Advertisement

Quality & Quantity

, Volume 52, Issue 3, pp 1041–1055 | Cite as

Mapping global sustainability report scoring: a detailed analysis of Europe and Asia

  • Mario González
  • María del Mar Alonso-Almeida
  • David Dominguez
Article

Abstract

This study maps the General Reporting Initiative (GRI) relations for a set of global enterprises. Enterprise interrelationships are built using the Mutual Information (MI) of the data reported by enterprises. From the MI topology, we describe interrelationships among the enterprises using chord diagrams to represent the inter- and intra-connectivity between geographical regions and economic sectors globally , by continent and country. Detailed maps are presented for European and Asian regions/sectors, including the relationship between Europe and Asia’s top reporting countries. Our findings reinforce previous research regarding the role of Europe as a driver of sustainability and its influence worldwide. We also determined that Spain is a major player in Europe and that Northern Europe does not have the assumed leading role mentioned in related studies. Eastern Asia is, by far, the leader of the region, and the GRI maps demonstrate the preponderant role of China in the region and the minimal role of India. MI topology maps outline the behavior of the economic sectors, for all the studied regions. Furthermore, a measure that relates the inter- to intra-connections is presented to describe the internal an external relationships among regions/sectors.

Keywords

Global reporting initiative (GRI) Mutual information topology GRI inter- and intra-connectivities GRI regions and sectors 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work has been funded by UNEMI 2015CONVP01-001 research grant and DITC UDLA.

References

  1. Alonso-Almeida, M.M., Llach, J., Marimon, F.: A closer look at the ‘global reporting initiative’ sustainability reporting as a tool to implement environmental and social policies: a worldwide sector analysis. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 21(6), 318–335 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alonso-Almeida, M.M., Marimon, F., Llach, J.: The use of sustainability reporting in latin america: territorial and sectorial analysis. Estudios Gerenc. 31(135), 139–149 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bravo, R., Matute, J., Pina, J.M.: Corporate social responsibility as a vehicle to reveal the corporate identity: a study focused on the websites of spanish financial entities. J. Bus. Ethics 107(2), 129–146 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bury, T.: Market structure explained by pairwise interactions. Phys. A: Stat. Mech. Appl. 392(6), 1375 – 1385 (2013). ISSN 0378-4371. doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2012.10.046. URL http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378437112009685
  5. Christofi, A., Christofi, P., Sisaye, S.: Corporate sustainability: historical development and reporting practices. Manag. Res. Rev. 35(2), 157–172 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dominguez, D.R.C., Maravall, M., Turiel, A., Ciria, J.C., Parga, N.: Numerical simulation of a binary communication channel: comparison between a replica calculation and an exact solution. EPL (Europhys. Lett.) 45(6), 739 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Drozdz, S., Grümmer, F., Górski, A.Z., Ruf, F., Speth, J.: Dynamics of competition between collectivity and noise in the stock market. Phys. A: Stat. Mech. Appl. 287(34), 440–449 (2000). ISSN 0378-4371. doi: 10.1016/S0378-4371(00)00383-6. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378437100003836
  8. Drozdz, S., Grümmer, F., Ruf, F., Speth J.: Towards identifying the world stock market cross-correlations: Dax versus dow jones. Phys. A: Stat. Mech. Appl. 294(12), 226–234 (2001). ISSN 0378-4371. doi: 10.1016/S0378-4371(01)00119-4. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378437101001194
  9. Etzion, D., Ferraro, F.: The role of analogy in the institutionalization of sustainability reporting. Organization Science 21(5), 1092–1107 (2010). ISSN 1526-5455. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1090.0494
  10. European Commission. Circular economy strategy (2017). http://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/index_en.htm
  11. Fuente, J.A., García-Sánchez, I.M., Lozano, M.B.: The role of the board of directors in the adoption of gri guidelines for the disclosure of csr information. J. Clean. Prod. 141, 737–750 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gafiychuk, V.V., Datsko, B.Y., Izmaylova, J.: Analysis of data clusters obtained by self-organizing methods. Phys. A: Stat. Mech. Appl. 341(0), 547 – 555 (2004). ISSN 0378-4371. doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2004.04.115. URL http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378437104005473
  13. Garcia, S., Cintra, Y., Rita de Cássia, S.R., Lima, F.G.: Corporate sustainability management: a proposed multi-criteria model to support balanced decision-making. J. Clean. Prod. 136, 181–196 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gilbert, D.U., Rasche, A.: Discourse ethics and social accountability: the ethics of sa 8000. Bus. Ethics Q. 17(02), 187–216 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Godha, A., Jain, P.: Sustainability reporting trend in indian companies as per GRI framework: a comparative study. South Asian J. Bus. Manag. Cases 4(1), 62–73 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. González, M., Alonso-Almeida, M.M., Avila, C., Dominguez, D.: Modeling sustainability report scoring sequences using an attractor network. Neurocomputing 168, 1181–1187 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Habek, P.: Evaluation of sustainability reporting practices in poland. Qual. Quant. 48(3), 1739–1752 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Habek, P., Wolniak, R.: Assessing the quality of corporate social responsibility reports: the case of reporting practices in selected european union member states. Qual. Quant. 50(1), 399–420 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hamilton, L., Webster, P.: The International Business Environment. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2015)Google Scholar
  20. Hermann, B.G., Kroeze, C., Jawjit, W.: Assessing environmental performance by combining life cycle assessment, multi-criteria analysis and environmental performance indicators. J. Clean. Prod. 15(18), 1787–1796 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jain, A., Islam, M.A.: The rise of GRI: a social contagion epidemic. In: Proceedings of the Ninth Asia-Pacific Conference on Global Business, Economics, Finance and Banking (2016)Google Scholar
  22. Jones, S., Frost, G., Loftus, J., van der Laan, S.: An empirical examination of the market returns and financial performance of entities engaged in sustainability reporting. Aust. Acc. Rev. 17(41), 78–87 (2007). ISSN 1835-2561. doi: 10.1111/j.1835-2561.2007.tb00456.x
  23. Lamberton, G.: Sustainability accountinga brief history and conceptual framework. Acc. Forum 29(1), 7 – 26 (2005). ISSN 0155-9982. doi: 10.1016/j.accfor.2004.11.001. URL http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0155998204000808
  24. Llach, J., Marimon, F., Alonso-Almeida, M.M.: Social accountability 8000 standard certification. J. Clean. Prod. 93, 288–298 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Marimon, F., del Pilar Rodríguez, M., Alejandro, K.A.C.: The worldwide diffusion of the global reporting initiative: what is the point? J. Clean. Prod. 33, 132–144 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Park, S.M.D., Isaksson, R., Steimle, U.: What does GRI-reporting tell us about corporate sustainability? TQM J. 21(2), 168–181 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Moneva, J.M., Archel, P., Correa, C.: GRI and the camouflaging of corporate unsustainability. Acc. Forum 30(2), 121–137 (2006). ISSN 0155-9982. doi: 10.1016/j.accfor.2006.02.001. URL http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0155998206000159
  28. Nam, Y., Barnett, G.A., Kim, D.: Corporate hyperlink network relationships in global corporate social responsibility system. Qual. Quant. 48(3), 1225–1242 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Noronha, C., Tou, Si, Cynthia, M.I., Guan, J.J.: Corporate social responsibility reporting in china: an overview and comparison with major trends. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 20(1), 29–42 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Perrini, F., Tencati, A.: Sustainability and stakeholder management: the need for new corporate performance evaluation and reporting systems. Bus. Strateg. Environ. 15(5), 296–308 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Prado-Lorenzo, J.M., Gallego-Alvarez, I., Garcia-Sanchez, I.M.: Stakeholder engagement and corporate social responsibility reporting: the ownership structure effect. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 16(2), 94–107 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schaltegger, S., Burritt, R.L.: Sustainability accounting for companies: catchphrase or decision support for business leaders? J. World Bus. 45(4), 375 – 384 (2010). ISSN 1090–9516. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2009.08.002. URL http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090951609000479
  33. Shahi, A.M., Issac, B., Modapothala, J.R.: Intelligent corporate sustainability report scoring solution using machine learning approach to text categorization. In: Sustainable Utilization and Development in Engineering and Technology (STUDENT), 2012 IEEE Conference on, pp. 227–232 (2012). doi: 10.1109/STUDENT.2012.6408409
  34. Vigneau, L., Humphreys, M., Moon, J.: How do firms comply with international sustainability standards? processes and consequences of adopting the global reporting initiative. J. Bus. Ethics 131(2), 469–486 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Willis, A.: The role of the global reporting initiative’s sustainability reporting guidelines in the social screening of investments. J. Bus. Ethics 43, 233–237 (2003). ISSN 0167-4544. doi: 10.1023/A:1022958618391

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.FICAUniversidad de las AméricasQuitoEcuador
  2. 2.FACIUniversidad Estatal de MilagroGuayasEcuador
  3. 3.FCEEUniversidad Autónoma de MadridMadridSpain
  4. 4.Escuela Politécnica SuperiorUniversidad Autónoma de MadridMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations