The relationship between non-financial reporting quality (NFRQ) and various company-level factors has been studied extensively, considering the mandatory requirements applicable under the Non-Financial Reporting Directive 2014/95/EU (NFRD) of the European Union. The purpose of this research is to systematize the results of previous published studies on the relationship between NFRQ and company size, financial performance, corporate governance, market performance, and sustainability performance, under a mandatory regime. Our study contributes to the literature by proposing a taxonomy of company-level factors grouped into five categories. We analyze the post-2017 period, focusing on the application of NFRD in the European Union. By applying systematic inclusion and exclusion criteria to a population of 618 articles from Scopus, we obtain a sample of fifteen articles that are subject to an in-depth analysis of correlation matrices. The systematic review resorts to the vote counting methodology to assess the existence and strength of relationships between the NFRQ and company-level factors, based on correlation coefficients. The summarized results indicate that company size, corporate governance, and sustainability performance are positive factors of NFRQ. Regarding corporate governance, we find that board independence, board size, foreign ownership, gender diversity, corporate governance quality, the existence of a sustainability committee, and sustainability-linked remuneration positively influence NFRQ. Our findings emphasize the need to explicitly consider the role of corporate governance and sustainability performance in improving NFRQ while transitioning to improved corporate sustainability reporting under the new Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive 2022/2464 (CSRD). Our study has implications for academics who seek to engage in empirical research on various factors with positive or negative influence on sustainability reporting, throughout the transition from the NFRD to the CSRD. Policymakers may find our study useful in addressing specific areas of sustainability reporting that have a negative impact on corporate transparency, while practitioners may obtain valuable information on the challenges of transitioning to sustainability reporting and the implementation of mandatory assurance.

The purpose of this article is to investigate the development of sustainable business models (SBMs) of renewable energy companies. To assess the degree of alignment with the European Union Taxonomy for sustainable activities (Regulation 2020/852), the European Green Deal, and the Sustainable Development Goals of five renewable energy companies—Ørsted, Engie, Vattenfall, Iberdrola, and Enel—we have used their sustainability reports from 2023. We have analyzed how each company contributes to the EU climate targets and strategy to achieve a 55% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and net zero by 2050. The results showed the challenges faced by each company in switching from traditional fossil fuel models to renewable models. Due to regulatory constraints and different organizational structures, each company has adopted a specific SBM with respect to power generation and the green transition. The advantages and disadvantages of these SBMs were identified and described comparatively to help regulators, policymakers, and industry associations improve sustainability reporting for the energy sector.

The need for sustainable business models (SBMs) has grown significantly in response to contemporary environmental and social challenges such as climate change. This article offers a literature review of the characteristics and institutional factors in the landscape of SBMs. We define SBMs as transformative models that yield positive impacts on the environment and society. It emphasizes the fundamental reconfiguration of how organizations create, deliver, and capture value. The literature review describes the characteristics of SBMs which attempt to balance profitability with the management of environmental and social impacts. We underline the relevance of stakeholder theory in the creation of SBMs in the context of the triple bottom line. Challenges in SBM adoption, such as organizational inertia, are also discussed. The circular economy model is a promising approach within SBMs, emphasizing product and material reuse in contrast to the linear take-make-use-dispose model. The alignment of SBMs with broader sustainability goals, corporate social responsibility (CSR) engagement, and proactive consideration of future regulatory changes would enhance the companies’ strategic advantage. The paper concludes by advocating the adoption of SBMs not just as a responsible choice but as a strategic imperative for long-term success, resilience, and positive social impact.