Employees’ Perception of the Importance of Implementing Environmental, Social, and Governance Criteria in the Sustainability Report at a Shipyard
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
- -
- The averages of all responses are below 0.5 (partial involvement);
- -
- For large sections with long production processes (assembly section 1, assembly section 2, cutting section, and mounting section), personal perception, which includes individual contribution, shows average values between 0.37 and 0.46;
- -
- For the other sections, the degree of individual involvement of respondents is lower (averages between 0.26 and 0.28).
- -
- Assembly section 1 and assembly section 2;
- -
- Cutting and assembly;
- -
- The cutting section and the piping sections;
- -
- The sandblasting and painting section and the repair section.
- -
- The different amount of information provided to section members;
- -
- The quality and clarity of presentations;
- -
- The interest of employees in considering themselves part of the integrated process of the shipyard.
- -
- For carbon emissions, increasing information, awareness, and finding solutions is necessary for the piping, sandblasting, painting, and repair sections.
- -
- For energy and water use, the study highlighted the need to increase information on these two indicators in assembly section 1 and the piping, sandblasting, painting, and repair sections.
- -
- In the assembly 2 and cutting departments, it is necessary to intensify information, awareness, and practices regarding waste management.
- -
- Concerning biodiversity, the level of information in the assembly 2 department must be increased.
- -
- Regarding health and safety at work, additional information and assessment are needed for respondents in assembly section 1.
- -
- For the “employee satisfaction” parameter, the company must take measures in assembly 1 and the installation sections.
- -
- Regarding pay equity, fair pay scales need to be better promoted in assembly sections 1 and 2 and cutting.
- -
- Regarding the parameters of codes of conduct and regular ESG reporting, action needs to be taken concerning employees in the two assembly sections.
5. Discussions
6. Conclusions
- -
- Training modules on ESG principles (explaining what ESG factors are and why they matter to the company);
- -
- The development of modules tailored to the specificities of each department, explaining to employees how ESG criteria are relevant to their work and decision-making processes;
- -
- Internal communication plans to highlight progress made and align sustainability goals with employees’ roles;
- -
- Feedback mechanisms (surveys to assess how employees understand ESG issues, how they can identify knowledge gaps, and how they can gather ideas for improving their knowledge; digital platforms where each employee can submit ESG-related questions; dedicated contact channels through which specific email addresses can be set up or online forms can be filled out by employees to ask questions or provide feedback on ESG initiatives);
- -
- Workshops on sustainability issues, focusing on ESG challenges and solutions specific to the shipyard (waste reduction, ethical practices, etc.);
- -
- Encouraging dialogue and accountability through public meetings with question and answer sessions;
- -
- Educating employees on how ESG data is collected and interpreted to understand the real impact of the company’s initiatives;
- -
- Disseminating successful experiences on how employees/departments contribute to ESG objectives;
- -
- Company-wide meetings to share ESG initiative progress and report key indicators;
- -
- Constant communication from leaders at all levels about the company’s commitment to ESG, showing how it aligns with the overall mission;
- -
- Transparent reporting through the publication of internal ESG reports that clearly show the efforts, challenges, and progress of the entire company to build trust and awareness.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
| SDG | Sustainable Development Goals |
| ESG | Environmental, Social and Governance |
| GRI | Global Reporting Initiative |
References
- García Navarro, V.; Granda Revilla, G. La incorporación de los objetivos de desarrollo sostenible como factor de competitividad empresarial. Inf. Com. Esp. Rev. Econ. 2020, 912, 75–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Domingo-Posada, E.; González-Torre, P.L.; Vidal-Suárez, M.M. Sustainable Development Goals and Corporate Strategy: A Map of the Field. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2024, 31, 2733–2748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salas, L.M.; Arenas, J.S. Navigating towards sustainable vessels: State of the industry and its relationship to SDGs. Ship Sci. Technol. 2024, 18, 9–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- United Nations. The Sustainable Development Goals Report. Available online: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2024/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2024.pdf (accessed on 12 February 2025).
- European Court of Auditors. Rapid Case Review: Reporting on Sustainability: A Stocktake of EU Institutions and Agencies. Available online: https://www.eca.europa.eu/lists/ecadocuments/rcr_reporting_on_sustainability/rcr_reporting_on_sustainability_en.pdf (accessed on 29 January 2025).
- Fincantieri Sustainability Report. Available online: https://www.fincantieri.com/globalassets/sostenibilita2/fincantieri-sustainability-report-2023.pdf (accessed on 10 February 2025).
- United Nations. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (“Agenda 2030”). Available online: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/21252030%20Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf (accessed on 29 January 2025).
- Teodorescu, G.; Rădulescu, C.; Tanislav, D.; Stănescu, G.; Iancu, D. Inovaţie şi Antreprenoriat Durabil Pentru un Viitor Verde (Innovation and Sustainable Entrepreneurship for a Green Future); Transversal Publishing House: Targoviste, Romania, 2024; Volume 1, pp. 1–105. [Google Scholar]
- Paužuolienė, J.; Derkach, V. Integrating Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Principles into Organisations. Reg. Form. Dev. Stud. 2024, 44, 28–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strandhagen, J.W.; Buer, S.V.; Semini, M.; Alfnes, E.; Strandhagen, J.O. Sustainability challenges and how Industry 4.0 technologies can address them: A case study of a shipbuilding supply chain. Prod. Plan. Control 2020, 33, 995–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Para-González, L.; Mascaraque-Ramírez, C.; Cubillas-Para, C. Maximizing performance through CSR: The mediator role of the CSR principles in the shipbuilding industry. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 27, 2804–2815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, L.; Tang, Q. The real effects of ESG reporting and GRI standards on carbon mitigation: International evidence, Bus. Strategy Environ. 2023, 32, 2985–3000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grant Thornton. Sustainable Finance and ESG Reporting: Opportunities for Saudi Arabian Companies. Available online: https://www.grantthornton.sa/en/insights/articles-and-publications/sustainable_finance/ (accessed on 10 September 2025).
- Alhoussari, H. Integrating ESG Criteria in Corporate Strategies: Determinants and Implications for Performance. J. Ecohumanism 2025, 3, 11925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Damen Shipyards. Corporate Social Responsibility Report 2023. 2023. Available online: https://medialibrary.damen.com/m/6aa54b224288fa33/original/corporate-social-responsibility-report-2023.pdf (accessed on 17 February 2025).
- Reboredo, J.C.; Sowaity, S.M.A. Environmental, social, and governance information disclosure and intellectual capital efficiency in Jordanian listed firms. Sustainability 2022, 14, 115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Crace, L.; Gehman, J. What really explains ESG performance? Disentangling the asymmetrical drivers of the triple bottom line. Organ. Environ. 2022, 36, 150–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gebhardt, M.; Thun, T.W.; Seefloth, M.; Zülch, H. Managing sustainability—Does the integration of environmental, social and governance key performance indicators in the internal management systems contribute to companies’ environmental, social and governance performance? Bus. Strategy Environ. 2022, 32, 2175–2192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, J.; Chu, D.; Zheng, J.; Ye, T. Environmental, social and governance performance: Can it be a stock price stabilizer? J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 379, 134705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsang, Y.P.; Fan, Y.; Feng, Z.P. Bridging the gap: Building environmental, social and governance capabilities in small and medium logistics companies. J. Environ. Manag. 2023, 338, 117758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cregan, C.; Kelly, J.A.; Clinch, J.P. Are environmental, social and governance (ESG) ratings reliable indicators of emissions outcomes? A case study of the airline industry. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2023, 31, 909–928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Doni, F.; Fiameni, M. Can innovation affect the relationship between environmental, social, and governance issues and financial performance? Empirical evidence from the STOXX200 index. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2023, 33, 546–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- La Torre, M.; Leo, S.; Panetta, I.C. Banks and environmental, social and governance drivers: Follow the market or the authorities? Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2021, 28, 1620–1634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cameron, G.J.; Dang, H.H.; Dinc, M.; Foster, J.; Lokshin, M.M. Measuring the statistical capacity of nations. Oxf. Bull. Econ. Stat. 2021, 83, 870–896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harymawan, I.; Nasih, M.; Agustia, D.; Putra, F.K.G.; Djajadikerta, H.G. Investment efficiency and environmental, social, and governance reporting: Perspective from corporate integration management. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2022, 29, 1186–1202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mikołajek-Gocejna, M. The environmental, social and governance aspects of social responsibility indices—A comparative analysis of European SRI indices. Comp. Econ. Res. 2018, 21, 25–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ouni, Z.; Mansour, J.B.; Arfaoui, S. Board/executive gender diversity and firm financial performance in Canada: The mediating role of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) orientation. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Souza Barbosa, A.; Crispim, M.C.; Silva, L.; Da Silva, J.M.N.; Barbosa, A.M.; Morioka, S.N. How can organizations measure the integration of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria? Validation of an instrument using item response theory to capture workers’ perception. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2023, 33, 3607–3634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tomassetti, P. Between stakeholders and shareholders: Pension funds and labour solidarity in the age of sustainability. Eur. Labour Law J. 2023, 14, 73–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alghababsheh, M.; Butt, A.S.; Ali, S.M. The role of buyers justice in achieving socially sustainable global supply chains: A perspective of apparel suppliers and their workers. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 2023, 29, 100820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baldini, M.; Di Maso, L.; Liberatore, G.; Mazzi, F.; Terzani, S. Role of Country- and Firm-Level Determinants in Environmental, Social, and Governance Disclosure. J. Bus. Ethics 2018, 150, 79–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cek, K.; Eyupoglu, S. Does Environmental, Social and Governance Performance Influence Economic Performance? J. Bus. Econ. Manag. 2020, 21, 1165–1184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, T.T.; Wang, K.; Sueyoshi, T.; Wang, D.D. ESG: Research Progress and Future Prospects. Sustainability 2021, 13, 11663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pulino, S.C.; Ciaburri, M.; Magnanelli, B.S.; Nasta, L. Does ESG Disclosure Influence Firm Performance? Sustainability 2022, 14, 7595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gündoğdu, H.G.; Aytekin, A.; Toptancı, Ş.; Korucuk, S.; Karamaşa, Ç. Environmental, Social, and Governance Risks and Environmentally Sensitive Competitive Strategies: A Case Study of a Multinational Logistics Company. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2023, 32, 4874–4906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vakili, S.; Schonborn, A.; Olçer, A.I. The Road to Zero-Emission Shipbuilding Industry: A Systematic and Transdisciplinary Approach to Modern Multi-Energy Shipyards. Energy Convers. Manag. X 2023, 18, 100365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tong, H. The Importance of ESG in Corporate Strategy and Investment Decisions with Patagonia as an Example. In Proceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Management Research and Economic Development, Qingdao, China, 28 April 2023; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gavalas, D. Does Sustainability Reporting Affect Firm Performance? Evidence from the Port Sector. Marit. Technol. Res. 2024, 6, 266092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trigo, A.; Silva, P. Sustainable Development Directions for Wine Tourism in Douro Wine Region, Portugal. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- KPMG. How to Report on the SDGs: What Good Looks Like and Why It Matters. 2018. Available online: https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2018/02/how-to-report-on-sdgs.pdf (accessed on 17 February 2025).
- McKinsey & Company. SDG Guide for Business Leaders: A Practical Guide for Business Leaders to Working with the SDGs as a Competitive Factor. 2019. Available online: https://vl.dk/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/20190612-SDG-Guide-full-version.pdf (accessed on 15 February 2025).
- Sulkowski, A.; Jebe, R. Evolving ESG reporting governance, regime theory, and proactive law: Predictions and strategies. Am. Bus. Law J. 2022, 59, 449–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clément, A.; Robinot, É.; Trespeuch, L. Improving ESG Scores with Sustainability Concepts. Sustainability 2022, 14, 13154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cabaleiro-Cerviño, G.; Mendi, P. ESG-driven innovation strategy and firm performance. Eurasian Bus. Rev. 2024, 14, 137–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliver Yébenes, M. Climate change, ESG criteria and recent regulation: Challenges and opportunities. Eurasian Econ. Rev. 2024, 14, 87–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dinu, E.M.; Jurcuț, C.N.; Gligor, D.A.G.; Cișmașu, I.; Buglea, A. Integrating Digital Technologies to Enhance ESG Performance: A Focus on Central and Eastern European Countries. Amfiteatru Econ. 2025, 27, 903–921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fuadaha, L.L.; Mukhtarudina, A.I.; Arisman, A. Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG). Integr. J. Bus. Econ. 2023, 7, 459–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Radzi, S.H.M.; Hamid, N.A.; Ismail, R.F. An Overview of Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) and Company Performance. In Building a Sustainable Future: Fostering Synergy Between Technology, Business and Humanity; Said, J., Daud, D., Erum, N., Zakaria, N.B., Zolkaflil, S., Yahya, N., Eds.; European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences; European Publisher: London, UK, 2023; pp. 1111–1122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ye, J.; Xu, W. Carbon reduction effect of ESG: Empirical evidence from listed manufacturing companies in China. Front. Ecol. Evol. 2023, 11, 1311777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jouybari, F.G.; Khazaei, M.; Saen, R.F.; Kia, R.; Bonakdari, H.; Hajiaghaei-Keshteli, M.; Ramezani, M. Developing environmental, social and governance (ESG) strategies on evaluation of municipal waste disposal centers: A case of Mexico. Chemosphere 2024, 364, 142961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venham, D.; Mekonnen, M.M. The scarcity-weighted water footprint provides unreliable water sustainability scoring. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 756, 143992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gow, I.D.; Larcker, D.F.; Watts, E.M. Board diversity and shareholder voting. J. Corp. Financ. 2023, 83, 102487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Semenova, N.; Lars, G.; Hassel, L.G. The Performance of Investor Engagement Dialogues to Manage Sustainability Risks. Nord. J. Bus. 2019, 68, 5–22. [Google Scholar]
- Eliwa, Y.; Abound, A.; Saleh, A. Board gender diversity and ESG decoupling: Does religiosity matter? Bus. Strategy Environ. 2023, 32, 4046–4067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Riani, D.; Sundarta, M.I.; Afrianto, Y.; Aini, S. ESG Risk and Firm’s Performance. eCo-Buss 2024, 7, 563–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uyar, A.; Kuzey, C.; Karaman, A.S. Does aggressive environmental, social, and governance engagement trigger firm risk? The moderating role of executive compensation. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 398, 136542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cambrea, D.R.; Paolone, F.; Cucari, N. Advisory or monitoring role in ESG scenario: Which women directors are more influential in the Italian context? Bus. Strategy Environ. 2023, 32, 4299–4314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Angela, T.; Sari, N. The Effect of Environmental, Social, and Governance Disclosure on Firm Value. E3S Web Conf. 2023, 426, 01078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rezaee, Z.; Homayoun, S.; Poursoleyman, E.; Rezaee, N.J. Comparative analysis of environmental, social, and governance disclosures. Glob. Financ. J. 2023, 55, 100804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]


| Pilons | SDGs | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Sustainable solution | 7, 9, 12, 13, 14, 17 | |
| -zero emissions | 7, 14 | -Affordable and Clean Energy (Promoting research and funding for the development of clean energy technologies for the maritime industry); -Life Below Water (Responsibilities for the conservation and use of water and marine resources through pollution prevention measures to improve the safety and security of maritime transport); |
| -circular economy | 12, 17 | -Responsible Consumption and Production (Promoting resource efficiency through sustainable production and consumption patterns to reduce waste generation); -Partnerships for the goals (Concluding partnership agreements with leading international organizations to achieve the SDGs); |
| -innovation | 9, 13 | -Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure (Encouraging innovation, promoting sustainable industrialization, and building resilient transport infrastructure); -Climate action (Implementation of emission control measures to reduce the impact of climate change); |
| Sustainable operations | 3, 5, 6, 12, 13, 17 | |
| -safe and empowered | 3, 6 | -Good health and well-being (Measures to reduce transport pollution, ensure and promote healthy living through adequate medical care); -Clean water and sanitation (Sustainable water management by improving the quality of and access to drinking water resources); |
| -environmental stewardship | 12, 13 | -Responsible consumption and production (Promoting resource efficiency through sustainable production and consumption patterns to reduce waste generation); -Climate action (Implementation of emission control measures to reduce the impact of climate change). |
| -communities engagement | 5, 17 | -Gender equality (Eliminating discrimination and violence to achieve gender equality and equal rights and opportunities); -Partnerships for the goals (Concluding partnership agreements with leading international organizations to achieve the SDGs). |
| Sustainable organization | 4, 5, 8, 13, 16, 17 | |
| -commitment to sustainability | 4, 5, 16 | -Quality education (Promoting learning opportunities to ensure equitable and inclusive education with a view to closing the global education gap); -Gender equality (Eliminating discrimination and violence to achieve gender equality and equal rights and opportunities); -Peace, justice, and strong institutions (Building effective and accountable institutions, ensuring access to justice, and promoting inclusive societies). |
| -responsible business | 13, 17 | -Climate action (Implementation of emission control measures to reduce the impact of climate change); -Partnerships for the goals (Concluding partnership agreements with leading international organizations to achieve the SDGs). |
| -performance monitoring | 8 | -Decent work and economic growth (Ensuring inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment, and decent work for all people). |
| Degree of Involvement Multiple Comparisons p= | Assembly Section 1 | Assembly Section 2 | Cutting Section | Blocks Assembly Section | Piping Section | Blasting and Painting Section | Repair Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assembly section 1 | 0.165 | 0.004 | 0.361 | 0.001 | 0.007 | 0.000 | |
| Assembly section 2 | 0.210 | 0.651 | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.000 | ||
| Cutting section | 0.081 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |||
| Blocks assembly section | 0.000 | 0.002 | 0.000 | ||||
| Piping section | 1.000 | 0.739 | |||||
| Blasting and painting section | 0.772 | ||||||
| Repair section |
| Degree of Involvement Multiple Comparisons p= | Assembly Section 1 | Assembly Section 2 | Cutting Section | Blocks Assembly Section | Piping Section | Blasting and Painting Section | Repair Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assembly section 1 | 0.058 | 0.058 | 0.583 | 0.303 | 0.395 | 0.275 | |
| Assembly section 2 | 0.126 | 0.126 | 0.570 | 0.107 | 0.058 | ||
| Cutting section | 0.375 | 0.032 | 0.061 | 0.029 | |||
| Blocks assembly section | 0.178 | 0.246 | 0.162 | ||||
| Piping section | 1.000 | 0.945 | |||||
| Blasting and painting section | 0.952 | ||||||
| Repair section |
| Degree of Involvement Multiple Comparisons p= | Assembly Section 1 | Assembly Section 2 | Cutting Section | Blocks Assembly Section | Piping Section | Blasting and Painting Section | Repair Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assembly section 1 | 0.003 | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.234 | 0.326 | 0.169 | |
| Assembly section 2 | 0.012 | 0.795 | 0.131 | 0.189 | 0.188 | ||
| Cutting section | 0.175 | 0.002 | 0.007 | 0.004 | |||
| Blocks assembly section | 0.067 | 0.114 | 0.104 | ||||
| Piping section | 1.000 | 0.859 | |||||
| Blasting and painting section | 0.878 | ||||||
| Repair section |
| Degree of Involvement Multiple Comparisons p= | Assembly Section 1 | Assembly Section 2 | Cutting Section | Blocks Assembly Section | Piping Section | Blasting and Painting Section | Repair Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assembly section 1 | 0.519 | 0.043 | 0.301 | 0.476 | 0.556 | 0.592 | |
| Assembly section 2 | 0.242 | 0.769 | 0.255 | 0.322 | 0.323 | ||
| Cutting section | 0.355 | 0.021 | 0.043 | 0.032 | |||
| Blocks assembly section | 0.139 | 0.202 | 0.187 | ||||
| Piping section | 1.000 | 0.889 | |||||
| Blasting and painting section | 0.904 | ||||||
| Repair section |
| Degree of Involvement Multiple Comparisons p= | Assembly Section 1 | Assembly Section 2 | Cutting Section | Blocks Assembly Section | Piping Section | Blasting and Painting Section | Repair Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assembly section 1 | 0.385 | 0.007 | 0.063 | 0.994 | 0.995 | 0.749 | |
| Assembly section 2 | 0.118 | 0.436 | 0.464 | 0.524 | 0.319 | ||
| Cutting section | 0.393 | 0.021 | 0.043 | 0.011 | |||
| Blocks assembly section | 0.12 | 0.180 | 0.069 | ||||
| Piping section | 1.000 | 0.781 | |||||
| Blasting and painting section | 0.809 | ||||||
| Repair section |
| Degree of Involvement Multiple Comparisons p= | Assembly Section 1 | Assembly Section 2 | Cutting Section | Blocks Assembly Section | Piping Section | Blasting and Painting Section | Repair Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assembly section 1 | 0.385 | 0.007 | 0.063 | 0.994 | 0.995 | 0.749 | |
| Assembly section 2 | 0.118 | 0.436 | 0.464 | 0.524 | 0.319 | ||
| Cutting section | 0.393 | 0.021 | 0.043 | 0.011 | |||
| Blocks assembly section | 0.12 | 0.180 | 0.069 | ||||
| Piping section | 1.000 | 0.781 | |||||
| Blasting and painting section | 0.809 | ||||||
| Repair section |
| Degree of Involvement Multiple Comparisons p= | Assembly Section 1 | Assembly Section 2 | Cutting Section | Blocks Assembly Section | Piping Section | Blasting and Painting section | Repair Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assembly section 1 | 0.152 | 0.379 | 0.422 | 0.056 | 0.099 | 0.062 | |
| Assembly section 2 | 0.659 | 0.561 | 0.660 | 0.702 | 0.722 | ||
| Cutting section | 0.908 | 0.377 | 0.441 | 0.427 | |||
| Blocks assembly section | 0.294 | 0.366 | 0.340 | ||||
| Piping section | 1.000 | 0.936 | |||||
| Blasting and painting section | 0.944 | ||||||
| Repair section |
| Degree of Involvement Multiple Comparisons p= | Assembly Section 1 | Assembly Section 2 | Cutting Section | Blocks Assembly Section | Piping Section | Blasting and Painting Section | Repair Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assembly section 1 | 0.000 | 0.068 | 0.307 | 0.032 | 0.077 | 0.073 | |
| Assembly section 2 | 0.144 | 0.021 | 0.189 | 0.253 | 0.119 | ||
| Cutting section | 0.447 | 0.847 | 0.867 | 0.947 | |||
| Blocks assembly section | 0.322 | 0.393 | 0.480 | ||||
| Piping section | 1.000 | 0.791 | |||||
| Blasting and painting section | 0.818 | ||||||
| Repair section |
| Degree of Involvement Multiple Comparisons p= | Assembly Section 1 | Assembly Section 2 | Cutting Section | Blocks Assembly Section | Piping Section | Blasting and Painting Section | Repair Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assembly section 1 | 0.170 | 0.170 | 0.148 | 0.159 | 0.245 | 0.166 | |
| Assembly section 2 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | ||
| Cutting section | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | |||
| Blocks assembly section | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | ||||
| Piping section | 1.000 | 1.000 | |||||
| Blasting and painting section | 1.000 | ||||||
| Repair section |
| Degree of Involvement Multiple Comparisons p= | Assembly Section 1 | Assembly Section 2 | Cutting Section | Blocks Assembly Section | Piping Section | Blasting and Painting Section | Repair Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assembly section 1 | 0.896 | 0.914 | 0.423 | 0.569 | 0.638 | 0.412 | |
| Assembly section 2 | 0.843 | 0.440 | 0.559 | 0.612 | 0.428 | ||
| Cutting section | 0.579 | 0.708 | 0.744 | 0.560 | |||
| Blocks assembly section | 0.857 | 0.876 | 0.963 | ||||
| Piping section | 1.000 | 0.825 | |||||
| Blasting and painting section | 0.848 | ||||||
| Repair section |
| Degree of Involvement Multiple Comparisons p= | Assembly Section 1 | Assembly Section 2 | Cutting Section | Blocks Assembly Section | Piping Section | Blasting and Painting Section | Repair Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assembly section 1 | 0.130 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.002 | 0.000 | |
| Assembly section 2 | 0.070 | 0.057 | 0.061 | 0.104 | 0.065 | ||
| Cutting section | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | |||
| Blocks assembly section | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | ||||
| Piping section | 1.000 | 1.000 | |||||
| Blasting and painting section | 1.000 | ||||||
| Repair section |
| Degree of Involvement Multiple Comparisons p= | Assembly Section 1 | Assembly Section 2 | Cutting Section | Blocks Assembly Section | Piping Section | Blasting and Painting Section | Repair Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assembly section 1 | 0.486 | 0.486 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |
| Assembly section 2 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.002 | 0.007 | 0.002 | ||
| Cutting section | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | |||
| Blocks assembly section | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | ||||
| Piping section | 1.000 | 1.000 | |||||
| Blasting and painting section | 1.000 | ||||||
| Repair section |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Popescu, G.; Ungureanu, C.; Gasparotti, C. Employees’ Perception of the Importance of Implementing Environmental, Social, and Governance Criteria in the Sustainability Report at a Shipyard. Sustainability 2025, 17, 8832. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17198832
Popescu G, Ungureanu C, Gasparotti C. Employees’ Perception of the Importance of Implementing Environmental, Social, and Governance Criteria in the Sustainability Report at a Shipyard. Sustainability. 2025; 17(19):8832. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17198832
Chicago/Turabian StylePopescu, Gabriel, Costel Ungureanu, and Carmen Gasparotti. 2025. "Employees’ Perception of the Importance of Implementing Environmental, Social, and Governance Criteria in the Sustainability Report at a Shipyard" Sustainability 17, no. 19: 8832. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17198832
APA StylePopescu, G., Ungureanu, C., & Gasparotti, C. (2025). Employees’ Perception of the Importance of Implementing Environmental, Social, and Governance Criteria in the Sustainability Report at a Shipyard. Sustainability, 17(19), 8832. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17198832

