Scholarlink

<p>This study aims to present a focused disclosure-centric analysis to assess the comprehensiveness of biodiversity disclosures among leading global revenue-generating firms, evaluating sectoral differences in disclosure practices by mapping reported biodiversity measures to Global Reporting Initiative- 304 and Sustainable Development Goal 15. Using quantitative coding and qualitative content analysis, the study comprehensively evaluated biodiversity disclosures from 47 top-revenue global companies for the 2023–2024 reporting period. The analysis examines only disclosures (sustainability reports, annual reports, integrated reports and company websites) and therefore draws conclusions about reporting practices, not directly on ground conservation outcomes. Key biodiversity measures analyzed included habitat extent and quality, species abundance and diversity, and ecosystem services. Statistical analysis, including Kruskal–Wallis and Chi-Square tests, was conducted for sectoral variations in biodiversity reporting. The findings suggest that while 81% of organizations undertake biodiversity initiatives, only a fraction provides measurable and transparent disclosures. Reporting on habitat extent and quality (38.3%) and species abundance and diversity (80.9%) often lacked depth and methodology. Significant inconsistent presentation of budgetary and spatial measures suggests a lack of standardized reporting conventions rather than directly comparable investment levels. The energy and utilities sector demonstrated the highest engagement, while healthcare and finance lagged. Furthermore, executive compensation linked to biodiversity remains an underutilized accountability mechanism. These findings highlight companies’ need to extend their biodiversity commitments beyond current ESG reporting, particularly in retail, construction and finance. The study identified the gaps in quantification and transparency, and therefore recommends the development of harmonized biodiversity reporting metrics to improve comparability and stakeholders’ accountability.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Cross-sectoral analysis of corporate biodiversity disclosures among top revenue global companies

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月14日

查看全文
  • Ravi Sharma,
  • Geetika Dhruv

摘要

This study aims to present a focused disclosure-centric analysis to assess the comprehensiveness of biodiversity disclosures among leading global revenue-generating firms, evaluating sectoral differences in disclosure practices by mapping reported biodiversity measures to Global Reporting Initiative- 304 and Sustainable Development Goal 15. Using quantitative coding and qualitative content analysis, the study comprehensively evaluated biodiversity disclosures from 47 top-revenue global companies for the 2023–2024 reporting period. The analysis examines only disclosures (sustainability reports, annual reports, integrated reports and company websites) and therefore draws conclusions about reporting practices, not directly on ground conservation outcomes. Key biodiversity measures analyzed included habitat extent and quality, species abundance and diversity, and ecosystem services. Statistical analysis, including Kruskal–Wallis and Chi-Square tests, was conducted for sectoral variations in biodiversity reporting. The findings suggest that while 81% of organizations undertake biodiversity initiatives, only a fraction provides measurable and transparent disclosures. Reporting on habitat extent and quality (38.3%) and species abundance and diversity (80.9%) often lacked depth and methodology. Significant inconsistent presentation of budgetary and spatial measures suggests a lack of standardized reporting conventions rather than directly comparable investment levels. The energy and utilities sector demonstrated the highest engagement, while healthcare and finance lagged. Furthermore, executive compensation linked to biodiversity remains an underutilized accountability mechanism. These findings highlight companies’ need to extend their biodiversity commitments beyond current ESG reporting, particularly in retail, construction and finance. The study identified the gaps in quantification and transparency, and therefore recommends the development of harmonized biodiversity reporting metrics to improve comparability and stakeholders’ accountability.