The Textual Representation of Double Materiality in ESG Reports: Developing a Content Analysis Codebook within a Business Model Perspective

Authors

  • Raili Lilo School of Economics and Business Administration, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia https://orcid.org/0009-0007-3811-0087
  • Elina Paemurru School of Economics and Business Administration, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia https://orcid.org/0009-0006-5196-1567
  • Ülle Pärl School of Economics and Business Administration, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7472-3373

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54337/jobm.v13i2.10050

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to operationalise the analysis of textual patterns in ESG reports from the perspective of double materiality, enabling the distinction between value and impact statements across environmental, social, and governance initiatives. This aligns with the transformative nature of ESG reporting, which promotes more sustainable business models by integrating environmental and social impacts into core value creation, facilitating the management of risks and opportunities linked to the interests of various stakeholders.

Design/Methodology/Approach: The paper develops guidelines for exploratory content analysis to examine ESG reports through a structured codebook approach, focusing on topic prevalence, tone, and integration levels. It combines signalling, stakeholder, legitimacy, institutional, and attribution theories as complementary elements.

Findings: The research establishes a methodological framework for analysing double materiality in ESG reports facilitating the recognition, systematisation, and analysis of textual choices in ESG reporting.

Practical implications: The developed codebook provides a structured approach to analyse and compose ESG reports, helping organisations balance standardisation requirements with reporting flexibility while ensuring transparent, decision-useful information for stakeholders. This benefits both academics and practitioners.

Originality/Value: This paper presents a novel methodological approach to analyse ESG reports through the lens of double materiality, bridging theoretical understanding with practical application. This supports the use of ESG reporting as a tool for transformation towards more sustainable business models.

References

Adams, C.A. (2017). Conceptualising the contemporary corporate value creation process, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 30(4), 906-931. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2016-2529

Adams, C.A. and Abhayawansa, S. (2022). Connecting the COVID-19 pandemic, environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing and calls for ‘harmonisation’ of sustainability reporting, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 82, 102309, ISSN 1045-2354. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2021.102309

Adams, C., Alhamood, A., He, X., Tian, J., Wang, L. and Wang, Y. (2022). The development and implementation of GRI standards: practice and policy issues, in Adams, C. (Ed.), Handbook of Accounting and Sustainability, Edward Elgar Publishing, London, 26-43.

Akerlof, G.A. (1970). The Market for 'Lemons': Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1970, 84(3), 488-500. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/1879431

Alvarado-Herrera, A., Bigne, E., and Aldas-Manzano, J. (2017). A Scale for Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility Following the Sustainable Development Paradigm, Journal of Business Ethics, 140, 243–262. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2654-9

Ashforth, B., and Gibbs, B. (1990). The Double-Edge of Organizational Legitimation. Organization Science, 1(2), 177-194. doi:https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1.2.177

Bansal, P. (2005). Evolving sustainably: a longitudinal study of corporate sustainable development, Strategic Management Journal, 26(3), 197-218. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.441

Barkemeyer, R., Preuss, L. and Lee, L. (2015). On the effectiveness of private transnational governance regimes – evaluating corporate sustainability reporting according to the global reporting initiative, Journal of World Business, 502), 312-325. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2014.10.008

Baumüller, J., and Grbenic, S. (2021). Moving from non-financial to sustainability reporting: analysing the EU Commission’s proposal for a Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), Facta Univeritatis. Series: Economics and Organization, 18 (4), Special Issue, 2021, 369 – 381. doi:https://doi.org/10.22190/FUEO210817026B

Baumüller, J. and Sopp, K. (2022). Double materiality and the shift from non-financial to European sustainability reporting: review, outlook and implications, Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 23 (1), 8-28. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-04-2021-0114

Bebbington, K.J. and Gray, R.H. (2001). An account of sustainability: failure, success and a reconceptualization, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 125), 557-587. doi:https://doi.org/10.1006/cpac.2000.0450

Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communication research. Free Press.

Beske, F., Haustein, E. and Lorson, P.C. (2020). Materiality analysis in sustainability and integrated reports, Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 11(1), 162-186. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-12-2018-0343

Bhatti, M.I., Razaq, Z. and Awan, H. (2014), The key performance indicators (KPIs) and their impact on overall organisational performance, Quality & Quantity, 48(10), 3127-2143. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-013-9945-y

Bini, L., Giunta, F., Nielsen, Ch., Schaper, S., and Simoni, L. (2021). Business Model Reporting: Why the Perception of Preparers and Users Matters, Journal of Business Models, 9(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.5278/jbm.v9i1.4240

Bower, J.L. and Paine, L.S. (2017). “The Error at the Heart of Corporate Leadership”, Harvard Business Review, available at: https://hbr.org/2017/05/the-error-at-the-heart-of-corporate-leadership (accessed 26 November 2023).

Calabrese, A., Costa, R., Levialdi, N. and Menichini T. (2017). To be, or not to be, that is the Question. Is Sustainability Report Reliable?, European Journal of Sustainable Development, 6(3), 519-526. doi:https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2017.v6n3p519

Campbell, J.L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility, Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 946-967. doi:https://www.jstor.org/stable/20159343

Chauhan, Y., and Kumar, S.B. (2019). The value relevance of nonfinancial disclosure: Evidence from foreign equity investment, Journal of Multinational Financial Management, Volumes 52–53, 100595. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mulfin.2019.100595

Cho, C.H., Guidry, R., Hageman, A. and Patten, D. (2012). Do actions speak louder than words? An empirical investigation of corporate environmental reputation, Accounting, Organization and Society, 37(1), 14-25. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2011.12.001

Cho, C.H., Laine, M., Roberts, R.W. and Rodrigue, M. (2015). Organized hypocrisy, organizational façades, and sustainability reporting, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 40, 78-94. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2014.12.003

Cooper, S.M. and Michelon, G. (2022). Conceptions of materiality in sustainability reporting frameworks: commonalities, differences and possibilities, Handbook of Accounting and Sustainability, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp. 44-66.

Council of the European Union (2025). “Simplification: Council Agrees Position on the ‘Stop-the-Clock’ Mechanism to Enhance EU Competitiveness and Provide Legal Certainty to Businesses”, available at: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2025/03/26/simplification-council-agrees-position-on-the-stop-the-clock-mechanism-to-enhance-eu-competitiveness/ (accessed 30 April 2025).

De Cristofaro, T. and Gulluscio, C. (2023). In Search of Double Materiality in Non-Financial Reports: First Empirical Evidence, Sustainability, 15(2): 924. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su15020924

Delgado-Ceballos, J., Ortiz-De-Mandojana, N., Antolín-López, R., and Montiel, I. (2022). Connecting the Sustainable Development Goals to firm-level sustainability and ESG factors: The need for double materiality, Business Research Quarterly, 26(1), 2-10. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/23409444221140919

De Villiers, C., La Torre, M. and Molinari, M. (2022). The global reporting initiative’s (GRI) past, present and future: critical reflections and a research agenda on sustainability reporting (standard-setting), Pacific Accounting Review, 34(5), 728-747. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/PAR-02-2022-0034

Dhaliwal, D. S., Li, O. Z., Tsang, A., and Yang, Y. G. (2011). Voluntary Nonfinancial Disclosure and the Cost of Equity Capital: The Initiation of Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting, The Accounting Review, 86(1), 59–100. doi:http://www.jstor.org/stable/29780225

Dhaliwal, D., Li, O.Z., Tsang, A. and Yang, Y.G. (2014). Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure and the Cost of Equity Capital: The Roles of Stakeholder Orientation and Financial Transparency, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 33(4), 328-355. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2014.04.006

Dillard, J., and Vinnari, E. (2019). Critical dialogical accountability: From accounting-based accountability to accountability-based accounting, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 62, 16-38. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2018.10.003

DiMaggio, P. J., and Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields, American sociological review, 48(2), 147–160. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101

Diouf, D. and Boiral, O. (2017). The quality of sustainability reports and impression management: a stakeholder perspective, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 30(3), 643-667. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2015-2044

Di Vaio, A., Syriopoulos, Th., Alvino, F. and Palladino, R. (2020). “Integrated thinking and reporting” towards sustainable business models: a concise bibliometric analysis, Meditari Accountancy Research, 29(4), 691-719. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-12-2019-0641

Edgley C. (2014). A genealogy of accounting materiality, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 25(3), 255-271. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2013.06.001

Edgley, C., Jones, M.J. and Atkins, J.F. (2015). The Adoption of the materiality concept in social and environmental reporting assurance: A field study approach, The British Accounting Review, 47(1), 1-18. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2014.11.001

Edussuriya, I. (2022). ESG for SMEs, Sustainable Development for Small & Medium Sized Enterprises. Published by Indika Edussuriya, 1st Ed. UK. ISBN: 9798351853741.

European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) (2023). “EFRAG SRB meeting (23 August 2023): Implementation guidance for materiality assessment”, available at: https://www.efrag.org/system/files/sites/webpublishing/Meeting%20Documents/2307280747599961/06-02%20Materiality%20Assessment%20SRB%20230823.pdf (accessed 25 November 2023).

Eliwa, Y, Aboud, A., and Saleh, A. (2021). ESG practices and the cost of debt: Evidence from EU countries, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 79, September 2021, 102097, ISSN 1045-2354. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2019.102097

Espinosa, A. and Walker, J. (2017). Complexity Approach to Sustainability, A: Theory and Application, Vol. 5. World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing, Singapore.

The European Commission (EC) (2022). “Directive (EU) 2022/2464 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 amending Regulation (EU) No 537/2014, Directive 2004/109/EC, Directive 2006/43/EC and Directive 2013/34/EU, as regards corporate sustainability reporting” (Text with EEA relevance), available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2022/2464/oj/eng

The European Commission (EC) (2023a). “The European Commission. The European Green Deal”, available at: https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal_en (accessed 23 November 2023).

The European Commission (EC) (2023b). “Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2772 of 31 July 2023 supplementing Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards sustainability reporting standards (Text with EEA relevance)”, available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32023R2772&qid=1760508374503 (accessed 26 November 2023).

Fama, E.F. (1970). Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work, The Journal of Finance, 25(2), 383-417. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/2325486

Farooq, M.B. and de Villiers, C. (2019). Understanding how managers institutionalise sustainability reporting: evidence from Australia and New Zealand, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 32(5), 1240-1269. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-06-2017-2958

Fernando, S., and Lawrence, S. (2014). A theoretical Framework for CSR practices: integrating legitimacy theory, stakeholder theory and institutional theory, The Journal of Theoretical Accounting Research, 10(1), 149-178. (open access)

Fiandrino, S., Tonelli, A. and Devalle A. (2022). Sustainability materiality research: a systematic literature review of methods, theories and academic themes, Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 19(5), 665-695. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/QRAM-07-2021-0141

Findler, F., Schönherr, N., Lozano, R., Reider, D. and Martinuzzi, A. (2019). The impacts of higher education institutions on sustainable development: A review and conceptualization, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 20(1), 23-38. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-07-2017-0114

Freeman, R.E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Pitman, Boston.

Giner, B. and Luque-Vílchez, M. (2022). A commentary on the ‘new’ institutional actors in sustainability reporting standard-setting: a European perspective, Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 13(6), 1284-1309. doi:https:/doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-06-2021-0222

Gray, R. (2006). Social, environmental and sustainability reporting and organisational value creation? Whose value? Whose creation?, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 19(6), 793-819. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570610709872

Gray, R., Kouhy, R. and Lavers, S. (1995). Corporate social and environmental reporting: A review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 8(2), 47-77. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/09513579510146996

Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. Wiley, New York, NY.

Hewett, R., Shantz, A., Mundy, J. and Alfes, K. (2017). Attribution theories in Human Resource Management research: a review and research agenda. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 29(1), 87-126. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2017.1380062

Hicks, E.L. (1964). Materiality, Journal of Accounting Research, Autumn 1964, 158-71

Hur, W.-M., Kim, H., and Woo, J. (2014). How CSR leads to corporate brand equity: Mediating mechanisms of corporate brand credibility and reputation, Journal of Business Ethics, 125(1), 75–86. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1910-0

Jahn, J., and Brühl, R. (2019). Can bad news be good? On the positive and negative effects of including moderately negative information in CSR disclosures, Journal of Business Research, 97, 117-128. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.12.070

Jensen, M.C. and Meckling, W.H. (1976). Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behaviour, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure, Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X

Jørgensen, S., Mjøs, A. and Pedersen, L.J.T. (2022). Sustainability reporting and approaches to materiality: tensions and potential resolutions, Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 13(2), pp. 341-361. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-01-2021-0009

Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. SAGE Publications.

La Torre, M., Bernardi, C., Guthrie, J. and Dumay, J. (2019). Integrated reporting and integrating thinking: practical challenges, In: Arvidsson, S. (eds) Challenges in Managing Sustainable Business, Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93266-8_2

Lebeau, Y. and Cochrane, A. (2015). Rethinking the ‘third mission’: UK universities and regional engagement in challenging times, European Journal of Higher Education, 5(3), 250-263. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2015.1044545

Lecocq, X., Demil, B., Warnier, V. (2024). Moving business models forward for positive (social, environmental and economic) outcomes: Managing externalities (and internalities) to build sustainable ecosystems, Journal of Business Models, 11(3)doi:https://doi.org/10.54337/jbm.v11i3.8128

Leonidou, C. N., and Skarmeas, D. (2017). Gray shades of green: Causes and consequences of green skepticism, Journal of Business Ethics, 144(2), 401–415. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2829-4

Lilo, R., Paemurru, E. and Pärl, Ü. (2025). Accountability through linguistic features: A holistic theoretical framework for sustainability reports, Theoretical Journal of Accounting, 49(4). (Forthcoming, accepted 04.08.2025)

Lin-Hi, N., and Müller, K. (2013). The CSR bottom line: Preventing corporate social irresponsibility, Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1928–1936. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.02.015

Luque-Vílchez, M., Cordazzo, M., Rimmel G. and Tilt, C.A. (2023). Key aspects of sustainability reporting quality and the future of GRI, Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 14(4), 637-659. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-03-2023-0127

Lüdeke-Freund, F., Rauter, R., Pedersen, E., and Nielsen, C. (2020). Sustainable Value Creation Trhough Business Models: The What, the Who and the How, Journal of Business Models, 8(3), 62-90. (open access)

Lüdeke-Freund, F., Massa, L. and Breuer, H. (2024). Sustainable Business Model Design, Journal of Business Models, 12(1), 115-132. (open access)

Maas, K. and Liket, K. (2011). Social impact measurement: Classification of methods, in Burritt, R.L., Schaltegger, S., Bennett, M., Pohjola, T. and Csutora, M. (Eds), Environmental Management Accounting and Supply Chain Management, Springer, Berlin, pp. 171-202. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1390-1_8

Manetti, G. (2011). The quality of stakeholder engagement in sustainability reporting: empirical evidence and critical points, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 18(2), 110-122. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.255

Massa, L., Tucci, Ch.L., and Afuah A. (2017). A Critical Assessment of Business Model Research, Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 73-104. doi:https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2014.0072

Michalak, J., Rimmel, G., Beush, P., and Jonäll, K. (2017). Business Model Disclosures in Corporate Reports, Journal of Business Model, 5(1), 51-73. doi:https://doi.org/10.5278/ojs.jbm.v5i1.1995

Michelon, G., Pilonato, S. and Ricceri, F. (2015). CSR reporting practices and the quality of disclosure: An empirical analysis, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 33, 59-78, ISSN 1045-2354. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2014.10.003

Monciardini, D., Mähönen, J.T. and Tsagas, G. (2020). Rethinking Non-Financial Reporting: A Blueprint for Structural Regulatory Changes. Accounting, Economics and Law: A Convivium, 10(2): 20200092. doi:https://doi.org/10.1515/ael-2020-0092

Moratis, L. and Brandt, S. (2017). Corporate stakeholder responsiveness? Exploring the state and quality of GRI-based stakeholder engagement disclosures of European firms, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 24(4), 312-325. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1408

Nielsen, C. (2023), ESG Reporting and Metrics: From Double Materiality to Key Performance Indicators. Sustainability, 15(23), 16844. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/su152416844

Paemurru, E., Lilo, R., and Pärl.Ü. (2025). Regulation in Flux: The Evolution of Sustainability Reporting, Dyczkowska, J., European Sustainability Reporting Standards in Action: Context, Implementation, Ramifications, Publishing House of Wroclaw University of Economics and Business, Wroclaw, 19-39.

Pesci, C., Vola, P. and Gelmini, L. (2023). Flattening or addressing complexity? The future role of GRI in light of the sustainability accounting (r)evolution, Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 14(4), 792-814. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-05-2022-0287

Picard, N., Lord, G. and Eastman H. (2023). “Gulf or gap?: More unites standard setters than divides them”. PWC. Available at: https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/services/audit-assurance/corporate-reporting/ESG-Materiality-Standards-Reporting.html (accessed 26 November 2023).

Puroila, J. and Mäkelä, H. (2019). Matter of opinion: exploring the socio-political nature of materiality disclosures in sustainability reporting, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 32(4), 1043-1072. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-11-2016-2788

Pärl, Ü., Paemurru, E., Paemurru, K., and Kivisoo, H. (2022). Dialogical Turn of Accounting and Accountability Integrated Reporting in Non-Profit and Public-Sector Organisations, Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 34(1), 27-51. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBAFM-11-2019-0178

Rasche, A., Edinger-Schons, L. M., Ströhle, J., Gümüsay, A. A., Berg, F., Hoos, F., and Melloni, G. (2025), “EU Sustainability Omnibus – A Call for Evidence-Based Policy-Making (Copenhagen Declaration)”, available at: https://www.uni-hamburg.de/newsroom/im-fokus/2025/0909-interview-copenhagen-declaration/copenhagen-declaration-final.pdf (accessed 7 October 2025).

Roblek, V., Thorpe, O., Pejic Bach, M., Jerman, A. and Meško, M.. (2020). The Fourth Industrial Revolution and the Sustainability Practices: A Comparative Automated Content Analysis Approach of Theory and Practice, Sustainability 2020, 12(20), 8497. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208497

Roo, R. (2011). Disclosure Discourse: A Shift in Estonian Public Companies’ Interim Report Commentaries during the Turn towards Recession. Research in Economics and Business: Central and Eastern Europe, 3(1), 64–83.

Ross, S.A. (1977). The Determination of Financial Structure: The Incentive-Signalling approach, The Bell Journal of Economics, the RAND Corporation, 8(1), 23-40, Spring. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/3003485

Safari, M. and Areeb, A. (2020). A qualitative analysis of GRI principles for defining sustainability report quality: an Australian case from the preparers’ perspective, Accounting Forum. 44(4), 344-375. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/01559982.2020.1736759

Skinner, D.J. (1994). Why Firms Voluntarily Disclose Bad News, Journal of Accounting Research, 32(1), 38-60. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/2491386

Stone, P. J., Dunphy, D. C., and Smith, M. S. (1966). The general inquirer: A computer approach to content analysis. M.I.T. Press.

Stubbs, W., and Cocklin, C. (2008). Conceptualizing a “Sustainability Business Model.” Organization & Environment, 21(2), 103–127. doi:http://www.jstor.org/stable/26162326

Stubbs, W. and Higgins, C. (2018). Stakeholders’ Perspectives on the Role of Regulatory Reform in Integrated Reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 147, 489-508. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2954-0

Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches, The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/258788

Tiron-Tudor, A., Oprisor, T. and Zanellato, G. (2019). The mimicry of integrated reporting: an analysis of the Principles-Based approach. In: Idowu, S.O. and Del Baldo, M. (Eds), Integrated Reporting. CSR, Sustainability, Ehics&Governance,, pages 153-168. Springer, Cham. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01719-4_8

Unerman, J. and Zappettini, F. (2014). Incorporating materiality considerations into analyses of absence from sustainability reporting, Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, 34(3), 172-186. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2014.965262

van de Ven, M., Machado, P.L., Athanasopoulou, A., Aysolmaz, B., and Turetken, O. (2023). Performance Indicators for Business Models: The Current State of Research, Journal of Business Models, 11(1), 38-57. doi:https://doi.org/10.54337/jbm.v11i1.7177

World Economic Forum (WEF) (2023). “Get the reporting right and sustainability will follow”, available at: https://europeansting.com/2022/06/16/get-the-reporting-right-and-sustainability-will-follow/ (accessed 20 November 2023).

Yarime, M. and Tanaka, Y. (2012). The issues and methodologies in sustainability assessment tools for higher education institutions – a review of recent trends and future challenges, Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 6(1), 63-77. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/097340821100600113

Young-Ferris, A. and Roberts, J. (2021). Looking for Something That Isn’t There’: A Case Study of an Early Attempt at ESG Integration in Investment Decision Making, European Accounting Review, 32(3), 717-744. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2021.2000458

Zharfpeykan, R. (2021). Representative account or greenwashing? Voluntary sustainability reports in Australia’s mining/metals and financial services industries, Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(4), 2209-2223. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2744

Zhou, N., Pan, L., Tian, Y, Cai X., and Gao, J. (2023). How sustainable business model innovation and green technology innovation interact to affect sustainable corporate performance, Frontiers in Environmental Science, 11:1049295. doi:https://10.3389/fenvs.2023.1049295

Downloads

Published

09-12-2025

Issue

Section

Articles