生物多样性报告：标准化、重要性和保证

IF 6.6 2区环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability Pub Date : 2024-04-06 DOI:10.1016/j.cosust.2024.101435

Viktor Elliot , Kristina Jonäll , Mari Paananen , Jan Bebbington , Giovanna Michelon

{"title":"生物多样性报告：标准化、重要性和保证","authors":"Viktor Elliot , Kristina Jonäll , Mari Paananen , Jan Bebbington , Giovanna Michelon","doi":"10.1016/j.cosust.2024.101435","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper examines the evolving landscape of biodiversity reporting standards, describes their underlying rationale and anticipated effects, and highlights unresolved issues that impede the provision of ‘good’ information to markets and other report users. While a variety of reporting regulations exist, they do not point to a common ground for reporting. They address different aspects of corporate biodiversity impact and adopt different conceptions of assurance and materiality. Given the early stage of this field, further research is needed on what best practice informational governance may entail.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":294,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability","volume":"68 ","pages":"Article 101435"},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877343524000228/pdfft?md5=87797ea287bef4bc6cd955b1c12a17b5&pid=1-s2.0-S1877343524000228-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Biodiversity reporting: standardization, materiality, and assurance\",\"authors\":\"Viktor Elliot , Kristina Jonäll , Mari Paananen , Jan Bebbington , Giovanna Michelon\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cosust.2024.101435\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This paper examines the evolving landscape of biodiversity reporting standards, describes their underlying rationale and anticipated effects, and highlights unresolved issues that impede the provision of ‘good’ information to markets and other report users. While a variety of reporting regulations exist, they do not point to a common ground for reporting. They address different aspects of corporate biodiversity impact and adopt different conceptions of assurance and materiality. Given the early stage of this field, further research is needed on what best practice informational governance may entail.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":294,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability\",\"volume\":\"68 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101435\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877343524000228/pdfft?md5=87797ea287bef4bc6cd955b1c12a17b5&pid=1-s2.0-S1877343524000228-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877343524000228\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877343524000228","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了生物多样性报告标准的演变情况，描述了其基本原理和预期效果，并强调了阻碍向市场和其他报告用户提供 "良好 "信息的未决问题。虽然存在各种报告法规，但它们并没有指出报告的共同点。它们涉及企业生物多样性影响的不同方面，并采用不同的保证和重要性概念。鉴于该领域尚处于早期阶段，需要进一步研究信息管理的最佳实践。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Biodiversity reporting: standardization, materiality, and assurance

This paper examines the evolving landscape of biodiversity reporting standards, describes their underlying rationale and anticipated effects, and highlights unresolved issues that impede the provision of ‘good’ information to markets and other report users. While a variety of reporting regulations exist, they do not point to a common ground for reporting. They address different aspects of corporate biodiversity impact and adopt different conceptions of assurance and materiality. Given the early stage of this field, further research is needed on what best practice informational governance may entail.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES-ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

CiteScore

13.80

自引率

2.80%

发文量

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： "Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability (COSUST)" is a distinguished journal within Elsevier's esteemed scientific publishing portfolio, known for its dedication to high-quality, reproducible research. Launched in 2010, COSUST is a part of the Current Opinion and Research (CO+RE) suite, which is recognized for its editorial excellence and global impact. The journal specializes in peer-reviewed, concise, and timely short reviews that provide a synthesis of recent literature, emerging topics, innovations, and perspectives in the field of environmental sustainability.