Purpose: The aim of this study is to critically examine the transparency and reporting practice of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) controversies within the pharmaceutical and textile industry. Based on the four core dimensions of transparency, we explore which reporting medium is most frequently chosen for the disclosure of negative ESG contributions, the nature and information content of the disclosed incidents and how voluntary adherence to sustainability reporting standards and independent assurances affect the reporting.Design/methodology/approach: We use conceptual content analysis and employ a counter-accounting approach to analyse the disclosure of 190 ESG controversies in 104 corporate reports from the pharmaceutical and textile industries, covering a three-year period from 2018–2020.Findings: The very large majority of controversies are reported only once in the legal proceedings section of the annual report, but not again in the sustainability report, where it would be necessary to provide a balanced picture. Moreover, companies tend to disclose only those controversies that are either associated with high media attention or are expected to be related to litigation, resulting in 26 per cent of controversies not being disclosed at all. The overall quality of disclosure is unsatisfactory and in need of improvement, but comparably higher in the pharmaceutical industry than in the textile industry. Interestingly, neither the application of sustainability reporting standards nor independent assurance seems to positively impact the disclosure behaviour.Originality/value: Our paper provides new insights into the shortcomings of current ESG controversy disclosures by revealing patterns of selective reporting practices and the strategic framing of issues. In addition, it contributes to the debates on corporate cherry-picking in the adoption of sustainability reporting guidelines and on the effectiveness of external assurance of sustainability reports. Based on the findings, it offers important implications for practitioners, in particular management, policy makers, rating agencies and assurance providers.

The private sector plays crucial role in achieving the climate goals of the Paris Agreement. It is not surprising that in recent years, academic interest at the interface of climate change and management accelerated. Many researchers are working on understanding important relationships between corporate carbon performance and corporate governance factors, as well as linkages between carbon and financial performance. Understanding the determinants and consequences of corporate climate action is highly relevant, especially in times where corporate sustainability is increasingly under scrutiny. Reliable scientific results require robust and consistent underlying data and metrics for measurement. Corporate carbon performance data is required which is comparable, meaningful and clearly defined. Based on a comprehensive systematic literature review, this study sets out to explore the evolution and application of corporate carbon performance metrics over time used in empirical management research. The in-depth analysis discusses the current application of various metrics and their different characteristics, such as emission scopes, types of greenhouse gases covered, and the metrics themselves. Moreover, the underlying data sources from third party providers are critically examined. Based on the findings, future research avenues and recommendations for standardizing carbon performance metrics used in academia are presented, aiming to improve the comparability of study results amongst researchers when working with corporate Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emission performance data.

Duncker & Humblot - Berlin. Ein Forum für die Wissenschaft seit 1798