facilitate the organisational work involved in conserving the socio-ecological systems comprising nature on Earth.","PeriodicalId":38053,"journal":{"name":"Social and Environmental Accountability Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/0969160X.2021.1889388","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48754284","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-17DOI: 10.1080/0969160X.2021.1914840
Eleanor H. McNally
Morsing and Spence consider the preference of the owners and managers of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) for implicit forms of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) communication, such as...
{"title":"Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Communication and Small and Medium Sized Enterprises: The Governmentality Dilemma of Explicit and Implicit CSR Communication","authors":"Eleanor H. McNally","doi":"10.1080/0969160X.2021.1914840","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2021.1914840","url":null,"abstract":"Morsing and Spence consider the preference of the owners and managers of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) for implicit forms of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) communication, such as...","PeriodicalId":38053,"journal":{"name":"Social and Environmental Accountability Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/0969160X.2021.1914840","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42410367","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-17DOI: 10.1080/0969160X.2021.1914842
Putu Agus Ardiana
Nicolo and colleagues examine the level of compliance and the factors determining such compliance in the context of integrated reporting by state-owned enterprises (SOEs) in Europe. The study uses content analysis and an ordinary least square regression of integrated reports issued in 2016 by 34 SOEs representing 12 European countries. The content analysis was undertaken by developing a binary non-weighted disclosure index. The index was developed by assigning a score of one for every item on the Integrated Reporting Framework (IRF) disclosed by each firm under study, whereas a score of zero for the absence. The IRF is not mandatory but it is one of the reporting frameworks suggested by Directive 2014/95/EU which imposes the SOEs under study to report their non-financial issues. Despite being voluntary, the authors use the term ‘compliance’ with the framework to constitute the disclosed items on the IRF. The content analysis reveals that the firms under study fairly complied with the IRF requirements. Meanwhile, the regression analysis shows that firm size and sensitive industries were positively associated with the level of compliance, but the length of the report was negatively associated with the compliance level. A closer look at the compliance measurement suggests that the more items on the IRF were disclosed in the report, the higher the degree of compliance. However, this compliance potentially reflects ‘box-ticking’ behaviour, seeking legitimacy by symbolically meeting the IRF requirements without substantively showing social and environmental improvements in the area where the firms operated. Such symbolic behaviour may potentially also exist in mandatory settings under the Directive 2014/95/EU, where the ‘normativity of the law’ determines how influential the mandatory reporting requirements are, and therefore how likely they are to be complied with. In this regard, compliance with the mandatory reporting requirements of Directive 2014/95/EU is intimately entwined with the perception of reporters as to whether the requirements are binding. The normativity of the law in this context implies that SOEs may decouple the disclosure of items on the IRF from the actual practice when the mandatory reporting requirements of the Directive 2014/95/EU are perceived contradictive with their organisational objectives. Future research can explore reporters’ perceptions of the normativity of the mandatory reporting requirements through interviews and then link these perceptions to a longitudinal study of disclosure level in integrated reports. Such a study, rather than a cross-sectional one, can facilitate the examination of corporate reporting ‘metamorphosis’ over time. The interviews, along with the longitudinal study, can also explore whether disclosures in the integrated reports under study capture the actual practice – confirming whether this is symbolic or substantive compliance.
{"title":"Corporate reporting metamorphosis: empirical findings from state-owned enterprises","authors":"Putu Agus Ardiana","doi":"10.1080/0969160X.2021.1914842","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2021.1914842","url":null,"abstract":"Nicolo and colleagues examine the level of compliance and the factors determining such compliance in the context of integrated reporting by state-owned enterprises (SOEs) in Europe. The study uses content analysis and an ordinary least square regression of integrated reports issued in 2016 by 34 SOEs representing 12 European countries. The content analysis was undertaken by developing a binary non-weighted disclosure index. The index was developed by assigning a score of one for every item on the Integrated Reporting Framework (IRF) disclosed by each firm under study, whereas a score of zero for the absence. The IRF is not mandatory but it is one of the reporting frameworks suggested by Directive 2014/95/EU which imposes the SOEs under study to report their non-financial issues. Despite being voluntary, the authors use the term ‘compliance’ with the framework to constitute the disclosed items on the IRF. The content analysis reveals that the firms under study fairly complied with the IRF requirements. Meanwhile, the regression analysis shows that firm size and sensitive industries were positively associated with the level of compliance, but the length of the report was negatively associated with the compliance level. A closer look at the compliance measurement suggests that the more items on the IRF were disclosed in the report, the higher the degree of compliance. However, this compliance potentially reflects ‘box-ticking’ behaviour, seeking legitimacy by symbolically meeting the IRF requirements without substantively showing social and environmental improvements in the area where the firms operated. Such symbolic behaviour may potentially also exist in mandatory settings under the Directive 2014/95/EU, where the ‘normativity of the law’ determines how influential the mandatory reporting requirements are, and therefore how likely they are to be complied with. In this regard, compliance with the mandatory reporting requirements of Directive 2014/95/EU is intimately entwined with the perception of reporters as to whether the requirements are binding. The normativity of the law in this context implies that SOEs may decouple the disclosure of items on the IRF from the actual practice when the mandatory reporting requirements of the Directive 2014/95/EU are perceived contradictive with their organisational objectives. Future research can explore reporters’ perceptions of the normativity of the mandatory reporting requirements through interviews and then link these perceptions to a longitudinal study of disclosure level in integrated reports. Such a study, rather than a cross-sectional one, can facilitate the examination of corporate reporting ‘metamorphosis’ over time. The interviews, along with the longitudinal study, can also explore whether disclosures in the integrated reports under study capture the actual practice – confirming whether this is symbolic or substantive compliance.","PeriodicalId":38053,"journal":{"name":"Social and Environmental Accountability Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/0969160X.2021.1914842","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44677270","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-16DOI: 10.1080/0969160X.2021.1889386
Longxiang Zhao, J. Atkins
ABSTRACT The majority of research into corporate reporting on biodiversity and conservation generally concludes that such reporting is dominated by impression management, corporate self-interest and an anthropocentric mindset. This has led many researchers to dismiss corporate reporting, focusing increasingly on the activities of NGOs, the public sector and government level reporting. However, recent work has explored the potential for a corporate reporting (and reporting by other entities) to encapsulate emancipatory elements, where such elements demonstrate at least an intention to be transformative and emancipatory in the sense of improving conservation, enhancing biodiversity protection and, critically, preventing species extinctions. Extinction accounting that provides details on how a company is protecting/restoring habitat, enhancing biodiversity, and taking a dynamic approach to conservation could, potentially, lead to ecological and environmental improvements. Chinese listed companies have not, to date, received attention from researchers in relation to extinction accounting. This paper seeks to analyse an extensive sample of Chinese listed companies in a high ecological impact sector to assess the extent to which their biodiversity disclosures are dominated by impression management, in order to identify any elements of the reporting that could be interpreted as emancipatory extinction accounting. We respond to a call from the literature to research extinction accounting by companies in developing economies, given the paucity of the research in this area. Our findings suggest that despite a strong tendency for companies to reveal impression management and self-interest in their disclosures, there are examples of emancipatory extinction accounting, where they appear to be eliciting genuine transformation in their conservation behaviours and activities. Further, we identify species-specific, species-centric reporting as a significant element of extinction accounting, demonstrating the way in which emancipatory extinction accounting is growing and evolving in practice. This represents a significant contribution to the existing literature as previous research in the mining industry found only anthropocentric’ legitimacy-dominated extinction accounting. It is encouraging that elements of an emancipatory extinction accounting are beginning to emerge in reporting practice in a high impact sector in a developing economy.
{"title":"Assessing the Emancipatory Nature of Chinese Extinction Accounting","authors":"Longxiang Zhao, J. Atkins","doi":"10.1080/0969160X.2021.1889386","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2021.1889386","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The majority of research into corporate reporting on biodiversity and conservation generally concludes that such reporting is dominated by impression management, corporate self-interest and an anthropocentric mindset. This has led many researchers to dismiss corporate reporting, focusing increasingly on the activities of NGOs, the public sector and government level reporting. However, recent work has explored the potential for a corporate reporting (and reporting by other entities) to encapsulate emancipatory elements, where such elements demonstrate at least an intention to be transformative and emancipatory in the sense of improving conservation, enhancing biodiversity protection and, critically, preventing species extinctions. Extinction accounting that provides details on how a company is protecting/restoring habitat, enhancing biodiversity, and taking a dynamic approach to conservation could, potentially, lead to ecological and environmental improvements. Chinese listed companies have not, to date, received attention from researchers in relation to extinction accounting. This paper seeks to analyse an extensive sample of Chinese listed companies in a high ecological impact sector to assess the extent to which their biodiversity disclosures are dominated by impression management, in order to identify any elements of the reporting that could be interpreted as emancipatory extinction accounting. We respond to a call from the literature to research extinction accounting by companies in developing economies, given the paucity of the research in this area. Our findings suggest that despite a strong tendency for companies to reveal impression management and self-interest in their disclosures, there are examples of emancipatory extinction accounting, where they appear to be eliciting genuine transformation in their conservation behaviours and activities. Further, we identify species-specific, species-centric reporting as a significant element of extinction accounting, demonstrating the way in which emancipatory extinction accounting is growing and evolving in practice. This represents a significant contribution to the existing literature as previous research in the mining industry found only anthropocentric’ legitimacy-dominated extinction accounting. It is encouraging that elements of an emancipatory extinction accounting are beginning to emerge in reporting practice in a high impact sector in a developing economy.","PeriodicalId":38053,"journal":{"name":"Social and Environmental Accountability Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/0969160X.2021.1889386","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48637229","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-25DOI: 10.1080/0969160X.2021.1889385
M. Büchling, W. Maroun
ABSTRACT This paper responds to calls for more normative research on biodiversity accounting and reporting. It develops a model for reporting on biodiversity informed by earlier work on biodiversity reporting, ecological reporting and extinction accounting as well as the guidance on integrated and sustainability reporting developed by the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) and the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) respectively. The resulting ‘integrated biodiversity reporting mode’ is designed to provide a more nuanced tool for reporting on biodiversity. While the model is intended to be used by multiple organisations, its application is illustrated using the South African National Parks (SANParks). A detailed content analysis of the SANParks’ annual reports over seven years (2013–2019) is used to identify different types of disclosures, categorised according to the type of environmental information being reported and the associated capitals outlined by the IIRC. Applying the model to SANParks reveals how it is possible to provide a more detailed report on biodiversity than would be the case if only existing reporting frameworks are used. The proposed reporting model is not without challenges, but it can be applied to report more effectively on biodiversity-related risks and the interconnections between biodiversity and the different resources/capitals which are required to manage it. As a result, this paper contributes to the debate on how to report on biodiversity and demonstrates how the largely theoretical work on biodiversity reporting can be applied in practice.
{"title":"Accounting for Biodiversity and Extinction: The Case of South African National Parks","authors":"M. Büchling, W. Maroun","doi":"10.1080/0969160X.2021.1889385","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2021.1889385","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper responds to calls for more normative research on biodiversity accounting and reporting. It develops a model for reporting on biodiversity informed by earlier work on biodiversity reporting, ecological reporting and extinction accounting as well as the guidance on integrated and sustainability reporting developed by the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) and the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) respectively. The resulting ‘integrated biodiversity reporting mode’ is designed to provide a more nuanced tool for reporting on biodiversity. While the model is intended to be used by multiple organisations, its application is illustrated using the South African National Parks (SANParks). A detailed content analysis of the SANParks’ annual reports over seven years (2013–2019) is used to identify different types of disclosures, categorised according to the type of environmental information being reported and the associated capitals outlined by the IIRC. Applying the model to SANParks reveals how it is possible to provide a more detailed report on biodiversity than would be the case if only existing reporting frameworks are used. The proposed reporting model is not without challenges, but it can be applied to report more effectively on biodiversity-related risks and the interconnections between biodiversity and the different resources/capitals which are required to manage it. As a result, this paper contributes to the debate on how to report on biodiversity and demonstrates how the largely theoretical work on biodiversity reporting can be applied in practice.","PeriodicalId":38053,"journal":{"name":"Social and Environmental Accountability Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/0969160X.2021.1889385","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47945508","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-22DOI: 10.1080/0969160X.2021.1889387
E. Vinnari
ABSTRACT The purpose of this commentary is to encourage academics to be more open about the intellectual challenges involved in undertaking research. To that end, I will tell you my story of confronting an intellectual dead end and reflect on the more general lessons that could be drawn from this experience.
{"title":"Animals, Activists and Accounting: On Confronting an Intellectual Dead End","authors":"E. Vinnari","doi":"10.1080/0969160X.2021.1889387","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2021.1889387","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The purpose of this commentary is to encourage academics to be more open about the intellectual challenges involved in undertaking research. To that end, I will tell you my story of confronting an intellectual dead end and reflect on the more general lessons that could be drawn from this experience.","PeriodicalId":38053,"journal":{"name":"Social and Environmental Accountability Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/0969160X.2021.1889387","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48998391","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-15DOI: 10.1080/0969160X.2021.1881577
G. Rimmel
ABSTRACT The purpose of this research is to provide an account of whether extinction accounting and the use of IUCN categories offers a valuable and feasible addition to biodiversity disclosures for an organisation that has a professional interest in conservation programmes. Specifically, when and where IUCN categories can be used as biodiversity disclosures to address the threat of extinction. This study is based on a single anomalous case a Nordic zoo, located in Sweden, which has focused its operations exclusively on the conservation of threatened species and is the only zoo in Europe to do so. In order to comprehend the use of IUCN categories the annual report and the corporate website of Nordic Zoo have been examined. An open-ended interview with zoo management has been conducted to learn the intentions behind such specific disclosures and the use of IUCN categories. The findings of this study reveal that IUCN categories are appropriate biodiversity disclosures for highlighting extinction threats to various species. In an organisation with a professional interest in practicing conservation programmes, IUCN categories play a central role in communicating with stakeholders. This study demonstrates that biodiversity disclosures are part of a sincere effort to report on conservation.
{"title":"Angry Birds – The Use of International Union for the Conservation of Nature Categories as Biodiversity Disclosures in Extinction Accounting","authors":"G. Rimmel","doi":"10.1080/0969160X.2021.1881577","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2021.1881577","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The purpose of this research is to provide an account of whether extinction accounting and the use of IUCN categories offers a valuable and feasible addition to biodiversity disclosures for an organisation that has a professional interest in conservation programmes. Specifically, when and where IUCN categories can be used as biodiversity disclosures to address the threat of extinction. This study is based on a single anomalous case a Nordic zoo, located in Sweden, which has focused its operations exclusively on the conservation of threatened species and is the only zoo in Europe to do so. In order to comprehend the use of IUCN categories the annual report and the corporate website of Nordic Zoo have been examined. An open-ended interview with zoo management has been conducted to learn the intentions behind such specific disclosures and the use of IUCN categories. The findings of this study reveal that IUCN categories are appropriate biodiversity disclosures for highlighting extinction threats to various species. In an organisation with a professional interest in practicing conservation programmes, IUCN categories play a central role in communicating with stakeholders. This study demonstrates that biodiversity disclosures are part of a sincere effort to report on conservation.","PeriodicalId":38053,"journal":{"name":"Social and Environmental Accountability Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/0969160X.2021.1881577","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45442558","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-15DOI: 10.1080/0969160X.2020.1870313
Casey A. Camors
The study seeks to understand the persistence of inequality for women in Norwegian academia by examining the paradox of the female academic’s struggle between motherhood and achieving ‘star researc...
{"title":"Excellent and Gender Equal? Academic Motherhood and ‘Gender Blindness’ in Norwegian Academia","authors":"Casey A. Camors","doi":"10.1080/0969160X.2020.1870313","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2020.1870313","url":null,"abstract":"The study seeks to understand the persistence of inequality for women in Norwegian academia by examining the paradox of the female academic’s struggle between motherhood and achieving ‘star researc...","PeriodicalId":38053,"journal":{"name":"Social and Environmental Accountability Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/0969160X.2020.1870313","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45554817","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-14DOI: 10.1080/0969160X.2020.1870314
M. Scobie
It may not be immediately apparent why this book would be relevant to the social and environmental accounting/accountability community but it is relevant. There are several reasons for this. First,...
这本书与社会和环境会计/问责制社区相关的原因可能不是很明显，但它确实相关。这有几个原因。首先,……
{"title":"No Friend but the Mountains: Writing from Manus Prison","authors":"M. Scobie","doi":"10.1080/0969160X.2020.1870314","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2020.1870314","url":null,"abstract":"It may not be immediately apparent why this book would be relevant to the social and environmental accounting/accountability community but it is relevant. There are several reasons for this. First,...","PeriodicalId":38053,"journal":{"name":"Social and Environmental Accountability Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/0969160X.2020.1870314","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43671743","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-13DOI: 10.1080/0969160X.2020.1870315
Putu Agus Ardiana
Puroila and Makela seek to unfold the seemingly institutionalised practice of materiality assessment in sustainability reporting in a deliberative democratic setting, in which companies tend to foc...
{"title":"Matter of opinion: exploring the socio-political nature of materiality disclosures in sustainability reporting","authors":"Putu Agus Ardiana","doi":"10.1080/0969160X.2020.1870315","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2020.1870315","url":null,"abstract":"Puroila and Makela seek to unfold the seemingly institutionalised practice of materiality assessment in sustainability reporting in a deliberative democratic setting, in which companies tend to foc...","PeriodicalId":38053,"journal":{"name":"Social and Environmental Accountability Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/0969160X.2020.1870315","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42698761","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：