Previous Article in Journal
Genomic Surveillance of Streptococcus pneumoniae and Streptococcus pyogenes in the Czech Republic in the Post-COVID-19 Era
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Proceeding Paper

An Evaluative Approach of Corporate Sustainability in Agrifood System †

1
Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture (DICAR), University of Catania, v. S. Sofia, 6, 95100 Catania, Italy
2
Department of Agriculture, Food and Environment (D3A), University of Catania, v. S. Sofia, 95100 Catania, Italy
3
Department of Economics and Business (DEI), University of Catania, Corso Italia 55, 95100 Catania, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Presented at the 11th International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies in Agriculture, Food & Environment, Samos, Greece, 17–20 October 2024.
Proceedings 2025, 117(1), 34; https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2025117034
Published: 7 August 2025

Abstract

In recent decades, companies have developed innovative sustainable business management models capable of integrating green, resilient and inclusive approaches. Recently, partly as a result of EU and international regulatory guidelines, Corporate Sustainability (CS) is becoming more diffused in business models through which companies have attempted to integrate the three dimensions of sustainability (economic, social and environmental). The objective of this research is to analyze the processes of integrating CS into business management and the related online communication of implemented sustainable actions through an integrated methodological approach based on the analysis of the websites of Italian agribusinesses, using the “7S” method of analysis, supplemented by specific Focus Groups to acquire qualitative information directly from a sample of companies to analyze the motivations for companies to move toward sustainable actions. In the paper, the methodological approach will be proposed, as the research is in progress and includes, among the objectives, the identification of key drivers and the implementation of strategies for CS in line with the SDGs related to the corporate ecosystem.

1. Introduction

The notion of “sustainable development” [1] defines a new economic paradigm. “Sustainable development” combines the requirements of economic growth with those of human and social development, quality of life and protection of the planet from a long-term welfare perspective.
The United Nations 2030 Agenda [2] and its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) also pose new challenges to businesses, which are called upon to adapt their business functions and strategies to the requirements of the SDGs.
The European strategy in the Green Deal (issued in 2019) has as its aim to make the EU economy sustainable through a set of initiatives geared toward making the economy achieve climate neutrality union by 2050. The principal actions are as follows: the efficient use of resources through the transition to a clean, circular economy, the curbing of biodiversity loss, the reduction in pollution and, in particular, actions against climate change.
For decades, there has been a gradual shift in business management from a conventional approach (based on the linear economy) to a sustainable approach (based on the circular economy). Businesses, as well as the various actors involved in the socio-economic growth processes of economic systems, are called upon to take responsibility for the negative externalities produced as a result of their production processes, and it is to them that policies oriented towards a sustainable development model are addressed. Among the various approaches that have been adopted in businesses over the past decades, we have focused on Corporate Sustainability (CS), the innovative model through which companies have attempted to integrate the three dimensions of sustainability (economic, social and environmental).
This is a new corporate “vision” and “mission” to which companies are gradually approaching, albeit in a differentiated manner among countries and among different production sectors. The aspect related to the communication of CS adoption to stakeholders is also very diverse and not always effectively executed [3].
The objective of the paper is to present the methodological approach of the research, which is currently in progress, focusing on the analysis of the processes of CS integration into business management and the related online communication of implemented sustainable actions. The integrated methodological approach is based on the analysis of the websites of Italian agribusinesses, using the “7S” method of analysis, supplemented by specific Focus Groups, to acquire qualitative information about the motivations toward sustainable actions, directly from a sample of companies, using the TPB (Theory of Planned Behavior) method. The research, in progress, includes, among the objectives, the identification of key drivers and the implementation of strategies for a CS in line with the SDGs related to the corporate ecosystem. This study makes a contribution to the literature by developing a framework that could assess the factors that influence agribusinesses to implement actions related to sustainability in agriculture.

2. The Corporate Sustainability Approach in the Agrifood Enterprises

The integration of the circular and green economy approach in the agrifood sector is considered strategic and necessary to transform society and address future challenges [4]. The key to making production systems, communities and cities more circular is the conversion to a sustainable, inclusive, circular economic system based on reducing pressure on natural resources and recovery [5,6].
The shift in businesses from a traditional management approach to a Green Economy approach has changed the way of “doing business.” New business functions have enriched corporate management, and strategic planning is being developed using innovative approaches based on smart, green, inclusive and resilient models [7,8,9].
CS is defined as the process of innovation in management models based on optimizing relationships with stakeholders and strategically integrating social and environmental objectives into the company’s guidelines, processes and operations [10]. This new approach involves moving beyond investment in tangible resources alone since in modern economies it is intangible resources that represent a source of sustainable competitive advantage for the firm.
For companies, internalizing sustainability, in its three dimensions, into business functions means responding to the increasingly attentive community demand for the externalities produced, the associated costs as well as compensatory measures (especially in the case of negative externalities).
In addition to serving the social welfare of the network and the surrounding environment, sustainable practices can ensure a company’s long-term benefits. For example, the adoption of employee-friendly regulations will bring human resource involvement to the pursuit of corporate sustainability goals. In the long run, a company’s sustainability-focused vision, publicized on products, may gain additional market share, especially by tapping into more environmentally and socially sensitive customer targets [11,12,13].
Several studies have analyzed metrics of indicators related specifically to aspects of the agribusiness circular economy [13,14,15,16], but there are little research on the analysis of the integration of different aspects of sustainability in corporate functions [12,17] and, above all, of the communication to stakeholders of CS through websites, particularly in the agribusiness system.

3. Methodology and Results

The methodology adopted for the study of the CS analysis in Italian agrifood companies is based on an integrated approach between a quantitative and a qualitative analysis. The objective is to analyze the CS of agribusiness enterprises and related communication to stakeholders (customers, suppliers, institutions, etc.). In particular, the objective is to analyze how CS is communicated online, through websites, and the strengths and weaknesses of this business transition, through Focus Groups with a sample of agrifood companies in order to explore the motivations that guide toward a sustainable business model (through the TPB) [18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26].
The information collected will provide a framework for describing the following:
  • Current performance: Through website analysis, using the 7S method;
  • Key drivers: Identifying motivations to implement and improve CS (TPB analysis);
  • Implementation: Propose possible short- and long-term actions and strategies to develop CS (Figure 1).
In particular, the quantitative analysis will be carried out through the evaluation of the websites of Italian agrifood companies, according to the “7S” model [27,28] (Figure 2). It is articulated in the analysis of seven evaluation criteria, each of which analyzes a particular aspect of the CS. The criteria and the sub-criteria were defined based on the analysis of other studies performed [14,15,16], and on the indicators selected internationally for specific studies on CS [3].
Specifically, each criterion provides for the articulation into sub-criteria (rating from one to five), as listed below:
  • Economic Sustainability (innovation; risk management; growth enhancement; competitive behavior);
  • Environmental Sustainability (water and land emissions reductions; clean air; biodiversity; ecological impact);
  • Social Sustainability (customer welfare; human rights; labor relations; gender free);
  • Ethical Sustainability (jobs creation; skills enhancement; employee health and safety; diversity and inclusion);
  • Circular Sustainability (resource efficiency; life cycle management; no waste);
  • Climate Sustainability (environmental regulations; global climate change actions; energy management);
  • Territorial Sustainability (local economic impacts; social investment; business ethics).
The qualitative phase will be articulated in the development of specific Focus Groups with company managers of agrifood companies, with the use of a special questionnaire which will make it possible to acquire specific information on motivations and problems connected to the adoption of CS and the innovations, strengths and weaknesses. TPB provides a theoretical framework for the systematic study of factors that influence behavioral choices, and states that the decision to take a particular action is directly related to the individual’s behavioral intentions [18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25], influenced by three factors:
  • Attitude: Favorable or unfavorable assessment of the individual to perform a behavior;
  • Subjective norm: The individual’s perception of social pressure to perform or not perform a behavior;
  • Perceived behavior control: The individual’s perception of the ability to perform a behavior.

4. Conclusions and Discussion

Businesses, as well as the various actors involved in the socio-economic growth processes of economic systems, are called upon personally to take responsibility for the negative externalities produced from their production processes, and it is to them that policies oriented toward a model of sustainable development are addressed. Among the various approaches that businesses have adopted over the past decades, there has been a growing focus on innovative models through which businesses have sought to integrate the three dimensions of sustainability (economic, social and environmental).
The CS approach has oriented companies to review their “mission” and business functions, shifting the focus from operating income to environmental and social impacts. In fact, during strategic planning, companies pay particular attention to the definition of their “mission” and “vision”, no longer taking into account only the profit margin and profitability, but considering the effects of the company’s activities both at an environmental level (such as CO2 emissions, ecological footprint, etc.) and at a social level (through actions that aim at the wellbeing of its human resources and the territorial reference communities) [29,30].
The transition towards an integration of sustainability in business management can be promoted at this particular time, especially in the EU, by specific actions. The first major opportunity identified by the European Commission is represented by the National Recovery and Resilience Plans (NRRPs) approved by each Member State. Among their objectives are to better support companies in decarbonizing their production processes, adopting greener, circular technologies and promoting social inclusion actions. The proposed research, although limited to the presentation of the online CS evaluation approach, as the first step of research in progress could have operational developments in light of the recent 2022 EU. Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) [31] will generate important changes in the regulatory frameworks of EU member countries. One of the most significant innovations is that companies would be required to disclose sustainability information according to the EU Sustainability Reporting Standards including climate, pollution, water, biodiversity, workers and business conduct [32] (European Financial Reporting Advisory Group). This study could help develop future research based on the combination of psychological and socio-economic factors to understand the dynamics of sustainability adoption in Agribusiness System enterprises as well as weaknesses and strengths related to CS implementation in new business models.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.S. and A.S.; methodology, L.S.; software, C.Z. and M.C.; validation, M.C. and A.M.; resources, A.S. and A.M.; writing—original draft preparation, L.S. and A.S.; writing—review and editing, L.S.; funding acquisition, A.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Project code PE00000003, Concession Decree No. 1550 of 11 October 2022 adopted by the Italian Ministry of University and Research, Project title “ON Foods—Research and innovation network on food and nutrition Sustainability, Safety and Security—Working ON Foods”.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data availability to luisa.sturiale@unict.it.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
EUEuropean Union
CSCorporate Sustainability
SDGSustainable Development Goal
TPBTheory of Planned Behavior
NRRPNational Recovery and Resilience Plan
CSRDCorporate Sustainability Reporting Directive

References

  1. UN. Our Common Future; The World Commission on Environment and Development, Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1987. [Google Scholar]
  2. UN. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda For Sustainable Development; United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  3. OECD. Global Corporate Sustainability Report 2024; OECD: Paris, France, 2024. [Google Scholar]
  4. European Commission. COM (2020) 98 Final. A new Circular Economy Action Plan For a Cleaner and More Competitive Europe. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52020DC0098 (accessed on 13 April 2024).
  5. Rossi, E.S.; Materia, V.; Caracciolo, F.; Blasi, E.; Pascucci, S. Farmers in the transition toward sustainability: What is the role of their entrepreneurial identity? Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2023, 7, 1196824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Poponi, S.; Arcese, G.; Pacchera, F.; Martucci, O. Evaluating the transition to the circular economy in the agri-food sector: Selection of indicators. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2022, 176, 105916. [Google Scholar]
  7. El Bilali, H.; Callenius, C.; Strassner, C.; Probst, L. Food and nutrition security and sustainability transitions in food systems. Food Energy Secur. 2019, 8, e00154. [Google Scholar]
  8. Scuderi, A.; Timpanaro, G.; Sturiale, L. Economic evaluation of innovative investiments in agri-food chain. Qual. Access Success 2018, 19, 482–488. [Google Scholar]
  9. Mirabella, C.; Borsellino, V.; Galati, A.; Schimmenti, E.; Caracciolo, F. Value-Belief and Value-Identity Norms in Ethical Food Consumption: Investigating the Influence of Worker-Friendly Labels in Italy. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2025, 32, 2582–2597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. European Commission. COM(2011)681 Final. A Renewed EU Strategy 2011-14 for Corporate Social Responsibility. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2011:0681:FIN:EN:PDF (accessed on 23 April 2024).
  11. Sturiale, L.; Timpanaro, G.; La Via, G. The online sales models of fresh fruit and vegetables: Opportunities and limits for typical Italian products. Qual. Access Success 2017, 18, 444–451. [Google Scholar]
  12. Coppola, A.; Ianuario, S.; Romano, S.; Viccaro, M. Corporate social responsibility in agri-food firms: The relationship between CSR actions and firm’s performance. AIMS Environ. Sci. 2020, 7, 542–558. [Google Scholar]
  13. Fortunati, S.; Morea, D.; Mosconi, E.M. Circular economy and corporate social responsibility in the agricultural system: Cases study of the Italian agri-food industry. Agric. Econ. 2020, 66, 489–498. [Google Scholar]
  14. Cayzer, S.; Griffiths, P.; Beghetto, V. Design of indicators for measuring product performance in the circular economy. Int. J. Sustain. Eng. 2017, 10, 289–298. [Google Scholar]
  15. Elia, V.; Gnoni, M.G.; Tornese, F. Measuring circular economy strategies through index methods: A critical analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 142 Pt 4, 2741–2751. [Google Scholar]
  16. Corona, B.; Shen, L.; Reike, D.; Carreón, J.R.; Worrell, E. Towards sustainable development through the circular economy—A review and critical assessment on current circularity metrics. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 151, 104498. [Google Scholar]
  17. Opferkuch, K.; Caeiro, S.; Salomone, R.; Ramos, T. Circular economy in corporate sustainability reporting: A review of organisational approaches. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2021, 30, 4015–4036. [Google Scholar]
  18. Gao, L.; Wang, S.; Li, J.; Li, H. Application of the extended theory of planned behavior to understand individual’s energy saving behavior in workplaces. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 127, 107–113. [Google Scholar]
  19. Senger, I.; Borges, J.A.R.; Machado, J.A.D. Using the theory of planned behavior to understand the intention of small farmers in diversifying their agricultural production. J. Rural. Stud. 2017, 49, 32–40. [Google Scholar]
  20. Tama, R.A.Z.; Ying, L.; Yu, M.; Hoque, M.; Adnan, K.M.; Sarker, S.A. Assessing farmers’ intention towards conservation agriculture by using the Extended Theory of Planned Behavior. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 280, 111654. [Google Scholar]
  21. Sarkar, A.; Wang, H.; Rahman, A.; Azim, J.A.; Memon, W.H.; Qian, L. Structural equation model of young farmers’ intention to adopt sustainable agriculture: A case study in Bangladesh. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 2022, 37, 142–154. [Google Scholar]
  22. Foti, V.T.; Sturiale, L.; Timpanaro, G. An overview of food waste phenomenon: By problem to resource. Qual. Success 2018, 19, 232–240. [Google Scholar]
  23. Capaldi, N. The Sins of the CSR Movement: Errors in CSR. In Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability; Emerald Publishing Limited: Leeds, UK, 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Sturiale, L.; Scuderi, A.; Pecorino, B.; Timpanaro, G. Experiences of online purchase of food products in Italy during COVID-19 pandemic lockdown. Lect. Notes Netw. Syst. 2022, 482, 1400–1414. [Google Scholar]
  25. Brunori, G.; Bacco, M.; Puerta-Piñero, C.; Borzacchiello, M.T.; Stormer, E. Agri-food data spaces: Highlighting the need for a farm-centered strategy. Data Brief 2025, 59, 111388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Revelli, C. A critical analysis of socially responsible investment (SRI): Meta-debate and development perspectives. In Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability; Emerald Publishing Limited: Leeds, UK, 2016; Volume 2, pp. 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  27. Sturiale, L.; Scuderi, A. Information and communication technology (ICT) and adjustment of the marketing strategy in the agrifood system in Italy. CEUR Workshop Proc. 2011, 1152, 77–87. [Google Scholar]
  28. Scuderi, A.; Sturiale, L. Social commerce and marketing strategy for “made in Italy” food products. CEUR Workshop Proc. 2015, 1498, 509–519. [Google Scholar]
  29. Lim, K.H.; Ojha, R.; Nayga, R.M. Good for the environment and safer? Food safety halo effect of eco-labels. Food Qual. Prefer. 2025, 133, 105629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Lai, M.B.; Vergamini, D.; Brunori, G. Food Supply Chain: A Framework for the Governance of Digital Traceability. Foods 2025, 14, 2032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Directive (EU) 2022/2464 as Regards Corporate Sustainability Reporting. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2022/2464/oj/eng#:~:text=Directive%20%28EU%29%202022%2F2464%20of%20the%20European%20Parliament%20and,corporate%20sustainability%20reporting%20%28Text%20with%20EEA%20relevance%29%20PE%2F35%2F2022%2FREV%2F1 (accessed on 20 April 2024).
  32. European Commission. Implementing and Delegated Acts—CSRD. 2023. Available online: https://finance.ec.europa.eu/regulation-and-supervision/financial-services-legislation/implementing-and-delegated-acts/corporate-sustainability-reporting-directive_en (accessed on 23 May 2024).
Figure 1. Framework research.
Figure 1. Framework research.
Proceedings 117 00034 g001
Figure 2. “7 S” Model (author’s elaboration).
Figure 2. “7 S” Model (author’s elaboration).
Proceedings 117 00034 g002
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.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sturiale, L.; Zarbà, C.; Cammarata, M.; Matarazzo, A.; Scuderi, A. An Evaluative Approach of Corporate Sustainability in Agrifood System. Proceedings 2025, 117, 34. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2025117034

AMA Style

Sturiale L, Zarbà C, Cammarata M, Matarazzo A, Scuderi A. An Evaluative Approach of Corporate Sustainability in Agrifood System. Proceedings. 2025; 117(1):34. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2025117034

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sturiale, Luisa, Carla Zarbà, Mariarita Cammarata, Agata Matarazzo, and Alessandro Scuderi. 2025. "An Evaluative Approach of Corporate Sustainability in Agrifood System" Proceedings 117, no. 1: 34. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2025117034

APA Style

Sturiale, L., Zarbà, C., Cammarata, M., Matarazzo, A., & Scuderi, A. (2025). An Evaluative Approach of Corporate Sustainability in Agrifood System. Proceedings, 117(1), 34. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2025117034

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop