Chapter 1

Business Sustainability Factors of
Performance, Risk, and Disclosure

Business Sustainability Factors of
Performance, Risk, and Disclosure
Zabihollah Rezaee
Business Sustainability Factors of Performance, Risk, and Disclosure
Copyright © Business Expert Press, LLC, 2021.
Cover design by Charlene Kronstedt
Interior design by Exeter Premedia Services Private Ltd., Chennai, India
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in

a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—electronic,
mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other except for brief quotations,
not to exceed 400 words, without the prior permission of the publisher.
First published in 2021 by

Business Expert Press, LLC
222 East 46th Street, New York, NY 10017
www.businessexpertpress.com
ISBN-13: 978-1-63742-006-5 (paperback)

ISBN-13: 978-1-63742-007-2 (e-book)
Business Expert Press Business Law and Corporate Risk Management Collection
Collection ISSN: 2333-6722 (print)

Collection ISSN: 2333-6730 (electronic)
First edition: 2021
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Description
Business sustainability is advancing from the greenwashing and branding

to, very recently, business imperative as shareholders demand, regulators
require, and companies report their sustainability performance. Sustain-
ability has become economic and strategic imperative with potential to
create opportunities and risks for businesses.
Business Sustainability Factors of Performance, Risk, and Disclosure
examines sustainability factors of performance, risk and disclosure. The
five dimensions of sustainability p erformance are economic, governance,
social, ethical, and environmental (EGSEE). Sustainability risks are rep-
utational, strategic, operational, compliance, and financial (RSOCF).
Sustainability disclosures are relevant to financial economic sustainability
performance (ESP) and non-financial environmental, social, and gover-
nance (ESG) s ustainability performance with ethics are integrated into all
other components of sustainability performance.
This book offers guidance for proper measurement, recognition, and
reporting of all five E GSEE dimensions of sustainability performance.
It also highlights how people, business, and resources collaborate in a
business sustainability and accountability model in creating shared value
for all stakeholders. The three sustainability factors of performance, risk
and disclosure are driven from the stakeholder primacy concept with the
mission of profit-with-purpose. Anyone who is involved with business
sustainability and corporate governance, the financial reporting process,
investment decisions, legal and financial advising, and audit functions
will benefit from this book.
Keywords
business sustainability; financial economic sustainability performance;
nonfinancial environmental, ethical, social, and governance sustainabil-
ity performance; sustainability risk; sustainability disclosure; sustainabil-
ity indexes; sustainability ratings; sustainability reporting; sustainability
assurance; sustainability drivers; sustainability mandatory disclosures;
sustainability voluntary disclosures; sustainability standard-setting
organizations
Contents
Preface��ix
Acknowledgments��xi
Chapter 1 An Introduction to Business Sustainability��1

Chapter 2 Sustainability Performance Factor��39
Chapter 3 Sustainability Risk Factor��65
Chapter 4 Sustainability Disclosure Factor��83
About the Author��111

Index��113
Preface
Business sustainability has gained considerable attention of investors,
regulators, standard-setters, business organization, academics, and the
accounting profession in recent years. Business sustainability focuses on
achieving financial economic sustainability performance to create share-
holder value and desired financial returns for shareholders while securing
social and environmental impacts. The primary purpose of business
sustainability is to create shared value for all stakeholders from share-
holders to employees, customers, suppliers, creditors, society, commu-
nity, and the environment. This book examines three sustainability
factors of performance, risk, and disclosure.
This book consists of four chapters covering all three sustainability
factors with a keen focus on its implications for business organizations.
Anyone who is involved with business sustainability and corporate gov-
ernance, the financial reporting process, investment decisions, legal and
financial advising, audit functions, and corporate governance education
will be interested in this book. Specifically, corporations, their execu-
tives, the boards of directors, board committees, internal and external
auditors, accountants, lawmakers, regulators, standard-setters, users of
financial statements (investors, creditors, and pensioners), investor activ-
ists, business schools, and other professionals (attorneys, financial ana-
lysts, and bankers) will benefit from this book. This book offers guidance
for proper measurement, recognition and reporting of all five economic,
governance, social, ethical, and environmental (EGSEE) dimensions of
sustainability performance. Sustainability performance and accountabil-
ity reporting have gained a new interest in the aftermath of 2007–2009
Global Financial Crisis and the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic and resulted
global economic meltdown, which has sparked widening concerns about
whether big businesses are sustainable in the long term in contributing
to the economic growth and prosperity of the nation. The ever-increasing
erosion of public trust and investor confidence in the sustainability of
large businesses, the widening concern about social responsibility and
x Preface
environmental matters, overconsumption of natural resources, the global

government bailout of big businesses, and the perception that govern-
ment cannot solve all problems of businesses underscore the importance
of keen focus on sustainability performance, risk, and disclosure.
The primary theme of this book is on the examination of business
sustainability performance, risk, disclosure reporting, and assurance
and their integration into strategy, governance, risk assessment, cost
management, performance management, and the reporting process of
disclosing governance, ethical, social, environmental, and economic sus-
tainable p erformance. This book also highlights how people, business,
and resources collaborate in a business sustainability and accountability
model. This book is intended to cover a variety of issues relevant to busi-
ness sustainability and their implications for organizations of all types and
sizes. I hope you find this book relevant and useful to gain and maintain
your business and personal sustainability.
Zabihollah (Zabi) Rezaee
November 3, 2020
Acknowledgments
I acknowledge the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Public
Company Accounting Oversight Board, the American Institute of Certi-
fied Public Accountants, the Big Four Accounting Firms and Corporate
Governance Organizations, American Accounting Association, Global
Reporting Initiative (GRI), International Integrated Reporting Coun-
cil (IIRC), Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB), United
Nations, and other sustainability standards-setting organizations for per-
mission to quote and reference their professional standards and other
publications.
The encouragement and support of my colleagues at the University
of Memphis are also acknowledged. Especially, my graduate assistant,
Ms. Naomi Riley for providing invaluable assistance. I thank the mem-
bers of the Business Expert Press team and Exeter Premedia for their hard
work and dedication in editing the book, including, Scott Isenberg, John
Wood, and Dhinesh Kumar.
My sincere thanks are due to my family, my wife Soheila, and my
children Rose and Nick. Without their love, enthusiasm, and support,
this book would not have come to fruition when it did. I am dedicating
this book to the loving memory of my sister Monireh Rezaee and my
younger brother Heshmat (John) Rezaee.
CHAPTER 1
An Introduction to Business
Sustainability
Executive Summary
Business sustainability is rapidly and newly advancing from the green-
washing and branding to the business imperative as investors demand,
regulators require, and companies present their sustainability factors of
performance, disclosure, and risk. Investors are demanding public com-
panies to disclose nonfinancial environmental, social, and governance
(ESG) sustainability performance information in addition to financial
economic sustainability performance (ESP) information to enable them
to assess the risks associated with the companies’ operations and perfor-
mance. Regulators worldwide including the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) in the United States require public companies to dis-
close ESG information in their regulatory filings. Business sustainability
has become an economic and strategic imperative with potential to c reate
opportunities and risks for businesses in creating shared value for all
stakeholders. This book examines sustainability factors of performance,
risk, and disclosure. The five dimensions of business sustainability per-
formance are economic, governance, social, ethical, and environmental
(EGSEE) dimensions. Sustainability risks include reputational, strategic,
operational, compliance, and financial (RSOCF) risks among others.
Sustainability disclosures are relevant to all five EGSEE dimensions of
sustainability performance.
This introductory chapter provides a synopsis of all three factors of busi-
ness sustainability. Chapter 2 presents sustainability performance whereas
Chapters 3 and 4 focus on sustainability risk and disclosure, respectively.
These chapters address the increasing focus on business sustainability and
its factors of performance, disclosure, and risk and their implications for
policy consideration, business practice, education, and research.
2 BUSINESS SUSTAINABILITY FACTORS
Introduction
There have been considerable efforts to encourage business organiza-
tions to pursue profit-with-purpose goals and for investors to integrate
financial economic sustainability performance (ESP) and nonfinancial
environmental, ethical, social, and governance (EESG) sustainability per-
formance into their strategic and investment decisions. The nonfinancial
EESG sustainability performance is often summarized as environmen-
tal, social, and governance (ESG) sustainability performance with ethics
integrated into other sustainability dimensions. This book presents five
dimensions of business sustainability performance as economic, gover-
nance, social, ethical, and environmental (EGSEE) and further classifies
the dimensions to financial ESP and nonfinancial EESG sustainability
performance. This introductory chapter provides a synopsis of all three
business sustainability factors of performance, risk, and disclosure whereas
Chapters 2 through 4 describe these factors in more depth and scope.
This chapter presents guidelines for proper measurement, recognition,
and reporting of all five EGSEE dimensions of sustainability performance.
Sustainability performance and accountability reporting have gained a
new interest in the aftermath of 2007–2009 Global Financial Crisis and
the resulting global economic meltdown, which has sparked widening
concerns about whether big businesses (banks and car makers) are sustain-
able in the long term in contributing to economic growth and prosperity
of the nation. The challenges brought on by the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic
has caused business organizations to pay more attention to their sustain-
ability, survival, and continuity as well as to take care of their employees,
suppliers, and customers while creating shared value for all stakeholders.
Business Sustainability: Definition and Relevance

Business sustainability has been defined in many ways. It has been defined
from agency/shareholder theory as the process of creating and maximiz-
ing shareholder wealth by aligning management interests with those of
shareholders. In this regard, the main purpose of business sustainability is
to enable management to focus on short-, medium-, and long-term stra-
tegic decisions to achieve high performance in creating shareholder value.
An Introduction to Business Sustainability 3
usiness sustainability can be defined from the legal and compliance view
B
as the process of complying with all applicable laws, rules, regulations,
and standards including those related to the environment and society in
achieving all five EGSEE dimensions of sustainability performance. Until
recently, the terms “business sustainability,” “corporate social responsi-
bility” (CSR), and “triple bottom line” (focusing on profit, people, and
planet) have been used interchangeably in the literature and authoritative
reports. However, the concept of business sustainability is broader than
just CSR and thus a more comprehensive definition of s ustainability has
been developed.
Business sustainability, for the purpose of this book, is defined as a
process (journey) of achieving financial economic sustainability perfor-
mance (ESP) in generating value for shareholders (desired returns on
investment) while achieving nonfinancial EESG sustainability perfor-
mance in creating shared value for all stakeholders (having social and
environmental impacts).1 In this chapter, business sustainability focuses
on generating financial ESP to create shareholder value while achieving
nonfinancial EESG sustainability performance in protecting interests of
other stakeholders including creditors, customers, employees, suppliers,
government, society, and the environment.2
The term CSR has evolved over the years. Originally, CSR referred
primarily to philanthropy, good community relations (in a general
sense), and employee engagement activities. While many researchers and
companies still use CSR in that sense, it has evolved to a more holistic
meaning—one where stakeholders are emphasized over shareholders, and
corporate performance is assessed against EESG factors of performance,
risk, disclosure, and their related metrics. The challenge is that compa-
nies and academics use both definitions interchangeably today. Sustain-
ability factors are more specific, though they are also subject to different
1
This definition of business sustainability and factors of performance, risk and
disclosure are adapted from Rezaee, Z., and T. Fogarty. 2019. Business Sustain-
ability, Corporate Governance, and Organizational Ethics. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
2
Much of discussion in this chapter and next three chapters comes from
Rezaee, Z., and T. Fogarty. 2019. Business Sustainability, Corporate Governance,
and Organizational Ethics. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
interpretations as sustainability includes financial economic sustainability

and nonfinancial EESG factors. As sustainability truly becomes embed-
ded into strategic plans and core business operations, a more standard and
uniformly accepted definition and factors of sustainability will evolve.
Recently on August 19, 2019, the Business Roundtable (BRT)
announced the adoption of a new Statement on the Purpose of a
Corporation that promotes the move toward sustainability of creating
shared value for all stakeholders.3 The COVID-19 pandemic forces orga-
nizations to pay more attention to EESG sustainability by focusing on the
safety, health, and well-being of their employees, suppliers, and custom-
ers.4 Asset managers (e.g., Blackrock, State Street, and Vanguard) invest
in sustainable companies with social responsibility focus and take EESG
sustainability factors of performance, risk, and disclosure into consider-
ation when making investment decisions.5 Investors, in the aftermath of
the COVID-19 pandemic, public health, economic situation, and social
justice crises, are paying more attention to the EESG factors and have
intensified their focus on sustainability and business continuity. The
amount of ESG funds available to U.S. investors has increased substan-
tially in 2019 to $20.6 billion, about four times more than the amount of
funds invested in ESG in 2018.6
The World Economic Forum (WEF 2020), in defining the purpose
of a business organization, states, “A company is more than an economic
3
Business Roundtable (BRT). 2019. “Statement on the Purpose of a Corpora-
tion.” August 19, 2019. Available at https://opportunity.businessroundtable.org/
wp-content/uploads/2019/09/BRT-Statement-on-the-Purpose-of-a-Corporation-
with-Signatures-1.pdf
4
Rezaee, Z., and N. J. Rezaee. 2020. “Stakeholder Governance Paradigm
in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic19 Pandemic.” Journal of Corporate
Governance Research 4, no. 1.
5
Investor Responsibility Research Center Institute (IRRCi). 2018. “Measur-
ing Effectiveness: Roadmap to Assessing System-level and SDG Investing.”
https://irrcinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/FINAL-TIPP-Report-
Measuring-Effectiveness-Report-2018.pdf (accessed on July 14, 2018).
6
Lacurci, G. 2020. “Money Moving into Environmental Funds Shatters Previous
Record.” CNBC, January 14, 2020. Available at https://cnbc.com/2020/01/14/
esg-funds-see-record-inflows-in-2019.html
unit generating wealth. It fulfills human and societal aspirations as part

of the broader social system. Performance must be measured not only on
the return to shareholders, but also on how it achieves its environmental,
social, and governance objectives.”7 Thus, the purpose of business organi-
zations has transformed from profit maximization and shareholder wealth
creation to generation of shared value for all stakeholders.
The ever-increasing erosion of public trust, social trust, and investor
confidence in the sustainability of large businesses, the widening concern
about social responsibility and environmental matters, social unrest, over-
consumption of natural resources, the global government bailout of big
businesses, and the perception that government cannot solve all problems of
businesses underscore the importance of keen focus on business sustainabil-
ity and the improvement of ESGEE. Sustainability risks are reputational,
strategic, operational, compliance, and financial (RSOCF). Sustainability
disclosures are relevant to financial ESP and nonfinancial ESG sustainabil-
ity performance with ethics integrated into all other components of sustain-
ability performance. Throughout the book we use ESG and environmental,
ethical, social, and governance (EESG) interchangeably. The next section
presents business sustainability initiatives as a framework and guidelines for
the discussion of sustainability factors of performance, risk, and disclosure.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) analyzed EESG sus-
tainability disclosures of 32 large and mid-sized public companies in
2020 to determine why investors obtain EESG disclosures, what EESG
sustainability factors are, and what advantages and disadvantages of ESG
policy options are.8 The 2020 GAO report indicates that the majority of
institutional investors obtain and use EESG information to better under-
stand and assess risks that could affect companies’ financial performance.9
7
World Economic Forum. 2020. “Toward Common Metrics and Consistent
Reporting of Sustainable Value Creation.” January 2020. Available at https://
weforum.org/agenda/2020/03/covid-19-personal-data-new-commodity-market/
8
United States Government Accountability Office (GAO). 2020. “Report to
the Honorable Mark Warner U.S. Senate. Public Companies Disclosure of Envi-
ronmental, Social and Governance Factors and Options to Enhance Them.” July
2020. Available at https://gao.gov/assets/710/707949.pdf
9
Ibid.
Currently, a number of organizations are addressing these sustainability

factors of performance, risk, and disclosure by establishing practices in
terms of mandatory and voluntary initiatives. However, these initiatives
are still constantly being evaluated, as their effectiveness are debatable.
The next section provides a description of these initiatives and attempts
to assess their relative success.
Business Sustainability Initiatives

In the aftermath of the 2020 global COVID-19 pandemic and the Global
Financial Crisis of 2007–2009, business organizations are required to
improve their performance in all five (EGSEE) dimensions of sustain-
ability. At the same time, corporations are expected to effectively commu-
nicate their EGSEE sustainability performance to all their stakeholders
through sustainability reporting. This section discusses drivers of recent
moves toward business sustainability performance, integrated/sustainabil-
ity, sustainability disclosure, risk assessment, reporting, and assurance.
Responding to increasing interest in and demand for business sustain-
ability factors of performance, disclosure, and risk as well as reporting by
corporations, many public companies now voluntarily manage, measure,
recognize, and disclose their commitments as well as events and trans-
actions relevant to all five (EGSEE) dimensions of sustainability perfor-
mance. The number of firms reporting sustainability has been increasing
from 50 global companies two decades ago to more than 50,000 in recent
years.
Sustainability initiatives are designed to maximize corporate social
benefits and environmental impacts while minimizing the potential
conflicts of interest among corporations, society, and the environment
caused by the differences between private and social costs and benefits,
and to align corporate goals with those of society. There are many exam-
ples of potential conflicts of interest between corporations and society,
and some can be related to social injustice and unrest, environmental
issues (pollution, acid rain, global warming), poor quality of education,
child labor in developing countries, and wages paid by multinational
corporations in poor countries. Business sustainability measures, which
include rules, regulations, and best practices of CSR programs, can raise
companies’ awareness of the social costs and benefits of their business

activities. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Develop-
ment (OECD) defines the purpose of a CSR program as, “To encourage
the positive contributions that multinational enterprises can make to
economics, environmental, and social progress and to minimize the diffi-
culties to which their various operations may give rise.”10 This definition
focuses on two important aspects of a CSR program, namely the creation
of social value through corporate activities (social value-added activities)
and the avoidance of conflicts between corporate goals and societal goals
(societal consensus). These two aspects of CSR programs should be inte-
grated into business sustainability strategies, decisions, performance, and
reporting.
There are several mandatory and voluntary guidelines for sustainability
factors of performance, risk, and disclosure including the reporting frame-
works released by GRI, integrated reporting promoted by the International
Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC), and the sustainability reporting
guidelines of the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB).
Research by the Callan Institute survey reported 43 percent of respon-
dents have voluntarily incorporated ESG factors into the investment
decision-making process and 8 percent of total respondents are consid-
ering incorporating ESG factors into future business decisions. Further-
more, these respondents that incorporated ESG into the investment
decision-making process indicate that they will broaden their approach
to ESG (39 percent) in the next one to three years, implying a continued
progression of implementation.11 An alternative to mandatory sustain-
ability reports is to standardize the sustainability performance reporting
and assurance by accomplishing the following:
(a) Provide an intellectual framework in core principles and objectives

of sustainability that guide standard-setting efforts in modernizing
and standardizing sustainability reporting and assurance.
10
Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2003.
“Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.” Available at www.oecd.org
11
Callan Institute. “2018 Survey. ESG Hitting Its Stride in U.S.” July 2018.
Available at https://callan.com/esg-survey-2018/
(b) Offer a common language of the standardized sustainability reports

that improve the ability of standard setters to communicate ideas
and intentions with key stakeholders.
(c) Standardize sustainability performance reports, risk assessment,
disclosures, and ratings.
(d) Establish globally accepted reporting framework and standards for
sustainability disclosures.
(e) Create uniformity in objectively measuring all five dimensions of
EGSEE performance.
(f ) Establish globally accepted and widely used sustainability key per-
formance indicators (SKPI) for all five dimensions of sustainability
performance.
(g) Develop a framework for proper assessment and management of all
aspects of sustainability risks.
(h) Create uniform sustainability disclosure guidelines.
(i) Ensure that a wide range of stakeholders, including investors, have
access to uniform and comparable sustainability reports.
(j) Establish standardized sustainability assurance processes.
(k) Establish sustainability disclosure index and ratings.
Mandatory Business Sustainability Initiatives
Countries that have adopted mandatory sustainability initiatives are

Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Malaysia,

Netherlands, Sweden, Hong Kong, and the United Kingdom. These
countries have adopted mandatory reporting on financial ESP and
nonfinancial ESEG sustainability performance.12 Corporate mandatory
disclosures are designed to provide investors with relevant, useful, and
reliable information in making sound investment decisions and thus vital
to the financial market. In the context of the agency theory, moral hazard
occurs in the presence of information asymmetry where the agent (man-
agement) acting on behalf of the principal (shareholders) knows more
about its actions and/or intentions than the principal does because of
12
Rezaee, Z. 2015. Business Sustainability: Performance, Compliance, Accountabil-
ity and Integrated Reporting. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Publishing.
the lack of proper monitoring of the agent. When the interests of the
agent are not aligned with those of the principal, the agent has incentives
and may not act in the best interest of and/or withhold important infor-
mation from the principal. In the case of mandatory disclosures, there
are fewer opportunities for the existence of information asymmetry. As
of now, there is no mandatory disclosure of sustainability performance
information. Corporate disclosure, mandatory or voluntary, is the back-
bone of financial markets worldwide. Public companies are required to
disclose a set of financial information if their securities are held by the
public. The primary purpose of corporate disclosure is to provide eco-
nomic agents (e.g., shareholders, creditors) with adequate information to
make appropriate decisions. This financial information to investors pro-
tects their interests and enhance their confidence in the financial reports
and markets, mitigating the information asymmetry associated with the
agency problems, and ensuring that stock prices fully reflect all value-
relevant information in an efficient capital market.
Business sustainability encourages management to manage earnings in
different ways to meet the needs of a variety of stakeholders. A share-
holder, for example, may believe that the purpose of the company
is to create value in order to generate a desired return on investment.
Customers, on the other hand, may expect that the company provides
not only the product or service advertised, but also gives back to society
in a meaningful way. Customer satisfaction, business reputation, brand
value, environmental initiatives, and social responsibility are often con-
sidered as intangible business assets that cannot be described adequately
in purely economic terms. Likewise, these assets and their value should be
linked to their related economic value over the long term. Shareholders
are better off in the long term by recognizing the various financial benefits
derived from the intangible business assets generated through sustain-
ability efforts and development. Thus, management should be motivated
to achieve sustainable economic performance for shareholders while
protecting the interests of other stakeholders. Mandatory disclosures are
disclosures of information required by law or regulation. This sustainabil-
ity information can occur within financial filings such as 10-Qs, Annual
Reports, and Management Disclosure & Analysis or nonfinancial reports
such as Health and Safety reports or Pollutant Release/Emissions reports.
EU Directive
In 2017 it became mandatory for the European Union (EU) companies

to disclose nonfinancial ESG sustainability information under the Direc-
tive 2014/95/EU (EU 2014).13 According to the EU Directive, transpar-
ency can be achieved through better disclosure practices, which leads to
more sustainable firm policies. Disclosure of nonfinancial and diversity
information by certain large undertakings and groups in annual reports.
It was initially proposed by the European Commission in April 2013 and
voted in Parliament in favor (599 to 55) on April 15, 2014. European
Commission has adopted a directive that require more than 6,000 com-
panies to disclose their environmental, social, governance, and diversity
sustainability performance for the 2017 reporting year and onward.
The EU Directive is intended to increase transparency, improve
ESG performance on environmental and social matters, and contribute
effectively to long-term economic growth and employment. All publicly
traded companies with at least 500 employees, banks, insurance compa-
nies, public-interest entities designated by national governments. Scope
includes approximately 6,000 large companies and groups across the EU.
Many entities are exempt from mandatory ESG disclosure requirements
including small-medium enterprises (SMEs) with less than 500 employ-
ees, companies with annual reports relying on frameworks (such as the
UN Global Compact, ISO 26000, the German Sustainability Code, or
GRI guidelines) covering the information required.
The European Commission directive (1) requires companies to dis-
close their environmental, social, governance, and diversity sustainability
performance; (2) is effective for the 2017 reporting year and onwards; and
(3) affects over 6,000 companies. Companies must report
• Environmental performance
• Social and employee-related matters
European Union (EU) Directive 2014/95/EU. “Directive 2014/95/EU of the

13
European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2013/34/EU as

Regards Disclosure of Non-Financial and Diversity Information by Certain Large
Undertakings and Groups.” Available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/
EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014L0095&from=EN
• Human rights policies

• Anticorruption and bribery issues
• Diversity on the board of directors
• Covered organizations will need to include information about
their suppliers
Asset managers and investment advisers will be required to take the

following steps to comply with the Disclosure Regulation:
• Policies and Procedures. To produce the required disclosures,

in-scope firms will need to consider and document the
relevance of ESG to their investment policies. In addition,
when preparing or updating their staff remuneration policies
(including, where required, public or investor disclosures with
regards to their remuneration practices), managers will be
required to specify how these policies are consistent with the
integration of sustainability risks. This will involve making a
series of strategic business and investor relations decisions.
• Website Disclosures. All managers will be required to publish
on their websites information about their policies on integration
of sustainability risks in their investment decision-making
processes. Additional public disclosure obligations will apply
to larger firms (with 500 employees or more) and will include
descriptions of investment due diligence processes for assess-
ing adverse impacts of investment decisions on sustainability
factors, a description of the principal adverse sustainability
impacts, policies on their identification and prioritization, any
action taken or planned with regards to such sustainability
impacts, as well as information on the manager’s shareholder
engagement policies. Firms that choose not to take sustain-
ability risks into account when making their investment
decisions will be required to provide clear reasons for their
decision.
• Precontractual Disclosures. Disclosures on the manner in which
sustainability risks are integrated into investment decisions
and advice and the results of the manager’s assessment of the
likely impacts of sustainability risks on the returns must also

be included in the “pre-contractual disclosures,” such as the
investment management agreement relating to a separately
managed account, or the private placement memorandum or
prospectus of a fund. If a manager does not consider sustain-
ability risks to be relevant, the precontractual disclosures must
include a clear explanation of the manager’s rationale.
• Sustainable Investments. Additional detailed disclosure
obligations will apply to investments that are marketed as
sustainable investments (meeting the requirements of the
Taxonomy Regulation) or other products that promote
specific ESG characteristics.
Hong Kong Exchange
The listed companies in Hong Kong have played an important role in

promoting and implementing business sustainability integrated report-
ing. The Hong Kong Stock Exchange (HKEX), in 2015 issued the Envi-
ronmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Reporting Guide that requires
listed companies to disclose ESG information on a comply-or-explain
basis effective from financial years ending on or after December 31,
2015.14 The Hong Kong Stock Exchange code provisions for sustain-
ability reporting are detailed in Appendix 24: Environmental, Social and
Governance (ESG) Reporting Guide of the Hong Kong Stock Exchange
Listing Rules for the Main Board, listing companies HKLR Appendix 27
has come into effect since January 2016, and the HKEX issued “7 recom-
mendations” in ESG disclosure in May 2018, followed by other updates
in November 2018.
The “Environmental” subject area includes three aspects: emissions
(A1), use of resources (A2), and the environment and natural resources
(A3). The “Social” subject area includes eight aspects: employment (B1),
14
Hong Kong Stock Exchange (HKEX). 2018. “Exchange Publishes Its Lat-
est Review of Listed Issuers’ Corporate Governance Practices and Updates Its
Guidance Material On ESG Reporting.” HKEX, www.hkex.com.hk/News/
News-Release/2018/181116news?sc_lang=en
health and safety (B2), development and training (B3), labor standards
(B4), supply chain management (B5), product responsibility (B6),
anticorruption (B7) and community investment (B8). Each “aspect”
contains both “comply or explain” items and “recommended disclosure”
items. The growing popularity of ESG disclosures comes in part due to
global market competition and mainly from the future sustainability ben-
efits. China is the world’s largest developing country and has been the
leader in introducing many sustainability policies such as ESG guide-
lines. Research on the interactive effect between ESG and green inno-
vation and its impact on firm value from the perspective of information
disclosure focuses on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange ESG disclosures.15
This research finds the following conclusions: (1) Green innovation plays
a stronger role in promoting medium- and high-level firm value. (2) In
terms of environment, information disclosure can only significantly pro-
mote low-level firm value.16 The positive impact of social information
disclosure on firm value is stronger with the increase of firm value level,
and the negative impact of governance information disclosure on firm
value is stronger with the increase of firm value level.
SEC and Sustainability Disclosures
SEC regulations on firm valuations and corporate ESG policies have

drastically changed in the past 50 years due to globalization, techno-
logical advancements, and other industry-specific developments. A
study on the SEC regulations and their relationship with firm value
was done to identify the benefits and detriments to these increasingly
15
February 24, 2020. “The Ubteraction Effect between ESG and Green Innova-
tion and Its Impact on Firm Value from the Perspective of Information Disclo-
sure.” Economic Business Aspects of Sustainability 12, no. 5. Available at https://
mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/5/1866/htm
16
Coluccia, D., M. Dabić, M. Del Giudice, S. Fontana, and S. Solimene. 2020.
“R&D Innovation Indicator and Its Effects on the Market. An Empirical Assess-
ment from a Financial Perspective.” Available online https://sciencedirect.com/
science/article/pii/S0148296319302577
stringent rules on the marketplace.17 The research finds that firms that
increase their demand for SEC regulatory compliance have correlation
to increased regulatory burdens. Regulations were thus found to have
stronger impacts than deregulations, which is consistent with the the-
ory that increased regulatory burdens push out weaker companies thus
increase the power of other companies. Firms are in effect, more likely to
leave the market or end in bankruptcy with increasing SEC restrictions.
Overall, the effects of SEC regulations are crucial to shaping the corpo-
rate sector and determining the outcomes of firm existence.
The SEC concept on disclosure reform was released on April 22,
2016, which includes 11 pages of discussion of sustainability disclosure,
and poses the following questions:18
1. How sustainability disclosure fits within the existing regulatory

requirements (Regulation S-K)?
2. What is the current cost of sustainability disclosure?
3. What are the challenges with line-item requirements?
4. How can a market standard for sustainability disclosure benefit
companies?
5. Should the focus be on ESG sustainability disclosures or just
environmental and climate change matters?
The SEC Investor Advisory Committee has held multiple discussions

on the topic of ESG Disclosures in regard to business sustainability. The
use of ESG-related disclosures has gone from a simple concept to a main-
stream global investment priority. This points toward a global convergence
17
SEC Regulations and Firms. March 2020. “Stern School of Business.” Available
at https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=22100000209312306912111
61011020640090260350410770880700770100910680930761210820
9911310703204412202012611101811511511408710711302203209207903
6125100089117121075079079023008077118125065030067067026089003
114107124004084116097112015080087101005065068079005&EXT=pdf
18
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 2016. “Business and Financial
Disclosure Required by Regulation S-K.” Release No. 33–10064; 34–77599; File
No. S7-06-16, Available at https://sec.gov/rules/concept/2016/33-10064.pdf
of investor interest in these ESG disclosures. For these reasons and more,
the Advisory Committee recommends the following:
1. Investors require reliable, material ESG information upon which to

base investment and voting decisions.
2. Issuers should directly provide material information to the market
relating to ESG issues used by investors to make investment and
voting decisions.
3. Requiring material ESG disclosure will level the playing field
between issuers.
4. The United States should take the lead on disclosure of material
ESG disclosure. Issuers are taking a variety of approaches to provide
this ESG related information to investors.
At the Meeting of the Asset Management Advisory Committee,

Chairman Clayton stated:
I look forward to hearing from the Committee’s recently-formed

subcommittees focused on private investments and on environ-
mental, social, and governance (or, “ESG”) issues. I have spoken
at length on issues in both areas. I believe I have made it clear
that, while I believe that in many cases one or more “E” issues, “S”
issues, or “G” issues are material to an investment decision, I have
not seen circumstances where combining an analysis of E, S, and
G together, across a broad range of companies, for example with
a “rating” or “score,” particularly a single rating or score, would
facilitate meaningful investment analysis that was not significantly
over-inclusive and imprecise. I have requested engagement on this
topic, particularly from active portfolio managers with actual
track records, and I greatly appreciate your efforts to inform the
Commission in this area.
European ESG Initiatives
On November 27, 2019, the European Parliament and the Council

of the European Union passed disclosure regulations relevant to ESG
information for the financial sector.19 The UN General Assembly

adopted a new global sustainable development framework: the 2030
Agenda for Sustainable Development (the “2030 Agenda”), which
includes the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) at its core. The
recent European regulations on ESG disclosures will take effect on
March 10, 2021, and will enhance the reliability and transparency of
ESG disclosures and their valuable contribution to investment decisions
and other proposals.20 Research shows that these diverging measures
will continue to be adopted at the national level and possibly in differ-
ent approaches in various financial service sectors that might persist.
The regulation aims to reduce information asymmetries in principal–
agent relationships with regard to the integration of sustainability risks,
the consideration of adverse sustainability impacts, the promotion of
environmental or social characteristics, and sustainable investment, by
requiring financial market participants and financial advisers to make
precontractual and ongoing disclosures for investors when they act as
agents of those end investors. Overall, the new requirements are com-
prehensive and are likely to encourage corporates to have the best prac-
tices that would ultimately incentivize adopting firms to increase their
ESG sustainability disclosure.
Regulators in the UK and the EU have recently proposed additional
ESG disclosures to promote sustainable economic activity. For example,
the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) published a consultation
paper, in March 2020, proposing that certain UK firms make climate
change disclosures.21 Disclosure policies of enterprises should include,
but not be limited to, material information on: (a) the financial and
operating results of the enterprise; (b) enterprise objectives; (c) major
19
The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union (EDR).
2019. “Regulations on Sustainability-related Disclosures in the Financial Services
Sector.” Official Journal of the European Union, December 12, 2019. Available at
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2019/2088/oj
20
Ibid.
21
United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority (UK/FCA). 2020. “Proposals
to Enhance Climate-Related Disclosures by Listed Issuers and Clarification of
Existing Disclosure Obligations.” Consultation Paper, March 2020, Available at
https://wlrk.com/docs/FCA_-_Consultation_Paper.pdf
share ownership and voting rights, including the structure of a group

of enterprises and intragroup relations, as well as control enhancing
mechanisms; (d) remuneration policy for members of the board and key
executives, and information about board members, including qualifica-
tions, the selection process, other enterprise directorships, and whether
each board member is regarded as independent by the board; (e) related
party transactions; (f ) foreseeable risk factors; (g) issues regarding work-
ers and other stakeholders; and (h) governance structures and policies,
in particular, the content of any corporate governance code or policy
and its implementation process. Enterprises should install high-quality
standards for accounting and financial, as well as nonfinancial disclo-
sure, including environmental and social reporting. In addition, the
standards or policies under which information is compiled or published
should be reported.
Many enterprises have taken a step further and adopted measures
designed to help them comply with the law and standards of business
conduct, and to enhance the overall transparency of their operations. An
increasing number of firms have issued voluntary codes of corporate con-
duct, which are expressions of commitments to ethical values in such
areas as environment, human rights, labor standards, consumer protec-
tion, or taxation. Specialized management systems have been, or are being
developed, and continue to evolve with the aim of helping respect these
commitments of information systems, operating procedures, and train-
ing requirements. Firms are encouraged to provide simple and econom-
ical access for all to published information and to consider making use
of information technologies to meet this goal. Information that is made
available to users in home markets should also be available to all inter-
ested users in other markets. Furthermore, firms may have to take special
steps to make information available to communities that do not have
access to printed media.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)

Guidelines
The OECD Guidelines are recommendations addressed by various

governments, specifically toward multinational enterprises involving
sustainability. The OECD Guidelines have a main objective to ensure

that operations of each enterprise is in harmony with the related and
current government policies with the purpose to strengthen the basis of
mutual confidence between the enterprises and society, to improve the
foreign investment environment, and to enhance the contribution to sus-
tainable development by enterprises. In the modern world, service and
knowledge-intensive industries are on the rise, quickly expanding with
the aid of the Internet economy, service, and technology enterprises. The
online economy is playing an increasingly crucial role in business sustain-
ability and the OECD Guidelines have evolved to reflect these changes in
the marketplace. The speed, nature, and scope of these economic changes
have presented challenging strategies for enterprises and their stakehold-
ers. Some firms have responded to public concerns by improving or creat-
ing internal programs for guidance and support for management systems
to enhance their commitment to good corporate citizenship, business,
practices, and internal conduct.
The OECD Guidelines have contributed to business sustainability in
important ways, such as through the development of standards that cover
sustainable areas involving the environment, carbon footprint, fraudu-
lent reporting risks and corruption, consumer interests and desires, as
well as corporate governance mechanisms and diversity. The common
goal of businesses to adhere to the OECD Guidelines is to encourage
positive contributions to business sustainability for the economy, envi-
ronment, and social progress and to minimize sustainable difficulties. In
reaching this goal, governments can help by providing effective domestic
policy frameworks to included sustainability, stability in the long run,
impartial system of courts and laws, appropriate regulation, and efficient
and honest public administration. Governments can also aid by promot-
ing the appropriate sustainability standards and policies to support the
development while also engaging ongoing current reforms to ensure that
the public sector is contributing actively, efficiently, and effectively. The
businesses and governments adhering to the OECD Guidelines are more
committed to the continuous improvement of sustainability policies with
an aim and perspective to improve the welfare and living standards of all
people and future peoples.
OECD General Policies
1. Contribute to economic, environmental, and social progress with a

view to achieving sustainable development.
2. Respect the internationally recognized human rights of those affected
by their activities.
3. Encourage local capacity building through close cooperation with
the local community, including business interests, as well as devel-
oping the enterprise’s activities in domestic and foreign markets,
consistent with the need for sound commercial practice.
4. Encourage human capital formation, in particular by creating
employment opportunities and facilitating training opportunities
for employees.
5. Refrain from seeking or accepting exemptions not contemplated in the
statutory or regulatory framework related to human rights, environmen-
tal, health, safety, labor, taxation, financial incentives, or other issues.
6. Support and uphold good corporate governance principles and
develop and apply good corporate governance practices, including
throughout the enterprise groups.
7. Develop and apply effective self-regulatory practices and manage-
ment systems that foster a relationship of confidence and mutual
trust between enterprises and the societies in which they operate.
8. Promote awareness of and compliance by workers employed by
multinational enterprises with respect to company policies through
appropriate dissemination of these policies, including through training
programs.
9. Refrain from discriminatory or disciplinary action against workers
who make bona fide reports to management or, as appropriate, to
the competent public authorities, on practices that contravene the
law, the guidelines, or the enterprise’s policies.
10. Carry out risk-based due diligence, by incorporating it into their
enterprise risk management systems, to identify, prevent, and mit-
igate actual and potential adverse impacts and account for how
these impacts are addressed. The nature and extent of due diligence
depend on the circumstances of a situation.
11. Avoid causing or contributing to adverse impacts on matters covered

by the Guidelines, through their own activities, and address such
impacts when they occur.
12. Seek to prevent or mitigate an adverse impact where they have
not contributed to that impact, when the impact is nevertheless
directly linked to their operations, products, or services by a busi-
ness relationship. This is not intended to shift responsibility from the
entity causing an adverse impact to the enterprise with which it has
a business relationship.
13. In addition to addressing adverse impacts in relation to matters cov-
ered by the guidelines, encourage, where practicable, business part-
ners, including suppliers and subcontractors, to apply principles of
responsible business conduct compatible with the guidelines.
14. Engage with relevant stakeholders in order to provide meaningful
opportunities for their views to be taken into account in relation to
planning and decision making for projects or other activities that
may significantly impact local communities.
15. Abstain from any improper involvement in local political activities.
In addition to the OECD Guidelines, enterprises should take into

account the already established accounting policies in the country
that they operate as well as consider the views of other investors and
creditors. The OECD Guidelines further encourage enterprises to:
(1) support, as appropriate to their circumstances, cooperative efforts
to promote Internet Freedom through respect of freedom of expres-
sion, assembly, and association online and (2) engage in or support,
where appropriate, private or multistakeholder initiatives and social
dialogue on responsible supply chain management while ensuring that
these initiatives take due account of their social and economic effects
on developing countries and of existing internationally recognized
standards.22
“OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.” 2011 edition. OECD.

22
Available at https://oecd.org/daf/inv/mne/oecdguidelinesformultinational
enterprises.htm
In summary, mandatory sustainability initiatives require companies

to report:
• Environmental performance
• Social and employee-related matters
• Human rights policies
• Anticorruption and bribery issues
• Diversity on the board of directors
• Covered organizations will need to include information about
their suppliers.
Voluntary Initiatives
Several organizations worldwide including the Global Reporting I nitiative

(GRI), International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC), Sustainabil-
ity Accounting Standard Board (SASB), and the United Nations Global
Compact have issued guidelines regarding voluntary disclosure of sustain-
ability performance information. These guidelines have been used by over
15,000 public companies in producing stand-alone integrated sustain-
ability reports. This subsection summarizes these sustainability-related
guidelines and their issuing organizations.
Global Reporting Initiative
The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) is an international independent

standards organization and its sustainability reporting and disclosure
standards are most widely used standards for reporting on nonfinancial
ESG sustainability performance. GRI global sustainability reporting stan-
dards have been developed through multistakeholder participation and
they address both comprehensive ESG reports and selected disclosures.
GRI standards provide disclosure guidelines for companies to communi-
cate their ESG sustainability performance including environmental issues
of climate change, social issues of human rights, and governance issues of
board diversity and independence. GRI establish globally accepted sus-
tainability standards to promote sustainable development, advance sus-
tainability initiatives, guide effective and efficient sustainability reporting,
and enable appropriate use of sustainability information to improve ESG

sustainability performance.
The GRI was launched in 1997 to bring consistency and global stan-
dardization to sustainability reporting. The evolution of GRI guidelines
began with the initial focus on incorporating environmental performance
into corporate reporting with its first publication, Sustainability Report-
ing Guidelines, in 2000.23 The GRI was originally created in response to
the demand for comparable sustainability reporting worldwide. These GRI
Sustainability Reporting Guidelines are updated periodically to reflect
new developments in sustainability reporting and guidance. Guideline
G4, released in May 2013, is the fourth update so far. The G4 Guideline
presents Reporting Principles, Standard Disclosures, and an Implementa-
tion Manual for sustainability reporting on economic, governance, social,
and environmental sustainability performance metrics by all organizations
regardless of their type, size, sector, or location.24 It focuses more heavily
on materiality considerations in the reporting process and final report. The
intention is to make sustainability reports, “more relevant, more credible,
and more user-friendly” by encouraging companies to center their reports
on the organization’s goals and the impacts it may have on society and other
stakeholders. In this guideline, the GRI promotes sustainability reporting
as a standard practice of disclosing sustainability-related issues that are
relevant to companies’ business and their stakeholders.
The G4 Guideline is broken into two parts: (1) “Reporting Princi-
ples and Standard Disclosures,” which contains the criteria necessary for
an organization to prepare its sustainability report “in accordance” with
the Guideline, and (2) the “Implementation Manual,” which instructs
practitioners how to apply the Reporting Principles, how to prepare dis-
closure information, and how to interpret various concepts in the guide-
line.25 There are also two components—Core and Comprehensive—for
23
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). 2013. “G4 Sustainability Reporting
Guidelines.” Available online at https://globalreporting.org/resourcelibrary/
GRIG4-Part1-Reporting-Principles-and-Standard-Disclosures.pdf (accessed on
March 29, 2016).
24
Ibid.
25
Ibid.
the “in accordance” process of identifying material to be disclosed

under the concept “Aspects,” under which refer to information with the
most influential economic, environmental, and social impacts or have
a marked effect on the decisions and perceptions of stakeholders. The
“Core” information should be disclosed in all cases and is meant to serve
as a background for disclosing the impacts of its performance in eco-
nomics, governance, social, and environmental sustainability dimensions.
The Comprehensive option requires additional Standard Disclosures on
strategy and analysis, governance, and ethics and integrity, along with
more extensive reporting on all “indicators” related to the material aspects
identified earlier in the process, rather than the minimum of one required
to be in accordance with the Core requirements.26
Global Sustainability Standards Board of the GRI
The Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB) has sole responsi-

bility for setting the first globally accepted standards for sustainability
reporting—the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards. This was estab-
lished as an independent operating entity under the auspices of GRI.
The GSSB is formed by 15 members representing a range of expertise
and multistakeholder perspectives on sustainability reporting. The GSSB
operates under the GSSB Terms of Reference to oversee the development
of the GRI Standards according to a formally defined due process.27
The GSSB works exclusively in the public interest and according to
the vision and mission of GRI. With the exception of some administrative
discussions, which can be held privately at the GSSB’s discretion, all GSSB
meetings are open to the public and available online. The GRI Sustainabil-
ity Reporting Standards are the product of more than 15 years of robust,
global, multistakeholder development. This development is governed by a
formally defined Due Process Protocol, which is overseen by the Due Pro-
cess Oversight Committee (DPOC). The Due Process Protocol is designed
to ensure that the GRI Standards promote the public interest and are
aligned with GRI’s vision and mission. It also ensures that GRI Standards
26
Ibid.
27
Global Sustainability Standards Board. GRI 2020. Available at https://global-
reporting.org/standards/gssb-and-standard-setting/
move through a clearly communicated development process. This starts

with project identification, prioritization, and commencement; continues
with content development, public exposure, and consideration of feedback;
and concludes with the final release of Standards.28
International Integrated Reporting Council
The International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) is a global coa-

lition of investors, public companies, regulators, standard setters, non-
governmental organizations (NGOs), the accounting profession, and
academia. The coalition promotes communication about value creation
as the next step in the evolution of corporate reporting. The IIRC’s mis-
sion is to establish integrated reporting and thinking within mainstream
business practice as the norm in the public and private sectors. The IIRC’s
vision is to align capital allocation and corporate behavior to wider goals
of financial stability and sustainable development through the cycle of
integrated reporting and thinking.29 The IIRC has established the Inte-
grated Reporting Framework that is intended to enable companies to pro-
duce a concise, standardized, and investor-focused sustainability reports.
The integrated reporting framework enables companies to report their
sustainability performance by focusing on six “capitals” (financial, manu-
factured, human, natural, intellectual, and social and relationship).
In April 2013, the IIRC released the draft of its framework consulta-
tion on integrated reporting intended to provide guidelines on commu-
nication with stakeholders.30 The IIRC’s proposed framework addresses
fundamental concepts of integrated reporting and its guiding principles
on an organization’s strategy, governance, performance, and prospects.
28
Global Sustainability Standards Board. Due process development. GRI 2020.
Available at https://globalreporting.org/standards/gssb-and-standard-setting/
due-process-development/
29
Integrated Reporting IR. International Framework revision Consultation
Draft and Companion Document. May 2020. Available at https://integrated
reporting.org/resource-type/technical/
30
International Integrated Reporting Committee (IIRC). 2013. “IIRC Consul-
tative Draft.2013.” IIRC Consultative Draft Section 3.12; p. 19. http://theiirc.org/
consultationdraft2013/
The IIRC, in its December 2013 Integrated Reporting Framework, pro-

motes a more integrated approach to corporate reporting by improving
the quality and quantity of information disseminated to providers of
financial capital including shareholders and other stakeholders.31
Sustainability Accounting Standards Board
The Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) issues sustainabil-

ity accounting standards to enable public companies to disclose material,
relevant, and decision useful ESG information to investors by integrating
ESG information into their mandatory filings. SASB is currently offering
77 different industry-specific standards for public companies. In October
2013, the SASB released its Sustainability Conceptual Framework con-
sisting of objectives, key definitions, and characteristics of sustainability
accounting and disclosures, methodology for assessing the materiality of
sustainability issues, and structure and harmonization of sustainability
accounting standards.32 The SASB has developed sustainability account-
ing standards relevant to disclosing material sustainability issues for
88 industries in 10 sectors, launching the process for mandatory filings to
the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that enable comparisons
between companies, which can be useful for investment decisions and
allocations of capital. Harmonizing SASB standards with existing disclo-
sure standards avoids additional costs for companies and aligns SASB’s
work with global corporate transparency efforts.
In 2017, SASB established a standards-setting group consisting of nine
individuals to revise its conceptual framework to ensure that its standards
are relevant and enable disclosure of useful sustainability information to
investors.33 Consistent with the conceptual frameworks of the Financial
Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and the International Accounting
31
Ibid.
32
Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB). 2013. “Conceptual Frame-
work of Sustainability Accounting Standard Board.” October 2013. Available at
http://sasb.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/SASB-Conceptual-Framework.pdf
33
Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (FBASB). 2017. SASB Con-
ceptual Framework, February 2017. Available at https://sasb.org/wp-content/
uploads/2020/02/SASB_Conceptual-Framework_WATERMARK.pdf
Standards Board (IASB), the SASB’s Conceptual Framework established

the basic principles, objectives, and definitions that guide its technical
staff in setting sustainability accounting standards. The proposed SASB’s
conceptual framework is still under revisions are intended to better artic-
ulate SASB’s approach in setting sustainability accounting standards.
The proposed SASB’s framework has substantially changed several
aspects of the previous framework. First, the definition of the materiality
is changed by specifying that SASB, “applies the definition of ‘materiality’
established under the U.S. securities law,” suggesting that information is
material if there is a “substantial likelihood that the disclosure of the omit-
ted fact would have been viewed by the reasonable investor as having sig-
nificantly altered the, ‘total mix’ of information made available.” Thus, any
sustainability disclosure is deemed material when it influences the decision
of a reasonable investor in providing decision-useful and relevant informa-
tion. Second, there are more clarity and guidelines on the characteristics of
decision-useful information with the intent to provide more clarity in artic-
ulating principles that guide standards. Finally, the SASB’s rules and proce-
dures are revised, which affect the content of the future SASB’s standards.
The SASB has recently launched a new certification for those who wish
to obtain credentials in sustainability. The candidates can obtain Funda-
mentals of Sustainability Accounting (FSA) certification at two levels: Level
I and Level II. The level I focuses on essential principles and emerging prac-
tices of sustainability, its learning objectives are to learn about the trends
driving demand for sustainability performance, reporting, and assurance
information, how to integrate sustainability information into managerial
and investment decisions, SASB approaches to sustainability and how
to integrate sustainability information to corporate reporting, the need
for sustainability accounting, understanding SASB standards, and how
to use SASB standards. The FSA Credential is designed for professionals
who benefit from understanding the link between material sustainability
information and a company’s financial performance.
United Nations Global Compact
The 2013 Global Corporate (GC) Sustainability Report released by

the United Nations Global Compact (UNGC) addresses the state of
corporate sustainability today and presents the actions taken by compa-

nies worldwide in integrating sustainability to their strategies, operations,
and culture. The report encourages companies to engage their suppliers
in the establishment of more sustainable practices and integration of sus-
tainability into their supply chain processes.34 This establishment takes
significantly more resources of various kinds to create efficient and effec-
tive sustainable practices in the supply chain process. Supply chains are a
hurdle for sustainability reporting for large and growing companies. This
is more likely due to the fact that many companies lack the implementing
measures and reporting metrics to remediate their supply chain, rather
than the actual supply chain itself.35
Global Compact participants rank supply chain practices as the larg-
est challenge faced by firms in regard to improving their sustainability
performance.36 Many of the problems extend from the size of the supply
chain, distance from suppliers, and operating with low standards. When
organizations set a tone at the top to prioritize sustainability within the
supply chain, progress can be made. The report finds that companies are
increasingly focusing on business sustainability and making progress on
setting expectations for their suppliers to integrate sustainability into
their strategies and practices. Many large companies show significantly
more effort in their commitment to action toward sustainability stan-
dards and therefore are also leading motivators. Some other benefits of
sustainability reporting include improved reputation, increased employee
loyalty, and higher customer satisfactions. However, there are several sus-
tainability challenges that could be a threat to the business value if they
34
United Nations Global Compact (UNGC). 2015. Guide to Corporate Sus-
tainability. Available at https://unglobalcompact.org/docs/publications/UN_
Global_Compact_Guide_to_Corporate_Sustainability.pdf(accessed on March 29,
2016).
35
UN Global Compact Releases Sustainability Research Findings. TriplePun-
dit. October 2013. Available at https://triplepundit.com/story/2013/un-global-
compact-releases-sustainability-research-findings/48701
36
Guide to Corporate Sustainability. Shaping a Sustainable Future. United
Nations Global Compact 2020. Available at https://d306pr3pise04h.cloud-
front.net/docs/publications%2FUN_Global_Compact_Guide_to_Corporate_
Sustainability.pdf
are not addressed properly, but these challenges can also be turned into
business opportunities.
According to the most recent update of Global Sustainability by the
UNGC, over 12,000 organizations in over 160 countries are currently
members of the global compact, with the majority coming from Europe
and Latin America. The new guide presents performance of member
organizations worldwide with respect to the 10 principles of the UNGC
that are related to human rights, labor, environment, and anticorrup-
tion. The report indicates that investors continue to demand companies
to act upon and report sustainability, while companies have found that it
is beneficial to integrate corporate responsibility into their business oper-
ations. These new initiatives help to improve corporations’ reputations
and demonstrate that these corporations are active participants in the
Global Compact, which in turn enhances stakeholder relations, improves
commitment by the CEO, promotes internal information sharing, and
provides information for investors.37
Principles of Responsible Investment
In 2005, the United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan invited

a group of large institutional investors to join a process to develop the
Principles of Responsible Investment (PRI), which was launched in April
2006, and the number of signatories has grown significantly from 100 to
over 3,000.38 The PRI addresses the long-term interests of its signatories
and financial markets and economies as related to ESG sustainability fac-
tors of performance, risk, and disclosure and their integration into invest-
ment decisions. The PRI partners with the UN Environment Program
Finance Initiative and the UN Global Compact to adopt and implement
its six aspirational principles relevant to ESG such as the following:39
• Integrating ESG factors into investment analysis and

decision-making processes
37
Ibid.
38
Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI). Available at https://unpri.org/
pri/about-the-pri
39
Ibid.
• Incorporating ESG factors into asset ownership policies and

practices
• Obtaining disclosures on ESG issues by investee companies
• Advancing acceptance and implementation of the principles
within the investment industry
• Promoting the effectiveness in implementing the principles
• Reporting on ESG activities and progress toward implement-
ing the principles.
United Nations Sustainable Development Goals
In 2015, the UN General Assembly adopted 17 Sustainable Development

Goals (SDGs) as part of its 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.40
The 17 SDGs build on the United Nations Millennium Development
Goals of 2000–2015 and involve new areas such as climate change, eco-
nomic inequality, innovation, sustainable production and consumption,
and peace and justice41 (UNSDG 2015). These SDGs are relevant to the
three dimensions of sustainability development, economic development,
and social and environmental development and thus can be linked to ESP
and ESG sustainability performance. The 17 SDGs address broad global
goals such as no poverty (Goal 1), zero hunger (Goal 2), quality education
(Goal 4), gender equity (Goal 5), responsible consumption and produc-
tion (Goal 12), climate action (Goal 13), life on land (Goal 15), peace and
justice (Goal 16), and partnerships for the goals (Goal 17). The SDGs are
accompanied by a total of 169 associated targets and 232 approved indi-
cators that are intended to be achieved by 2030. The SDGs are considered
40
United Nations Development Program. 2020. “UNDP Launches Standards
for Bond Issuers and Private Equity Funds Seeking SDG Impact.” June 16, 2020,
Available at https://undp.org/content/undp/en/home/news-centre/news/2020/
UNDP_launches_standards_for_bond_issuers_and_private_equity_funds
_seeking_SDG_impact.html
41
UN Sustainable Development Goals report (UNSDGs). 2015. “Indicators
and a Monitoring Framework for the Sustainable Development Goals Launch-
ing a data revolution for the SDGs.” Available at http://unsdsn.org/wp-content/
uploads/2015/03/150320-SDSN-Indicator-Report.pdf (accessed on 10 August
2017).
as a framework for prioritizing business sustainability strategies and related

reporting and are being integrated into investment strategies.
Impact of COVID-19
The COVID-19 pandemic has caused an incredible impact on business

environments and sustainability. Over the past decade, there has been an
exponential growth in demand and supply for standard-compliant products
therefore increasing the Voluntary Sustainability Standards (VSS) accord-
ingly. Castka, Searcy, and Fischer study the initial responses to COVID-19
for these leading VSS group of 21 standards.42 The intent of this research
was to analyze data from various public sources to determine how each VSS
has adjusted their certification services in response to COVID-19 pandemic
travel bans and lockdowns, with a particular emphasis on the adoption of
technologies. The findings show that remote working and information
technology systems have a significant uptake and is not currently expected
by VSS to extend beyond the pandemic crisis. The researchers go on to add
that these changes may become adopted as the new normal and may even
encourage businesses to utilize more advanced technology in certification
services. Despite these overwhelming challenges that COVID-19 has cre-
ated, businesses are demonstrating that they can take collective action to
address these situations such as rapid implementation of remote working.
Increased adoption of VSSs will ensure more efficient processes of certifica-
tion services and ultimately increase the credibility and trustworthiness of
businesses especially during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The manner in which companies are dealing with the regulations
and other circumstances surrounding the pandemic reflects their true
values and with the rise of social media influence. These actions will
be publicly scrutinized, causing a more intense focus on sustainability
and philanthropy. Another study by Main, Lindsay, and Hernandez43
42
“Technology Enhances Auditing in Voluntary Sustainability Standards: The
Impact of COVID-19.” MDPI Sustainability Journal. June 2020. Available at
https://mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/11/4740
43
“Human Capital, Front and Center.” Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate
Governance. May 2020. Available at https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2020/05/14/
human-capital-front-and-center/
probed the human capital relations and results from the COVID-19 pan-
demic. First, the research suggests that the social element, “S” in “ESG”
(environmental, social, and governance) be moved to the forefront
as social elements will become a top priority during COVID-19. The
authors go on to say that business transparency will be key during and
post-COVID-19 due to social norms and expectations. Social matters
are mainly focused on employee layoffs and reductions, health and safety,
employee engagement, and the role of executive leadership. While it is
impossible to say exactly how COVID-19 will affect the future of busi-
ness and social standards, it is reasonable to suggest that human capital
issues will remain a focus of attention by the public.
Sustainability CFO and the Chief Sustainability Officer
The Institute of Management Accountants turns the attention to the role

of corporate governance during and post-COVID-19. Gibassier, Arjalies,
and Garnier44 discuss how the role of the chief financial officer (CFO)
will be adapted to reflect changes in the business environment due to the
pandemic. The research suggests that a new job will appear in accounting
practices labeled “Sustainability CFO.” This new position will be a senior
executive, reporting under the Chief Value Office or a related depart-
ment, responsible for the sustainability performance, or the nonfinancial
performance, of the company. Sustainability involves various depart-
ments and topics such as assessing social impacts and their effects on
the firm’s intangible assets, managing environmental carbon footprints,
participating in corporate governance reporting standards, and more.
For most firms, the true value of the organization significantly exceeds,
what the financial statements report due to intangible assets. Those in
the accounting field have struggled to accurately and consistently value
this crucial nonfinancial information in reports. Research indicates that
44
“Sustainability CFO: The CFO of the Future?” Institute of Management
Accountants. The Association of Accountants and Financial Profession-
als in Business. 2020. Available at https://imanet.org/insights-and-trends/
external-reporting-and-disclosure-management/sustainability-cfo-the-cfo-of-
the-future?ssopc=1
80 percent of the valuation of a company actually depends on the worth

of its intangible assets.45
Sustainability CFOs are accounting professionals that are usually CPA
certified with extensive knowledge and experience who want to enhance
the relationship between the firm’s sustainability objectives and financial
reporting. This goal will hopefully start the change into better inclusion
of ESG disclosures while benefiting the day-to-day practices of the firm.
The responsibilities and tasks of a Sustainability CFO are similar to those
of the original CFO except with a focus on nonfinancial issues. The most
important responsibility is reporting of nonfinancial information by using
key performance indicators (KPI) as a performance measure and analyzing
the results of ESG factors. In addition, Sustainability CFOs must conform
to existing nonfinancial standards and regulations, become the link to “tra-
ditional” finance, and contribute in lobby and representation of accounting
metrics for the future. Within these responsibilities, Sustainability CFOs
will face challenges such as measuring sustainability and other intangible
assets, choosing standards, and ultimately becoming a more competent
sustainable accountant.
Chief sustainability officers (CSOs) are of critical importance to
successful sustainability efforts and are often linked to environmental
issues. Furthermore, the CSO contributes to the supply chain, improv-
ing working conditions, creating safety procedures, and more. The
CSO can translate ESG business sustainability into corporate purpose,
mission, and strategy that creates shared value for all stakeholders. The
CSO should work with other executives and the board of directors in
identifying and assessing sustainability factors of performance, risk, and
disclosure.
The job brief of a CSO includes the following:
• Have profit-oriented mentality and practice. Seek profit from

increasingly difficult avenues of growth.
• Be multidisciplinary in both their own knowledge and that of
their staff.
David Colgren, T. February 2017. “Expanding the Accounting Ecosystem.” Strategic Finance,
45
62–63, http://sfmagazine.com/post-entry/february-2017-expanding-the-accounting-ecosystem/
• Find ways to reach out to new stakeholders or increase the

participation of and communication with existing ones.
• Demonstrate flexibility in new endeavors that seek to increase
the company’s future growth aspects.
• Communicate effectively to other officers and employees
about best practices in sustainability and enforce compliance
with the same.
• Learn to leverage company strengths, such as technology,
manpower, expertise, resources, and market positions.
Sustainability Performance
Business sustainability has gained significant attention from global inves-
tors, regulators, the business community, public companies, academics,
and the accounting profession. More than 15,000 public companies
worldwide are issuing sustainability reports on some or all five—economic,
governance, social, ethical, and environmental (EGSEE)—dimensions
of sustainability performance and this trend is expected to continue
worldwide. Proper measurement of sustainability performance, as well as
accurate and reliable disclosure of sustainability performance, and effec-
tive assessment of sustainability risks remain major challenges for orga-
nizations of different types and sizes. Different dimensions of business
sustainability performance are considered in an isolated fashion, with-
out effective integrations of both financial ESP and nonfinancial EESG
sustainability performance and disclosures/reporting.
The process of disclosing economic, governance, social, ethical,
and environmental (EGSEE) dimensions of sustainability performance
separately and holistically is described in this section. The collabora-
tion of people, business, and resources in business sustainability and
accountability model along with best practices of business sustainability
is explained. It also offers guidance to organizations to properly inte-
grate all five EGSEE dimensions of sustainability into their business
models, strategic plans, and practices. It also provides guidelines for
complete and accurate measurement, recognition, and disclosure of all
five EGSEE dimensions of sustainability performance in an integrated
reporting model.
Business sustainability is a multidisciplinary and multidimensional

concept with multiple users. This section considers different dimensions
of business sustainability (economic, social, governance, ethics, and envi-
ronmental sustainability) when analyzing their impacts on business prac-
tices and outcome holistically by considering the reciprocal relationship
among all related parties. Business sustainability is often defined only in
terms of one aspect of CSR and thus ignores regulations and practices
related to other dimensions of sustainability. These incomplete definitions
of business sustainability could not provide a complete picture of the
underlying business practice and may provide incomplete yet biased con-
clusions. Attention is given to the interactions of all five EGSEE dimen-
sions of sustainability performance and possible tensions among these
dimensions. Economic sustainability performance is the primary dimen-
sion that practitioners should emphasize, while environment, social, and
governance sustainability may interact with economic sustainability and
produce important effects that should not be ignored. It provides descrip-
tions of current practices of sustainability reporting and assurance and
how these practices can enhance the overall concept of business sustain-
ability practice and performance.
In this context, a model of business sustainability should incorporate
activities that generate financial (long-term earnings, growth, and return
on investment) and nonfinancial sustainability performance (governance,
social, ethical, and environmental) that concern all stakeholders. In prac-
tice, business sustainability should be viewed as a collection of procedures
that improve both financial ESP and nonfinancial EESG sustainability
performance dimensions that create shared value for all stakeholders.
Sustainability financial and nonfinancial performance is presented in
detail in Chapter 2.
Sustainability Risk
The concept of business sustainability should be examined with respect
to their practices, risk assessment reporting, and assurance concurrently.
Due to the principal–agent relationships between managers and differ-
ent stakeholders, the concept of business sustainability should be exam-
ined from the angles of these related parties simultaneously rather than
in an isolated fashion. Thus, it is important to understand that certain

practices are put into practice for the purpose of effective reporting as
well as to facilitate assurance, although the associated cost with related
practice could be slightly higher. The 2013 Global Corporate Sustain-
ability Report released by the United Nations Global Compact addresses
the state of business sustainability today and presents the actions taken
by companies worldwide in integrating sustainability to their strategies,
operations, management practices, and corporate culture.46
Sustainability risks present the likelihood that an organization is not
meeting its financial ESP and nonfinancial EESG sustainability perfor-
mance targets. Several important sustainability risks are strategic, opera-
tions, compliance, financial, and reputation. The most important risk
relevant to business sustainability is strategic risk. Strategic risks reflect
failure of strategic plans in achieving sustainability goals and these risks
should be identified, assessed, and managed and minimized to achieve sus-
tainability goals. Operations risks are also relevant financial ESP and non-
financial EESG dimensions of sustainability performance, the integration
of all sustainability performance dimensions into operating activities across
operational units, operation technology, supply chain, information tech-
nology, and other functional areas. The financial risk of issuing materially
misstated financial reports is detrimental to sustainability of corporations.
The company’s reputation and its related risk should be evaluated on an
ongoing basis and any damages to the reputation be minimized. These and
other sustainability risks are further described in detail in Chapter 3.
Sustainability Disclosure
Sustainability disclosures reflect sustainability reporting, ranking, rating,
and indexing. The sustainability reporting refers to the ongoing pro-
cess of promoting, measuring, recognizing, enforcing, reporting, and
auditing sustainability performance in all five (EGSEE) dimensions of
United Nations (UN). February, 2013. “How Investors are Addressing Environ-
46
mental, Social and Governance Factors in Fundamental Equity Valuation.” United

Nations-supported Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI). Available at http://
unpri.org/viewer/?file=wp-content/uploads/Integrated_Analysis_2013.pdf
sustainability.47 Business organizations have traditionally reported their

performance on economic affairs and their main focus on financial results
have become irrelevant. In recent years, stakeholders, investors, regulators,
global organizations, and the public at large have increasingly demanded
information on both financial ESP and nonfinancial ESG key perfor-
mance indicators (KPIs) in the platform of multiple bottom line (MBL)
accountability and sustainability reporting. Sustainability performance
and accountability reporting have gained a new interest during the recent
Global Financial Crisis and resulting global economic meltdown, which
has sparked widening concerns about whether or not big businesses (e.g.,
banks and carmakers) are sustainable in the long term in contributing to
the economic growth and prosperity of the nation.
The ever-increasing erosion of public trust and investor confidence in
the sustainability of large businesses, the widening concern about social
responsibility and environmental matters, the overconsumption of natu-
ral resources, the global government bailout of big businesses, and the per-
ception that the government cannot solve all problems in the businesses
world underscore the importance of having a keen focus on sustainability
performance and accountability reporting. The United Nations Global
Compact in its 2013 Global Corporate Sustainability Report, while
underscoring the importance of business sustainability, calls on corpo-
rations worldwide to integrate 10 principles of sustainability pertaining
to environment, human rights, fair labor, and anticorruption into their
strategies and operations.48 Chapter 4 presents sustainability disclosures
including reporting, assurance, ranking, indexing, and rating in detail.
Conclusion
The sustainability disclosure initiatives, whether mandatory or voluntary, are
intended to reflect the financial, social, ethical, governance, and environ-
mental impacts of a company’s business operation and thus provide relevant
47
Brockett, A., and Z. Rezaee. 2012. Corporate Sustainability: Integrating
Performance and Reporting. New York, NY: Wiley.
48
United Nations (UN). February, 2013. “How Investors are Addressing Environ-
mental, Social and Governance Factors in Fundamental Equity Valuation.” United
Nations-supported Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI). Available at http://
unpri.org/viewer/?file=wp-content/uploads/Integrated_Analysis_2013.pdf
and reliable financial and nonfinancial information for all stakeholders

including investors. This chapter presents a synopsis of sustainability factors
of performance, risk, and disclosure. There are debates among policymak-
ers and scholars that international accounting standard-setters such as the
Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and International Account-
ing Standards Board (IASB) should issue accounting standards for proper
disclosure of EESG sustainability information. Effective achievement of all
five EGSEE dimensions of sustainability performance demands
• “tone at the top” commitments to business sustainability strat-

egies and actions;
• commitment by the board of directors and top executives is
essential in effectively coordinating all sustainability strategies
and activities and successfully implementing sustainability
strategies; and
• there is an urgent need for the establishment of the position
of chief sustainability officer (CSO) in C-suite of business
organizations.
Takeaways
• Define sustainability shared value creation in your organization.
• Identify and assess the positive and negative impact of trends
shaping your organization’s sustainability performance dimen-
sions of EGSEE.
• Identify nonfinancial metrics on nonfinancial dimensions of
sustainability performance (governance, social, ethical, and
environmental).
• Link nonfinancial sustainability performance metrics to the
sustainable financial success of the business.
• Integrate strategy, objectives, performance, risk, and incen-
tives across financial and nonfinancial information dimen-
sions of sustainability activities.
• Use holistic and integrated internal and external reports in
effectively communicating your business sustainability strate-
gic decisions, actions, and performance to both internal and
external users of sustainability reports.
Index
American Institute of Certified Due Process Oversight Committee
Public Accountants (DPOC), 23
(AICPA), 96 Due Process Protocol, 23
Annan, Kofi, 28
Asset managers, 4, 11 EESG, 5, 35, 37, 66
dimensions of sustainability
BlackRock, 4, 105 performance, 40, 44–60, 62
Bloomberg, 105 factors, 3–4, 74–77
Business Roundtable (2019), 4 Enterprise risk management (ERM),
Business sustainability, 1. See 69, 79, 81
also specific Sustainability COSO, 79–80
headings Environmental dimension of
definition of, 2–6 sustainability performance
initiatives, 6–37 factor, 45–50
overview of, 1–2 Environmental, social, and
performance, 33–34 governance. see ESG
“Environmental” subject area, 12
CARES Act, 76 Ernst & Young (EY), 95
CDP, 105 ESG disclosures, 5, 13–16, 32, 50,
Climate risk, 78–79 66, 74, 85, 103
Compliance risk, 70–71 Hong Kong Stock Exchange,
Conceptual Framework for 12–13
Sustainability (2013), 95 ESG factors, 7, 28–29, 32, 66, 74,
Corporate disclosure, 9, 84–92 76, 92
Corporate social responsibility ESP, 1–3, 5 8, 29, 33–36,
(CSR), 3, 71, 83, 90 41–43, 84
definition of, 7 operations risks, 66–67
Corporate sustainability systems strategic risks, 69
(CSS), 104 Ethical dimension of sustainability
COSO ERM framework, 79–80 performance, 51–52
COVID-19 pandemic, 4, 42, 65, Ethics, defined, 51
67, 68, 87, 93, 94, 105 EU Directive, 10–12
challenges, 2 European ESG Initiatives, 15–17
defined, 74
impact of, 30–31 Financial Accounting Standards
risk, 74–77 Board (FASB), 25, 37, 95
Financial economic sustainability
Decision-making process, 7, 11, 28, performance (ESP), 1, 3.
59, 100 See also ESP
Disclosure. See Sustainability Financial risk, 72–73
disclosure FTSE Russell, 105
114 Index
German Sustainability Code, 10 Morningstar, 105

Global Financial Crisis, 2, 6, 36, MSCI, 105
55, 93 Multiple bottom line (MBL), 36
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI),
21–23, 102 Nonfinancial environmental,
GSSB of, 23–24 ethical, social, and
Governance dimension of governance (EESG). See
sustainability performance, EESG
55–56
Government Accountability Office Operations risk, 70
(GAO), 5, 66 Organization for Economic Co-
operation and Development
Information security management
(OECD), 7
system (ISMS), 73
General Policies, 19–20
International Accounting Standards
Board (IASB), 25–26, Guidelines, 17–18
37, 95
International Business Council Precontractual disclosures, 11–12
(IBC), 102, 103 Principles of Responsible
International Integrated Reporting Investment (PRI), 28–29
Council (IIRC), 7, 21,
24–25, 91, 94–95 Qualified default investment
“International Standard on alternative (“QDIA”), 92
Assurance Engagements
Other Than Audits or Rankings. See Sustainability ratings/
Reviews of Historical rankings
Financial Information,” Rating. See Sustainability ratings/
3000 (ISAE 3000), 96 rankings
Investments. See Sustainable Reputation risk, 71
investments Reputational, strategic, operational,
ISO 26000, 10 compliance, and financial
ISO 31000 risk guidelines, 68 (RSOCF) risks, 1
Risk. See Sustainability risk
Key performance indicators (KPIs),
Risk Oversight Committee, 75
8, 32, 36, 41, 43, 47, 48,
70, 101
Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX), 90
Litigation risk, 77–78 SEC and sustainability disclosures,
13–15
Mandatory business sustainability SEC Investor Advisory Committee,
initiatives, 8–21 13–15
EU Directive, 10–12 Shared value initiatives, 60
European ESG Initiatives, 15–17 Social dimension of sustainability
Hong Kong Stock Exchange performance factor, 53–55
(HKEX), 12–13 “Social” subject area, 12–13
SEC and sustainability Sony cyberattack, 73
disclosures, 13–15 Stewardship theory, 60–61
Moody’s, 105 Strategic risk, 69
Index 115
Sustainability Accounting Standards EU Directive, 10–11

Board (SASB), 7, 21, 25–26, reliability and credibility of, 95
102 Sustainability risk, 1, 5, 34–35
“Sustainability Accounting Standard assessment and management,
Disclosures,” 95 79–80
Sustainability assurance, 95–98 climate risk, 78–79
Sustainability CFO and the Chief compliance risk, 70–71
Sustainability Officer, 31–33 COVID -19 pandemic risk,
Sustainability disclosure, 1, 5, 74–77
35–36. See also Sustainability financial risk, 72–73
mandatory disclosures litigation risk, 77–78
corporate disclosure, 84–92 operations risk, 70
DOL proposed ESG rule, 91–92 overview, 65–69
mandatory, 90–91 reputation risk, 71
metrics, 101–104 strategic risk, 69
overview of, 83–84 Sustainable investments, 12, 99
SEC and, 13–15
sustainability ratings/rankings, Task Force on Climate-Related
104–105 Financial Disclosures
sustainability reporting, 93–95 (TCFD), 102
voluntary disclosure, 85–89 Thomson Reuters, 105
Sustainability mandatory disclosures Triple bottom line, 3
policies and procedures, 11
regulations, 11–12 UN Global Compact, 10, 21,
Sustainability performance factor 26–28
EESG, 44–56 United Nations Sustainable
environmental dimension of, Development Goals, 29–30
45–50
ESP, 41–43 Vigeo-Eiris, 105
ethical dimension of, 51–52 Voluntary initiatives, 21–33
governance dimension of, 55–56 COVID-19 impact, 30–31
importance and relevance of ESP GRI, 21–24
and EESG dimensions of, IIRC, 24–25
56–62 PRI, 28–29
overview, 40–41 SASB, 25–26
social dimension of, 53–55 sustainability CFO and the Chief
Sustainability ratings/rankings, Sustainability Officer, 31–33
104–105 UNGC, 26–28
agencies, 106–108 UNSDG, 29–30
Sustainability report/reporting, 7–8,
93–95 Website disclosures, 11
best practices of, 98–101 World Economic Forum, 103

Chapter 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Business Sustainability Factors of

Performance, Risk, and Disclosure

Copyright © Business Expert Press, LLC, 2021.

Cover design by Charlene Kronstedt

Interior design by Exeter Premedia Services Private Ltd., Chennai, India

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in

First published in 2021 by

ISBN-13: 978-1-63742-006-5 (paperback)

Collection ISSN: 2333-6722 (print)

First edition: 2021

Business sustainability is advancing from the greenwashing and branding

Chapter 1 An Introduction to Business Sustainability�����������������������1

About the Author��������������������������������������������������������������������������������111

environmental matters, overconsumption of natural resources, the global

Business Sustainability: Definition and Relevance

interpretations as sustainability includes financial economic sustainability

unit generating wealth. It fulfills human and societal aspirations as part

Currently, a number of organizations are addressing these sustainability

Business Sustainability Initiatives

companies’ awareness of the social costs and benefits of their business

(a) Provide an intellectual framework in core principles and objectives

(b) Offer a common language of the standardized sustainability reports

Mandatory Business Sustainability Initiatives

Countries that have adopted mandatory sustainability initiatives are

In 2017 it became mandatory for the European Union (EU) companies

European Union (EU) Directive 2014/95/EU. “Directive 2014/95/EU of the

European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2013/34/EU as

• Human rights policies

Asset managers and investment advisers will be required to take the

• Policies and Procedures. To produce the required disclosures,

likely impacts of sustainability risks on the returns must also

Hong Kong Exchange

The listed companies in Hong Kong have played an important role in

SEC and Sustainability Disclosures

SEC regulations on firm valuations and corporate ESG policies have

1. How sustainability disclosure fits within the existing regulatory

The SEC Investor Advisory Committee has held multiple discussions

1. Investors require reliable, material ESG information upon which to

At the Meeting of the Asset Management Advisory Committee,

I look forward to hearing from the Committee’s recently-formed

European ESG Initiatives

On November 27, 2019, the European Parliament and the Council

information for the financial sector.19 The UN General Assembly

share ownership and voting rights, including the structure of a group

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)

The OECD Guidelines are recommendations addressed by various

sustainability. The OECD Guidelines have a main objective to ensure

OECD General Policies

1. Contribute to economic, environmental, and social progress with a

11. Avoid causing or contributing to adverse impacts on matters covered

In addition to the OECD Guidelines, enterprises should take into

“OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.” 2011 edition. OECD.

In summary, mandatory sustainability initiatives require companies

Several organizations worldwide including the Global Reporting I­ nitiative

Global Reporting Initiative

The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) is an international independent

and enable appropriate use of sustainability information to improve ESG

the “in accordance” process of identifying material to be disclosed

Global Sustainability Standards Board of the GRI

The Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB) has sole responsi-

Chapter 1 An Introduction to Business Sustainability��1

About the Author��111

Several organizations worldwide including the Global Reporting I nitiative