IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v8y2016i9p945-d78251.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring Corporate Sustainability and Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance Value Added

Author

Listed:
  • Alena Kocmanová

    (Department of Economics, Faculty of Business and Management, Brno University of Technology, Kolejní 4, Brno 61200, Czech Republic)

  • Marie Pavláková Dočekalová

    (Department of Economics, Faculty of Business and Management, Brno University of Technology, Kolejní 4, Brno 61200, Czech Republic)

  • Stanislav Škapa

    (Department of Economics, Faculty of Business and Management, Brno University of Technology, Kolejní 4, Brno 61200, Czech Republic)

  • Lenka Širáňová

    (Department of Informatics, Faculty of Business and Management, Brno University of Technology, Kolejní 4, Brno 61200, Czech Republic)

Abstract

The aim of the paper is to propose a model for measuring sustainable value which would complexly assess environmental, social, and corporate governance contribution to value creation. In the paper the concept of the Sustainable Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance Value Added is presented. The Sustainable Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance Value Added is based on the Sustainable Value Added model and combines weighted environmental, social, and corporate governance indicators with their benchmarks determined by Data Envelopment Analysis. Benchmark values of indicators were set for each company separately and determine the optimal combination of environmental, social, and corporate governance inputs to economic outcomes. The Sustainable Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance Value Added methodology is applied on real-life corporate data and presented through a case study. The value added of most of the selected companies was negative, even though economic indicators of all of them are positive. The Sustainable Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance Value Added is intended to help owners, investors, and other stakeholders in their decision-making and sustainability assessment. The use of environmental, social, and corporate governance factors helps identify the company’s strengths and weaknesses, and provides a more sophisticated insight into it than the one-dimensional methods based on economic performance alone.

Suggested Citation

  • Alena Kocmanová & Marie Pavláková Dočekalová & Stanislav Škapa & Lenka Širáňová, 2016. "Measuring Corporate Sustainability and Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance Value Added," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:9:p:945-:d:78251
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/9/945/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/9/945/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Francesco Perrini & Antonio Tencati, 2006. "Sustainability and stakeholder management: the need for new corporate performance evaluation and reporting systems," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(5), pages 296-308, September.
    2. Sanjay Sharma & Irene Henriques, 2005. "Stakeholder influences on sustainability practices in the Canadian forest products industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 159-180, February.
    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. Jonghyuk Kim & Hyunwoo Hwangbo, 2019. "Real-Time Early Warning System for Sustainable and Intelligent Plastic Film Manufacturing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-13, March.
    2. Arumega Zarefar & Dian Agustia & Noorlailie Soewarno, 2022. "Bridging the Gap between Sustainability Disclosure and Firm Performance in Indonesian Firms: The Moderating Effect of the Family Firm," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-13, September.
    3. Maria-Teresa Bosch-Badia & Joan Montllor-Serrats & Maria-Antonia Tarrazon-Rodon, 2017. "Efficiency and Sustainability of CSR Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-18, September.
    4. Alena Kocmanová & Marie Pavláková Dočekalová & Tomáš Meluzín & Stanislav Škapa, 2020. "Sustainable Investing Model for Decision Makers (Based On Research of Manufacturing Industry in the Czech Republic)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-27, October.
    5. Vicente López-López & Susana Iglesias-Antelo & Esteban Fernández, 2020. "Is Sustainable Performance Explained by Firm Effect in Small Business?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-13, December.
    6. Anca Gabriela Petrescu & Florentina Raluca Bîlcan & Marius Petrescu & Ionica Holban Oncioiu & Mirela Cătălina Türkeș & Sorinel Căpuşneanu, 2020. "Assessing the Benefits of the Sustainability Reporting Practices in the Top Romanian Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-31, April.
    7. Vivek Arulnathan & Mohammad Davoud Heidari & Maurice Doyon & Eric P. H. Li & Nathan Pelletier, 2022. "Economic Indicators for Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment: Going beyond Life Cycle Costing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-27, December.
    8. Miriam Jankalová & Jana Kurotová, 2019. "Sustainability Assessment Using Economic Value Added," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-19, December.
    9. Marie Pavláková Dočekalová & Alena Kocmanová, 2018. "Comparison of Sustainable Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance Value Added Models for Investors Decision Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-13, February.
    10. Karel Doubravský & Alena Kocmanová & Mirko Dohnal, 2018. "Analysis of Sustainability Decision Trees Generated by Qualitative Models Based on Equationless Heuristics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-18, July.
    11. Changqing Luo & Siyuan Fan & Qi Zhang, 2017. "Investigating the Influence of Green Credit on Operational Efficiency and Financial Performance Based on Hybrid Econometric Models," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-19, November.
    12. Ionica Oncioiu & Anca-Gabriela Petrescu & Florentina-Raluca Bîlcan & Marius Petrescu & Delia-Mioara Popescu & Elena Anghel, 2020. "Corporate Sustainability Reporting and Financial Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-13, May.
    13. Marian Socoliuc & Veronica Grosu & Elena Hlaciuc & Silvius Stanciu, 2018. "Analysis of Social Responsibility and Reporting Methods of Romanian Companies in the Countries of the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-37, December.
    14. Angelina Roša (Rosha) & Natalja Lace, 2018. "The Open Innovation Model of Coaching Interaction in Organisations for Sustainable Performance within the Life Cycle," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-17, September.

    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. Juliane Peters & Ana Simaens, 2020. "Integrating Sustainability into Corporate Strategy: A Case Study of the Textile and Clothing Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-35, July.
    2. Tze San Ong & Boon Heng Teh & Ah Suat Lee, 2019. "Contingent Factors and Sustainable Performance Measurement (SPM) Practices of Malaysian Electronics and Electrical Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-33, February.
    3. Hsiao-Yen Mao & Wen-Min Lu & Hsin-Yen Shieh, 2023. "Exploring the Influence of Environmental Investment on Multinational Enterprises’ Performance from the Sustainability and Marketability Efficiency Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-23, May.
    4. Rainer Lueg & Maria Medelby Pedersen & Søren Nørregaard Clemmensen, 2015. "The Role of Corporate Sustainability in a Low‐Cost Business Model – A Case Study in the Scandinavian Fashion Industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(5), pages 344-359, July.
    5. Marie Pavláková Dočekalová & Alena Kocmanová, 2018. "Comparison of Sustainable Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance Value Added Models for Investors Decision Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-13, February.
    6. Tauringana, Venancio & Chithambo, Lyton, 2015. "The effect of DEFRA guidance on greenhouse gas disclosure," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 425-444.
    7. Venkataraman S, 2019. "Stakeholder Approach To Corporate Sustainability: A Review," Working papers 319, Indian Institute of Management Kozhikode.
    8. Alvaro Rojas & Daniel Lorenzo, 2021. "Environmental and Social Goals in Spanish SMEs: The Moderating Effect of Family Influence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, February.
    9. Jonathan Pryshlakivsky & Cory Searcy, 2017. "A Heuristic Model for Establishing Trade-Offs in Corporate Sustainability Performance Measurement Systems," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 323-342, August.
    10. María D. López‐Gamero & Patrocinio Zaragoza‐Sáez & Enrique Claver‐Cortés & José F. Molina‐Azorín, 2011. "Sustainable development and intangibles: building sustainable intellectual capital," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(1), pages 18-37, January.
    11. J. A. Plaza‐Úbeda & J. Burgos‐Jiménez & D. A. Vazquez & C. Liston‐Heyes, 2009. "The ‘win–win’ paradigm and stakeholder integration," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(8), pages 487-499, December.
    12. Franck Brulhart & Sandrine Gherra & Bertrand V. Quelin, 2019. "Do Stakeholder Orientation and Environmental Proactivity Impact Firm Profitability?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 25-46, August.
    13. Carmen Nastase & Carmen Chasovschi & Mihai Popescu & Adrian Liviu Scutariu, 2010. "The Importance of Stakeholders and Policy Influence Enhancing the Innovation in Nature Based Tourism Services Greece, Austria, Finland and Romania Case Studies," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(2), pages 137-148.
    14. Guo, Shu & Zhang, ZhongXiang, 2023. "Green credit policy and total factor productivity: Evidence from Chinese listed companies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    15. Luis Jesús Córdova-Aguirre & Juan Manuel Ramón-Jerónimo, 2024. "Designing a Sustainability Assessment Framework for Peruvian Manufacturing Small and Medium Enterprises Applying the Stakeholder Theory Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-23, February.
    16. Barcos, Lucía & Barroso, Alicia & Surroca, Jordi & Tribó, Josep A., 2013. "Corporate social responsibility and inventory policy," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(2), pages 580-588.
    17. Chi-Yo Huang & Min-Jen Yang & Jeen-Fong Li & Hueiling Chen, 2021. "A DANP-Based NDEA-MOP Approach to Evaluating the Patent Commercialization Performance of Industry–Academic Collaborations," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(18), pages 1-26, September.
    18. H. L. Zou & R. C. Zeng & S. X. Zeng & Jonathan J. Shi, 2015. "How Do Environmental Violation Events Harm Corporate Reputation?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(8), pages 836-854, December.
    19. Julie Dekker & Tim Hasso, 2016. "Environmental Performance Focus in Private Family Firms: The Role of Social Embeddedness," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 136(2), pages 293-309, June.
    20. Jincheol Bae & Jaehong Lee & Eunsoo Kim, 2019. "Does Fixed Asset Revaluation Build Trust between Management and Investors?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-22, July.

    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:8:y:2016:i:9:p:945-:d:78251. 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.