{"title":"沉默是金？- 分析制药业和纺织业企业报告中环境、社会和治理争议的透明度","authors":"Sophia M. Schwoy, Andreas Dutzi, Juliane Messing","doi":"10.1108/md-10-2023-1988","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>The aim of this study is to critically examine the transparency and reporting practice of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) controversies within the pharmaceutical and textile industry. Based on the four core dimensions of transparency, we explore which reporting medium is most frequently chosen for the disclosure of negative ESG contributions, the nature and information content of the disclosed incidents and how voluntary adherence to sustainability reporting standards and independent assurances affect the reporting.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>We use conceptual content analysis and employ a counter-accounting approach to analyse the disclosure of 190 ESG controversies in 104 corporate reports from the pharmaceutical and textile industries, covering a three-year period from 2018–2020.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>The very large majority of controversies are reported only once in the legal proceedings section of the annual report, but not again in the sustainability report, where it would be necessary to provide a balanced picture. Moreover, companies tend to disclose only those controversies that are either associated with high media attention or are expected to be related to litigation, resulting in 26 per cent of controversies not being disclosed at all. The overall quality of disclosure is unsatisfactory and in need of improvement, but comparably higher in the pharmaceutical industry than in the textile industry. Interestingly, neither the application of sustainability reporting standards nor independent assurance seems to positively impact the disclosure behaviour.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>Our paper provides new insights into the shortcomings of current ESG controversy disclosures by revealing patterns of selective reporting practices and the strategic framing of issues. In addition, it contributes to the debates on corporate cherry-picking in the adoption of sustainability reporting guidelines and on the effectiveness of external assurance of sustainability reports. Based on the findings, it offers important implications for practitioners, in particular management, policy makers, rating agencies and assurance providers.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":18046,"journal":{"name":"Management Decision","volume":"44 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Silence is golden? – Analysing the transparency of ESG controversies in corporate reporting within the pharmaceutical and textile industry\",\"authors\":\"Sophia M. Schwoy, Andreas Dutzi, Juliane Messing\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/md-10-2023-1988\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Purpose</h3>\\n<p>The aim of this study is to critically examine the transparency and reporting practice of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) controversies within the pharmaceutical and textile industry. Based on the four core dimensions of transparency, we explore which reporting medium is most frequently chosen for the disclosure of negative ESG contributions, the nature and information content of the disclosed incidents and how voluntary adherence to sustainability reporting standards and independent assurances affect the reporting.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\\n<p>We use conceptual content analysis and employ a counter-accounting approach to analyse the disclosure of 190 ESG controversies in 104 corporate reports from the pharmaceutical and textile industries, covering a three-year period from 2018–2020.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Findings</h3>\\n<p>The very large majority of controversies are reported only once in the legal proceedings section of the annual report, but not again in the sustainability report, where it would be necessary to provide a balanced picture. Moreover, companies tend to disclose only those controversies that are either associated with high media attention or are expected to be related to litigation, resulting in 26 per cent of controversies not being disclosed at all. The overall quality of disclosure is unsatisfactory and in need of improvement, but comparably higher in the pharmaceutical industry than in the textile industry. Interestingly, neither the application of sustainability reporting standards nor independent assurance seems to positively impact the disclosure behaviour.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\\n<p>Our paper provides new insights into the shortcomings of current ESG controversy disclosures by revealing patterns of selective reporting practices and the strategic framing of issues. In addition, it contributes to the debates on corporate cherry-picking in the adoption of sustainability reporting guidelines and on the effectiveness of external assurance of sustainability reports. Based on the findings, it offers important implications for practitioners, in particular management, policy makers, rating agencies and assurance providers.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\",\"PeriodicalId\":18046,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Management Decision\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Management Decision\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/md-10-2023-1988\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Management Decision","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/md-10-2023-1988","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Silence is golden? – Analysing the transparency of ESG controversies in corporate reporting within the pharmaceutical and textile industry
Purpose
The aim of this study is to critically examine the transparency and reporting practice of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) controversies within the pharmaceutical and textile industry. Based on the four core dimensions of transparency, we explore which reporting medium is most frequently chosen for the disclosure of negative ESG contributions, the nature and information content of the disclosed incidents and how voluntary adherence to sustainability reporting standards and independent assurances affect the reporting.
Design/methodology/approach
We use conceptual content analysis and employ a counter-accounting approach to analyse the disclosure of 190 ESG controversies in 104 corporate reports from the pharmaceutical and textile industries, covering a three-year period from 2018–2020.
Findings
The very large majority of controversies are reported only once in the legal proceedings section of the annual report, but not again in the sustainability report, where it would be necessary to provide a balanced picture. Moreover, companies tend to disclose only those controversies that are either associated with high media attention or are expected to be related to litigation, resulting in 26 per cent of controversies not being disclosed at all. The overall quality of disclosure is unsatisfactory and in need of improvement, but comparably higher in the pharmaceutical industry than in the textile industry. Interestingly, neither the application of sustainability reporting standards nor independent assurance seems to positively impact the disclosure behaviour.
Originality/value
Our paper provides new insights into the shortcomings of current ESG controversy disclosures by revealing patterns of selective reporting practices and the strategic framing of issues. In addition, it contributes to the debates on corporate cherry-picking in the adoption of sustainability reporting guidelines and on the effectiveness of external assurance of sustainability reports. Based on the findings, it offers important implications for practitioners, in particular management, policy makers, rating agencies and assurance providers.
期刊介绍：
■In-depth studies of major issues ■Operations management ■Financial management ■Motivation ■Entrepreneurship ■Problem solving and proactivity ■Serious management argument ■Strategy and policy issues ■Tactics for turning around company crises Management Decision, considered by many to be the best publication in its field, consistently offers thoughtful and provocative insights into current management practice. As such, its high calibre contributions from leading management philosophers and practitioners make it an invaluable resource in the aggressive and demanding trading climate of the Twenty-First Century.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
