Workplace responsibility for employee mobility? A review of sustainability reporting frameworks

IF 9.5 1区 工程技术 Q1 TRANSPORTATION
{"title":"Workplace responsibility for employee mobility? A review of sustainability reporting frameworks","authors":"","doi":"10.1080/01441647.2024.2356030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Employers significantly influence employee travel habits through their policies and benefits, impacting workforce selection, equality of opportunities, and the environment. This study analyses what the fast-growing body of business sustainability standards and reporting frameworks (also known as Corporate Social Responsibility or Environment-Social-Governance (ESG) reporting) require from employers with respect to employee mobility. Analysing 29 leading frameworks using document analysis methods, our findings reveal that the majority (<em>n</em> = 19) do not address employee mobility in their reporting requirements. Among those that do (<em>n</em> = 10), their focus is notably limited, primarily centred on greenhouse gas emissions calculations. Only two frameworks emphasise employer responsibility for preventing transport injuries as part of workforce health and safety management. None of the frameworks mandate reporting on efforts to create an accessible workplace for all potential employees, regardless of abilities or car ownership. These results highlight a significant disparity between the limited expectations expressed in reporting frameworks and the far-reaching impacts of workplace mobility policies. We critique the GHG protocol's methodology concerning business travel and employee commuting on practical and normative grounds. We recommend that future reporting frameworks adopt broader requirements for employer transport policies, in the expectation that higher standards will trigger greener and more inclusive employer policies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48197,"journal":{"name":"Transport Reviews","volume":"44 5","pages":"Pages 1077-1102"},"PeriodicalIF":9.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transport Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/org/science/article/pii/S0144164724000175","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"TRANSPORTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Employers significantly influence employee travel habits through their policies and benefits, impacting workforce selection, equality of opportunities, and the environment. This study analyses what the fast-growing body of business sustainability standards and reporting frameworks (also known as Corporate Social Responsibility or Environment-Social-Governance (ESG) reporting) require from employers with respect to employee mobility. Analysing 29 leading frameworks using document analysis methods, our findings reveal that the majority (n = 19) do not address employee mobility in their reporting requirements. Among those that do (n = 10), their focus is notably limited, primarily centred on greenhouse gas emissions calculations. Only two frameworks emphasise employer responsibility for preventing transport injuries as part of workforce health and safety management. None of the frameworks mandate reporting on efforts to create an accessible workplace for all potential employees, regardless of abilities or car ownership. These results highlight a significant disparity between the limited expectations expressed in reporting frameworks and the far-reaching impacts of workplace mobility policies. We critique the GHG protocol's methodology concerning business travel and employee commuting on practical and normative grounds. We recommend that future reporting frameworks adopt broader requirements for employer transport policies, in the expectation that higher standards will trigger greener and more inclusive employer policies.

工作场所对员工流动的责任?可持续性报告框架回顾
雇主通过其政策和福利极大地影响着员工的旅行习惯,并对劳动力选择、机会平等和环境产生影响。本研究分析了快速增长的企业可持续发展标准和报告框架(也称为企业社会责任或环境-社会治理(ESG)报告)对雇主在员工流动性方面的要求。我们使用文件分析方法对 29 个主要框架进行了分析,结果发现大多数框架(n = 19)在报告要求中没有涉及员工流动问题。在那些涉及员工流动性的框架中(10 个),其关注点明显有限,主要集中在温室气体排放量的计算上。只有两个框架强调雇主有责任预防运输伤害,将其作为劳动力健康与安全管理的一部分。没有一个框架要求报告为所有潜在员工创造无障碍工作场所所做的努力,无论其能力如何或是否拥有汽车。这些结果凸显了报告框架中表达的有限期望与工作场所交通政策的深远影响之间的巨大差距。我们从实际和规范的角度对温室气体协议中有关商务旅行和员工通勤的方法进行了批评。我们建议未来的报告框架对雇主的交通政策提出更广泛的要求,以期望更高的标准能够引发更环保、更具包容性的雇主政策。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Transport Reviews
Transport Reviews TRANSPORTATION-
CiteScore
17.70
自引率
1.00%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: Transport Reviews is an international journal that comprehensively covers all aspects of transportation. It offers authoritative and current research-based reviews on transportation-related topics, catering to a knowledgeable audience while also being accessible to a wide readership. Encouraging submissions from diverse disciplinary perspectives such as economics and engineering, as well as various subject areas like social issues and the environment, Transport Reviews welcomes contributions employing different methodological approaches, including modeling, qualitative methods, or mixed-methods. The reviews typically introduce new methodologies, analyses, innovative viewpoints, and original data, although they are not limited to research-based content.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信