IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i12p3422-d241817.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Exploration of Content and Drivers of Online Sustainability Disclosure: A Study of Italian Organisations

Author

Listed:
  • Matteo Mura

    (Department of Management, University of Bologna, Via Terracini 28, 40131 Bologna, Italy
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Mariolina Longo

    (Department of Management, University of Bologna, Via Terracini 28, 40131 Bologna, Italy
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Ana Rita Domingues

    (Department of Management, University of Bologna, Via Capo di Lucca 34, 40126 Bologna, Italy
    CENSE—Center for Environmental and Sustainability Research, NOVA School of Science and Technology, NOVA University Lisbon, 2829-516 Caparica, Portugal
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Sara Zanni

    (Department of Management, University of Bologna, Via Terracini 28, 40131 Bologna, Italy
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

Abstract

Organisations have been disclosing environmental and social information through different tools, including their websites. However, the type of environmental and social information that organisations disclose online, and what are the characteristics of those organisations is still not fully understood. This research aims to (a) identify which environmental and social information organisations disclose online; and (ii) explore drivers of the specific information disclosed. We collected data on sustainability disclosures from 2008 Italian organisations. Results show that overall the amount of environmental and social information disclosed online is low. However, organisational characteristics explain different contents of disclosure. Bigger organisations (in terms of revenues and number of employees), and with environmental and social certifications in place tend to disclose more environmental and social information. Also, consumer goods’ organisations disclose mostly information related to the supply chain; whilst resource-intensive industries disclose mostly information on corporate social responsibility. This research shows that overall there is still a reserved attitude towards disclosing environmental and social information in Italian organisations, providing little information to stakeholders about environmental and social policies, strategies and practices. This study provides researchers and practitioners information on the content of sustainability information disclosed and possible drivers for their disclosure; this supports their understanding of the conditions where voluntary sustainability disclosure is more expected.

Suggested Citation

  • Matteo Mura & Mariolina Longo & Ana Rita Domingues & Sara Zanni, 2019. "An Exploration of Content and Drivers of Online Sustainability Disclosure: A Study of Italian Organisations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-24, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:12:p:3422-:d:241817
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/12/3422/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/12/3422/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Denis Cormier & Michel Magnan & Barbara Van Velthoven, 2005. "Environmental disclosure quality in large German companies: Economic incentives, public pressures or institutional conditions?," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 3-39.
    2. Sumit Lodhia & Gerard Stone, 2017. "Integrated Reporting in an Internet and Social Media Communication Environment: Conceptual Insights," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 27(1), pages 17-33, March.
    3. Tiberio Daddi & Niccolò Maria Todaro & Maria Rosa De Giacomo & Marco Frey, 2018. "A Systematic Review of the Use of Organization and Management Theories in Climate Change Studies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 456-474, May.
    4. Jan Bebbington & Colin Higgins & Bob Frame, 2009. "Initiating sustainable development reporting: evidence from New Zealand," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 22(4), pages 588-625, May.
    5. Torbjörn Tagesson & Veronica Blank & Pernilla Broberg & Sven‐Olof Collin, 2009. "What explains the extent and content of social and environmental disclosures on corporate websites: a study of social and environmental reporting in Swedish listed corporations," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(6), pages 352-364, November.
    6. Irene Herremans & M. Herschovis & Stephanie Bertels, 2009. "Leaders and Laggards: The Influence of Competing Logics on Corporate Environmental Action," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 89(3), pages 449-472, October.
    7. Federica Farneti & James Guthrie, 2009. "Sustainability reporting by Australian public sector organisations: Why they report," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(2), pages 89-98, June.
    8. Farneti, Federica & Guthrie, James, 2009. "Sustainability reporting by Australian public sector organisations: Why they report," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 89-98.
    9. Ralf Isenmann & Christoph Bey & Markus Welter, 2007. "Online reporting for sustainability issues," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(7), pages 487-501, November.
    10. Giacomo Manetti & Marco Bellucci, 2016. "The use of social media for engaging stakeholders in sustainability reporting," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 29(6), pages 985-1011, August.
    11. Samuel Tang & David Demeritt, 2018. "Climate Change and Mandatory Carbon Reporting: Impacts on Business Process and Performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 437-455, May.
    12. Nicole Darnall & Irene Henriques & Perry Sadorsky, 2010. "Adopting Proactive Environmental Strategy: The Influence of Stakeholders and Firm Size," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(6), pages 1072-1094, September.
    13. Kim Ceulemans & Rodrigo Lozano & María Del Mar Alonso-Almeida, 2015. "Sustainability Reporting in Higher Education: Interconnecting the Reporting Process and Organisational Change Management for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-23, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paolo Esposito & Paolo Ricci, 2021. "Cultural organizations, digital Corporate Social Responsibility and stakeholder engagement in virtual museums: a multiple case study. How digitization is influencing the attitude toward CSR," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 953-964, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Davide Giacomini & Paola Zola & Diego Paredi & Mario Mazzoleni, 2020. "Environmental disclosure and stakeholder engagement via social media: State of the art and potential in public utilities," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 1552-1564, July.
    2. Barone, Elisabetta & Ranamagar, Nathan & Solomon, Jill F., 2013. "A Habermasian model of stakeholder (non)engagement and corporate (ir)responsibility reporting," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 163-181.
    3. Siddique, Md Abubakar & Akhtaruzzaman, Md & Rashid, Afzalur & Hammami, Helmi, 2021. "Carbon disclosure, carbon performance and financial performance: International evidence," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    4. Lies Bouten & Patricia Everaert & Luc Van Liedekerke & Lieven De Moor & Johan Christiaens, 2011. "Corporate social responsibility reporting: A comprehensive picture?," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(3), pages 187-204, September.
    5. Fernando Gómez-Bezares & Wojciech Przychodzen & Justyna Przychodzen, 2016. "Corporate Sustainability and Shareholder Wealth—Evidence from British Companies and Lessons from the Crisis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-22, March.
    6. Waris Ali & Jedrzej George Frynas, 2018. "The Role of Normative CSR‐Promoting Institutions in Stimulating CSR Disclosures in Developing Countries," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(4), pages 373-390, July.
    7. Lynch, Barbara, 2010. "An examination of environmental reporting by Australian state government departments," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 32-45.
    8. António Pedro Vieira & Gregor Radonjič, 2020. "Disclosure of eco‐innovation activities in European large companies' sustainability reporting," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(5), pages 2240-2253, September.
    9. Muhammad Safdar Sial & Chunmei Zheng & Nguyen Vinh Khuong & Tehmina Khan & Muhammad Usman, 2018. "Does Firm Performance Influence Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting of Chinese Listed Companies?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-12, June.
    10. Raquel Garde Sánchez & Manuel Pedro Rodríguez Bolívar & Antonio M. López Hernández, 2017. "Corporate and managerial characteristics as drivers of social responsibility disclosure by state-owned enterprises," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 633-659, July.
    11. Tudor Oprisor & Adriana TIRON-TUDOR & Cristina Silvia NISTOR, 2016. "The integrated reporting system: a new accountability enhancement tool for public sector entities," The Audit Financiar journal, Chamber of Financial Auditors of Romania, vol. 14(139), pages 747-747.
    12. Aurelio Tommasetti & Riccardo Mussari & Gennaro Maione & Daniela Sorrentino, 2020. "Sustainability Accounting and Reporting in the Public Sector: Towards Public Value Co-Creation?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-19, March.
    13. Liu, Yang Stephanie & Zhou, Xiaoyan & Yang, Jessica Hong & Hoepner, Andreas G.F. & Kakabadse, Nada, 2023. "Carbon emissions, carbon disclosure and organizational performance," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    14. Lodovico Gherardi & Anna Maria Linsalata & Enrico Deidda Gagliardo & Rebecca Levy Orelli, 2021. "Accountability and Reporting for Sustainability and Public Value: Challenges in the Public Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-18, January.
    15. Nath, Prithwiraj & Ramanathan, Ramakrishnan, 2016. "Environmental management practices, environmental technology portfolio, and environmental commitment: A content analytic approach for UK manufacturing firms," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(P3), pages 427-437.
    16. Francisco J. López-Arceiz & Ana J. Bellostas & Pilar Rivera, 2018. "Twenty Years of Research on the Relationship Between Economic and Social Performance: A Meta-analysis Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 453-484, November.
    17. Iurkov, Viacheslav & Koval, Mariia & Misra, Shekhar & Pedada, Kiran & Sinha, Ashish, 2024. "Impact of ESG distinctiveness in alliances on shareholder value," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    18. Bonsón, Enrique & Bednárová, Michaela, 2015. "CSR reporting practices of Eurozone companies," Revista de Contabilidad - Spanish Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 182-193.
    19. Bouten, Lies & Everaert, Patricia, 2015. "Social and environmental reporting in Belgium: ‘Pour vivre heureux, vivons cachés’," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 24-43.
    20. Maider Aldaz Odriozola & Igor Álvarez Etxeberria, 2021. "Determinants of Corporate Anti-Corruption Disclosure: The Case of the Emerging Economics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-17, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:12:p:3422-:d:241817. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.