Special Issue "Interdisciplinary Approaches to Sustainability Accounting and Management: Selected Papers from the 4th EMAN Africa Conference on Sustainability Accounting & Management (including related invited papers)"

A special issue of Sustainability (ISSN 2071-1050).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 March 2017).

Special Issue Editors

Prof. Dr. Cosmas M. Ambe
Website
Guest Editor
African Higher Education and Training Academy (AHETA), South Africa
Interests: sustainability accounting and management
Prof. Dr. Roger Burritt

Guest Editor
Vising Professor Faculty of Organic Sciences, University of Kassel, Germany
Interests: environmental and sustainability management and accounting
Prof. Dr. Collins C. Ngwakwe

Guest Editor
Faculty of Management and Law, University of Limpopo, South Africa
Interests: sustainability accounting and management
Prof. Dr. Ki-Hoon Lee
Website
Guest Editor
Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia
Interests: corporate sustainability management; business innovation for sustainability; environmental and sustainability management accounting; sustainable supply chain management and shared value creation
Special Issues and Collections in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The 193 member states of United Nations have reached a landmark and ambitious accord on the new set of global development goals—the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. The significance embedded in this new agreement is evident in a giant leap from the previous eight development goals to a new set of 17 development goals with 169 targets. The diversified and integrated nature of the new set of sustainable development goals gave impetus to the 2016 EMAN–Africa Conference Theme—"Interdisciplinary Approaches to Sustainability Accounting and Management". Hence, the core aim of this Special Issue is to invite academics, researchers, and practitioners from diverse professional disciplines to offer innovative theories and methods toward interdisciplinary synergies that may foster desired integrative approaches for sustainability management and accountability in pursuit of 2030 sustainable economic development in emerging and/or developing economies.

The Special Issue editors, therefore, solicit interdisciplinary papers from accounting, management, economics, law, education, humanities, agriculture, geography, development, business and industry practitioners, all sciences and engineering. Aside from conference papers, other related papers to this thematic issue are also invited for inclusion in this Special Issue.

Prof. Dr. Cosmas M. Ambe
Prof. Dr. Roger Burritt
Prof. Dr. Collins C. Ngwakwe
Prof. Dr. Ki-Hoon Lee
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All papers will be peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Sustainability is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1800 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Sustainability Accounting and Management
  • Environmental Accounting
  • Material Flow Cost Accounting
  • Economic and Social Sustainability
  • Eco-efficiency Management
  • Socially Responsible Investment
  • Governance and Sustainability
  • Sustainability Assessment and Policies
  • Regulations, policies and Sustainability

Published Papers (4 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Open AccessArticle
Firms’ Board Independence and Corporate Social Performance: A Meta-Analysis
Sustainability 2017, 9(6), 1006; https://doi.org/10.3390/su9061006 - 10 Jun 2017
Cited by 16
Abstract
This paper investigates the influence of organizations’ board independence on corporate social performance (CSP) using a meta-analytic approach. A sample of 87 published papers is used to identify a set of underlying moderating effects in that relationship. Specifically, differences in the system of [...] Read more.
This paper investigates the influence of organizations’ board independence on corporate social performance (CSP) using a meta-analytic approach. A sample of 87 published papers is used to identify a set of underlying moderating effects in that relationship. Specifically, differences in the system of corporate governance, CSP measurement models and market conditions have been considered as moderating variables. The results show that the independence of a company’s board positively influences CSP. This is because companies with more independent directors in their boards are more likely to commit to stakeholder engagement, environmental preservation and community well-being. Interestingly, the results also show that the positive connection between board independence and CSP is stronger in civil law countries and when CSP is measured by self-reporting data. Finally, the strength of the influence of the independence of a firm’s board on CSP varies significantly in different market conditions. The paper concludes by presenting the main implications for academics, practitioners and policy makers. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle
Water Sustainability of Selected Mining Companies in South Africa
Sustainability 2017, 9(6), 957; https://doi.org/10.3390/su9060957 - 05 Jun 2017
Cited by 7
Abstract
Many parts of the world, and South Africa specifically, are facing a water crisis, not only because of the scarcity of water, but also the quality of the available water. Apart from agriculture, industry is viewed as the second largest user of water [...] Read more.
Many parts of the world, and South Africa specifically, are facing a water crisis, not only because of the scarcity of water, but also the quality of the available water. Apart from agriculture, industry is viewed as the second largest user of water and can, therefore, have a significant impact on the saving of water. The purpose of this research is to investigate how selected South African listed mining companies are measuring, managing, and disclosing their water risks, as well as engaging with stakeholders. The selection of the mining companies was made using the companies with the highest market capitalisation figures of those that have a primary listing on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE). The sustainability/integrated/annual reports for 2013 were reviewed using the Ceres Aqua Gauge™ (Boston, MA, USA) as the framework. The findings of this research were that the selected mining companies had grasped the seriousness of the water crisis in South Africa, and the effects it will have on their businesses in future. Most concerning was the activities relating to water management in the supply chain; all of the selected mining companies were found to have no evidence of this in their reports, subsequently this is an area that needs to be addressed in future research. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle
Sustainability and Risk Disclosure: An Exploratory Study on Sustainability Reports
Sustainability 2017, 9(4), 636; https://doi.org/10.3390/su9040636 - 18 Apr 2017
Cited by 21
Abstract
Recent policy changes in sustainability reporting, such as the ones related to the new European Directive on non-financial disclosure (2014/95/EU), the standards issued by the American Sustainability Accounting Standard Board (SASB), the G4 guidelines issued by the Global Sustainability Standard Board (GSSB), and [...] Read more.
Recent policy changes in sustainability reporting, such as the ones related to the new European Directive on non-financial disclosure (2014/95/EU), the standards issued by the American Sustainability Accounting Standard Board (SASB), the G4 guidelines issued by the Global Sustainability Standard Board (GSSB), and the framework of the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) stress the importance of extending the disclosure of ethical, social, and environmental risks within financial and social-environmental reporting. Institutional pressure has notably increased among organizations, in setting up risk management tools to understand sustainability risks within managerial and reporting practices. Given such institutional pressure, the corporate reaction in providing additional sustainability risk disclosure calls for attention and scrutiny. Therefore, this study aims at addressing such issues from an exploratory perspective. We based our analysis on a sample of large Italian organizations that issued sustainability disclosure in accordance with the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), G4 guidelines, and we tested the relationship between their level of risk disclosure and other relevant variables. Consistently with the literature, we found that “experienced” sustainable reporters provide a significant volume of disclosure, and that disclosure quality on risk is positively influenced by their international presence and reporting experience. However, when accounting for specific risk-related areas of disclosure, only a few of them seem to adopt a managerial perspective linking strategy, risk metrics, and disclosure. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle
The Influence of the Sustainability Logic on Carbon Disclosure in the Global Logistics Industry: The Case of DHL, FDX and UPS
Sustainability 2017, 9(4), 601; https://doi.org/10.3390/su9040601 - 13 Apr 2017
Cited by 15
Abstract
As a significant contributor to carbon emissions, global logistics companies are under scrutiny from various stakeholders, and respond by disclosing carbon-related information in the form of carbon reports. Carbon disclosure is, however, a mainly voluntary practice that allows for a broad range of [...] Read more.
As a significant contributor to carbon emissions, global logistics companies are under scrutiny from various stakeholders, and respond by disclosing carbon-related information in the form of carbon reports. Carbon disclosure is, however, a mainly voluntary practice that allows for a broad range of interpretation from the management field, which leads to different approaches to the measurement and reporting of carbon-related information. From a theoretical perspective, these different carbon-disclosure approaches in global logistics companies can be attributed to the underlying construct of competing logics, namely the market and the sustainability logic. While competing logics are frequently discussed in the current literature, little is known about their influence on shaping carbon-disclosure practices. The aim of this paper is to examine the similarities and differences in the measurement and reporting of carbon-related information in order to capture the underlying logic that drives carbon-disclosure behaviour in the global logistics industry. We adopt an interpretative content analysis approach and examine the carbon-related information using the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) reports of DHL, FDX and UPS. The analysis reveals significant differences in the applied carbon-disclosure strategies, as well as in the degree of transparency between the three companies. The results also indicate that the carbon-disclosure practices of FDX are dominated by a market logic that emphasizes the economic benefits of carbon reductions, while DHL and UPS have prioritized the sustainability logic to gain a competitive advantage. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop