A management control system to support corporate sustainability strategies

This paper outlines a management accounting system, based upon cost variance analysis, which supports the pursuit of environmental and traditional financial goals within a decentralized organization. The framework decomposes inefficiencies into two parts. The first consists of what might be considered a natural outcome of pursuing the traditional economic goal of efficiency through cost-minimization, a “waste” variance. The second part consists of sustainability gains that produce societal benefit but may be incongruent with short-term economic goals, a “sustainability” variance. While elimination of waste variances can be encouraged using a traditional performance evaluation and reward structure, elimination of sustainability variances requires re-design of performance evaluation tools and reward structures. We demonstrate that differing production functions across operational units within organizations can impact the relative magnitude of the two variances. The failure to recognize and incorporate these differences can lead to inefficient allocation of resources and/or only partial fulfillment of the strategic environmental goals of the organization.     

Sustainability at Dow Chemical

Dow Chemical Company, which was founded in 1894, is now the second‐largest chemical company in the world. From the outset, the company has been committed to high‐technology research and commercial innovation in chemistry, advanced materials, and agro‐sciences. But if Dow's long history of innovation is impressive, the greatest change in the past few years has been the company's use of innovation to reinforce its commitment to sustainability. In 1996, the company produced its first set of 10‐year sustainability‐related goals. In an effort to meet such goals, the company invested a total of $1 billion in environmentally beneficial products such as new seeds and traits in Dow's AgroSciences business, solar shingles, and advanced battery technologies. Along with the social benefit of higher crop yields and reduced carbon emissions, the company's return on this investment has been estimated at $5 billion. The company was even more ambitious when setting its next set of 10‐year goals in 2006. In this statement, Dow's leadership aimed to create a culture that saw sustainability as a business opportunity from the perspective of a “triple bottom line”—a performance evaluation scheme focused on “people, planet, and profit” that construes success in terms of social benefits, environmental stewardship, and economic prosperity. Dow is now starting the process of developing its third set of 10‐year goals, with the aim of producing a plan that will ensure the viability of the company 50 years from now. With this end in mind, Dow's leaders understand their obligation to continue investing in the health and well‐being of their employees, their communities, and the environment while still creating value for their shareholders.     

New Corporate Forms: One Viable Solution to Advancing Environmental Sustainability

There is a clear trend in corporate governance toward increased attention to the environmental and social impacts of business operations. Major consulting firms are advising Fortune 500 companies on how to become more environmentally sustainable, private equity and “impact” investors are measuring environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors, and voluntary reporting and shareholder resolutions on issues of environmental sustainability are on the rise. While traditional corporate forms allow companies to embrace social and environmental responsibility with some measure of success, various real and perceived risks encourage directors to focus on short‐term profitability. Even if a company has a strong social mission at inception, founders often have difficulty “anchoring their mission” over time. And the lack of required disclosure of social and environmental performance makes it more difficult for investors to evaluate and compare companies. Many believe that the institutionalized mispricing of natural resources and the continued failure to price externalities, combined with the progressive nature of climate change, require the transformation of both business and law. This article discusses social and environmental sustainability within the traditional corporate form and then explores three emerging alternatives that are now being used by businesses in California: limited liability corporations (LLCs); benefit corporations (B corps); and flexible purpose corporations (FPCs). Of these three alternatives, FPCs—a corporate form that requires shareholders to agree on one or more social missions with management and the board—may be best suited to meet the needs of the many small private firms (as well as some large public companies) that, whether for purely economic or altruistic reasons, plan to integrate ESG into their operations.     

Lies,Damn Lies,and Statistics: Why a Widely Used Sustainability Metric Fails and How to Improve It

Most of the world's major corporations now publicly report their sustainability performance for a number of key parameters, such as water use, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and waste generated. The metrics most often used to track progress are “total inventory” (for example, the total liters of water used, or the total tons of GHGs emitted) and average intensity (total liters of water used per ton of product or per $1 million revenue). Because average intensity is normalized for the company's level of business activity, it is commonly presented and viewed as a measure of the company's actual year‐to‐year efficiency. But average intensity is often not a reliable measure of a company's true performance in sustainability. An improvement in efficiency requires a company to consume fewer resources or generate less waste in delivering a specified unit measure of goods or services. This article demonstrates that, although efficiency directly contributes to average intensity, the measure is influenced by a number of confounding factors that make the change in average intensity a potentially misleading indicator of improvements in efficiency. The authors present a more reliable measure of changes in efficiency—one that is likely to benefit corporate managements as well as users of sustainability data—that makes use of flexible budgeting techniques. Examples are provided that illustrate Bacardi Limited's application of the sustainability efficiency metric for external sustainability reporting.     

A Tale of Two Stories: Sustainability and the Quarterly Earnings Call

One of the challenges companies claim to face in making sustainability a core part of their strategy and operations is that the market does not care about sustainability, either in general or because the time frames in which it matters are too long. The response of investors who say they care about sustainability—and their numbers are large and growing—is that companies do a poor job in providing them with the information they need to take sustainability into account in their investment decisions. Whatever the merits of each view, the fact remains that an effective conversation about sustainability requires the participation of both sides of the market. There are two main mechanisms for companies to communicate to the market as a way of starting this conversation: mandated reporting and quarterly conference calls. In this paper, the authors argue that neither companies nor investors can be seen as taking sustainability seriously unless it is integrated into the quarterly earnings call. Until that happens, the core business and sustainability are two separate worlds, each of which has its own narrator telling a different story to a different audience. The authors illustrate their argument using the case of SAP, the German software company. SAP was the first company to host an “ESG Investor Briefing,” a conference call for analysts and investors held on July 30, 2013 in which the company discussed both its sustainability performance and its contribution to the firm's financial performance. The narrative of this call was very similar to the narrative of the company's first “integrated report,” which was issued in 2012 and presented the company's sustainability initiatives in the context of its operating and financial performance. Nevertheless, the content and main focus of the “ESG Briefing” were very different from that of most quarterly earnings conferences, and so were the audiences. Whereas the quarterly call was attended mainly by sell side analysts—and the words “sustainability” or “sustainable” failed to receive a single mention—the ESG briefing was delivered to an investor audience made up almost entirely of the “buy side.”     

Sustainability as Adaptability

Most corporations now view sustainability as a key requirement for competitive advantage, but few claim to have achieved it. One of the key obstacles separating intention from execution is that the sustainability frameworks employed by companies tend to be insufficiently clear, precise, or comprehensive to guide decision making. One of the most pressing challenges for corporate leaders today is, of course, to sustain the economic viability of the core businesses. But given the implicit “beyond business” focus of most sustainability efforts, corporate executives would be better served by a more integrated, holistic framework—one that enables them to make tradeoffs among the economic, social, and ecological aspects of business. This article introduces such a framework—one that redefines sustainability as the ability of companies to adapt to change in three different spheres of operation—ecological, social, and economic—with a near‐term as well as a longer‐term planning horizon. Without such adaptation, business models become obsolete for reasons that can range from economic failure, to competitive inferiority, to social or ecological limits. This ability to adapt can be measured and valued by using the BCG Adaptive Advantage Index, a composite measure of corporate performance during market downturns. The BCG analysis also shows that although the most adaptive companies tend to report lower profits and have lower values during periods of relative stability, such companies perform consistently better over full cycles. Creating social and ecological value alone doesn't automatically confer economic rewards, but—with the right business model and capabilities—it can. The authors explore some of the business model archetypes that successfully achieve this “co‐optimization.”     

Energy efficiency complexities: A technical and managerial investigation

Increased concern about sustainability issues has been voiced in the accounting literature. Although environmental performance is only one dimension of sustainability, it is nevertheless a key factor, especially in sectors such as the process industry, which consume substantial volumes of materials and energy. Energy itself is important because its production is a major cause of carbon emissions. Hence efforts to reduce its use are important, and here energy efficiency measurement and management play a key role.Although the conceptual challenges posed by energy efficiency measurement are well known in the technical literature, there has been little discussion of energy efficiency management. This paper examines the complexities involved in the measurement and management of energy efficiency. In particular, it examines how these complexities impede effective use of management control systems to impact the ability and motivation of employees to work toward the goals of sustainable development. The study is a cross-disciplinary one, and combines technical energy efficiency research and environmental management accounting research in performance management. The study provides practical knowledge of what happens in organizations pursuing sustainable development, in this case environmental performance. The paper demonstrates a performance indicator that does not allow proper energy efficiency performance management because it is still technically underdeveloped. Setting targets for the indicator is especially problematic.     

Linkages between organizational goals,strategies, and the budget process

This case is ideally suited to integrate organizational goals and strategies with budgeting, feedback, and variance analysis. It demonstrates the interplay between the budget process and organizational goals and strategies. The case is also useful in integrating accounting concepts with concepts which students have studied in management or organizational behavior courses. It suggests that the way that managers respond to variances is affected by the environment in which the firm operates and the product(s) manufactured by the firm. This case is based upon an actual situation in which a firm experienced rapid growth through acquisition. Integration of the budget process with organizational goals and strategies enhances the students' interest and their understanding of the role of budgets in the planning and control process. The case demonstrates that budgets are part of a “big picture,” and can be traced and related to managerial goals and strategies. Further, the case allows students to develop an understanding and appreciation of variance analysis. The case has been used successfully with undergraduate cost accounting students and with participants in a 2-week executive-education program. The students find the case interesting and are eager to participate in the discussion.     

Insolvency proceedings from a sustainability perspective

Sustainability is a wide concept including environmental, economic, social/culture, and political dimensions. Currently, sustainability research is a rich scientific discipline producing a significant number of research papers. However, sustainability in the context of insolvency proceedings has attracted little research compared with, for example, how much attention corporate social responsibility has received in company law research. This article studies sustainability in the context of liquidation and restructuring proceedings and the preservation of different kinds of resources (natural, manufactured, human, and social capital) in insolvency procedures. The purpose of insolvency proceedings may prevent the full implementation of sustainability. In bankruptcy, the administrator must maximise the selling price for creditor satisfaction, and there are few possibilities to promote sustainability. When facing an acute environmental hazard, in the name of public interest, a bankruptcy estate with assets usually has to act unless the law stipulates that society is responsible for taking care of the problem. In restructuring proceedings, the main purpose is to continue the debtor's business. It depends on the markets how sustainable the debtor company must be to achieve profitability. If becoming a profitable company in a “green” or otherwise sustainable market requires costly efforts, creditors' interests may require the sale of the assets. The author views through sustainability lenses EU Restructuring and insolvency Directive (2019) and finds there is not much of a sustainability approach included.     

Governmentality in accounting and accountability: A case study of embedding sustainability in a supply chain

This paper examines how the introduction of sustainability accounting has been used by an organization as a means to seek to govern social, economic and environmental issues relating to suppliers. The concept of governmentality and four analytics of government are proposed as a means to examine systematic ways of exercising power and authority. This theoretical framework illuminates the specific rationales and practices of government that enable particular aspirations of reform – such as sustainability – to be constituted. The analysis is informed by the discussion of the implementation of sustainability-orientated regimes of practice in the context of a single supply chain within a major supermarket chain in the UK against the theoretical analytics of government. The paper provides novel empirical insights into how sustainability accounting shaped forms of power, rationales and practices in a supply chain. It explores the extent to which senior decision-takers frame and use sustainability accounting to foster disciplinary effects based ostensibly upon social and environmental goals. These are found in practice to be reformulated primarily according to an economic (rather than social or environmental) regime of practice.     

Ambiguous but tethered: An accounting basis for sustainability reporting

Sustainability reporting continues to become more widespread, despite ambiguities underlying the concept that may lead to varied interpretations and wider scope for “managing public perceptions” (e.g., Cho et al., 2010, Neu et al., 1998). An examination of the current form it takes using the GRI suggests a trade-off between principles and rules, with reduced emphasis on normative principles and a rather simplistic pursuit of “objective” measurement largely adapting to traditional accounting goals. While exploratory in nature, the paper suggests the need for “alignment” through an emphasis on principles based on normative stakeholder theory (Reed, 1999, Reed, 2002) that can draw from accounting without usurping the stakeholder goals underlying sustainability. This normative approach adds to the discourse on sustainability accounting by envisaging a wider and more localized perspective on firm accountability that could potentially stimulate the innovative endeavors of the corporation in the pursuit of wider wealth creation.     

Morgan Stanley Perspectives on Sustainable Investing: Acceleration and Integration

The CEO of Morgan Stanley's Institute for Sustainable Investing discusses recent developments in the field since the founding of the Institute three years ago. The position of the Institute, which works across Morgan Stanley businesses as well as with external partners, provides a unique vantage point for assessing both the company's and the financial industry's progress in advancing the goals of sustainability. Since its inception, the Institute has focused on measuring investor interest and highlighting the performance realities of sustainable investing strategies, with the ultimate goal of helping to increase the adoption of such strategies by not only Morgan Stanley's clients, but throughout the industry. Drawing on its own survey data and on the research and views of the Institute's internal and external collaborators, the author describes not only the acceleration of investor interest and the emergence of new players, but also the progressive integration of sustainability with more traditional methods as ESG issues move from being peripheral to “material” and “strategic” considerations. Such integration is helping to ensure that sustainability concerns—and corporate efforts to deal with them—will prove more than just a temporary trend and assume a prominent, and permanent, position in the dialogue between companies and investors.     

环境税率、双重红利与经济增长

本文构建了一个包含环境税、污染存量和预期寿命的世代交替模型,研究环境税对环境红利和经济发展红利的影响。基于新古典增长模型的研究表明,环境税能够实现双重红利(环境红利和经济发展红利),这契合“绿水青山就是金山银山”的绿色发展理念。从传导机制看,环境税通过负收入效应使得资本积累下降,同时,环境税通过健康效应使得预期寿命延长,这又使得资本积累增加。环境税通过影响资本积累,进而影响环境质量和经济发展。此外,环境税率上升使得用于环境治理的政府支出增加,这使得经济更容易产生环境红利。基于内生增长框架的分析表明,环境税有助于摆脱“环境贫困陷阱”,这为解释国家之间的收入差距提供了一个参考机制。数值模拟结果显示,在新古典增长框架和内生增长框架下,均存在最优的环境税率可以极大化人均产出和经济增长率。本文认为,合理的环境税率有助于推进减污降碳协同治理。     

The Economics of Organizational Architecture

Drawing on the work of Michael Jensen and William Meckling, the co‐formulators of “agency cost theory,” the authors argue that there are two main challenges in designing the structure of organizations: (1) the “rights assignment” problem—that is, ensuring that decision‐making authority is vested in managers and employees with the “specific knowledge” necessary to make the best decisions; and (2) the “control” or “agency” problem—designing performance‐evaluation and reward systems that give decision‐makers strong incentives to exercise their decision rights in ways that increase the long‐run value of the organization. The authors provide a number of instructive applications and extensions of the Jensen‐Meckling organizational framework. Using a series of short case studies that range from the Barings Brothers' debacle in the early 1990s and the decade‐long restructuring of ITT to the cases of McDonald's and Century 21, the authors demonstrate the importance of designing performance‐measurement and reward systems that are consistent with the assignment of decision rights. In so doing, the authors also work to dispel the widespread notion, popular among advocates of Total Quality Management, that the widespread use of performance measures and incentives undermines efforts to promote teamwork within large organizations. A number of brief case histories of companies like Xerox and Mary Kay Cosmetics are used to show the critical role of performance measurement and individual rewards in reinforcing a quality‐centered corporate culture. As the authors conclude, “It is a mistake to think of the ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ aspects of organizations as mutually exclusive or even as competing.”     

Portfolio Analysis with Factors and Scenarios

Recently there has been a growing interest in the scenario model of covariance as an alternative to the one-factor or many-factor models. We show how the covariance matrix resulting from the scenario model can easily be made diagonal by adding new variables linearly related to the amounts invested; note the meanings of these new variables; note how portfolio variance divides itself into “within scenario” and “between scenario” variances; and extend the results to models in which scenarios and factors both appear where factor distributions and effects may or may not be scenario sensitive.     

ON THE RATIONALITY OF COMMON STOCK RETURN VOLATILITY

This paper derives the relationship between the population unconditional variance of common stock returns and the variance of expected returns conditional on a well-specified information set. As a consequence, a lower bound is obtained for the variance of common stock returns. The sample counterpart of this bound is then empirically tested against the sample variance of returns. The paper's main conclusion can be stated as follows: the observed volatility of real (inflation-adjusted) common stock returns is not “irrationally” large. The paper admits of this conclusion because the point estimate of the lower-bound variance derived in this model is actually larger than the point estimate of common stock return volatility. However, since these point estimates are found to have a statistically insignificant difference, equality of the two variances cannot be ruled out. Hence, “rationality” of common stock returns—as implied by a utility-based valuation conditional on a specified information set—cannot be rejected.     

Solving/understanding/evaluating the e-waste challenge through transdisciplinarity?

Transdisciplinarity has been accepted as a promising research approach to respond to complex real-world problems such as electronic waste (e-waste). Already one of the fastest growing waste streams, e-waste is a sustainability challenge that shadows the pervasive uses of electronic devices in contemporary society. Previous studies have not only shown the toxicity and risks inherent in the hazardous waste but also economic value generated from its reuse and recycling and the environment justice implications of the existing transboundary movement of e-waste to developing countries. Responding to this multifaceted issue requires a transdisciplinary attempt at synthesis understandings, if not solutions. This paper reflects on an educational experiment to encourage disciplinary boundary crossing in the e-waste community through a summer school. The NVMP-StEP E-waste Summer School housed young researchers from diverse disciplines with a common research interest in e-waste. The event is evaluated against three sets of criteria that underpin successful transdisciplinary ventures: (i) clear, problem-oriented goals, (ii) careful preparation, institutional support and competent management, and (iii) communication and collaboration. Based on understandings and insights gained from the participation in the Summer School, participant surveys, and communications with organizers, six recommendations are outlined to help making similar events a better ground for transdisciplinarity in the future.     

ESG Investing in Graham & Doddsville

The author describes how and why the world's best “business value investors” have long incorporated environmental, social, and governance (ESG) considerations into their investment decision‐making. As the main source of value in companies has increasingly shifted from tangible to intangible assets, many followers of Graham & Dodd have delivered exceptional investment results by taking an “earnings‐power” approach to identifying high‐quality businesses—businesses with enduring competitive advantages that are sustained through significant ongoing investment in their core capabilities and, increasingly, their important non‐investor “stakeholders.” While the ESG framework may be relatively new, it can be thought of as providing a lens through which to view the age‐old issue of “quality.” Graham & Dodd's 1934 classic guide to investing, Security Analysis, and Phil Fisher's 1958 bestseller, Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits, both identify a number of areas of analysis that would today be characterized as ESG. Regardless of whether they use the labels “E,” “S,” and “G,” investors who make judgments about earnings power and sustainable competitive advantage are routinely incorporating ESG considerations into their decision‐making. The challenge of assessing a company's sustainable competitive advantage requires analysis based on concepts such as customer franchise value, as well as intangibles like brands and intellectual property. For corporate managers communicating ESG priorities, and for investors analyzing ESG issues, the key is to focus on their relevance to the business. In this sense, corporate reporting on sustainability issues should be viewed as analogous to and an integral part of financial reporting, with a management focus on materiality and relevance (while avoiding a “promotional” approach) that is critical to credibility.     

Declaraciones institucionales y percepciones individuales sobre la sustentabilidad en escuelas de negocios mexicanas

The objective of this paper is to analyze how business schools of Mexican universities deal with the concept of sustainability as part of their educational task. In order to achieve a comprehensive vision, this study considers the environmental, the social, and the economic components of sustainability. After discussing the conceptual dimensions of education for sustainability, the empirical part of the paper consists of two sections: a content analysis of how official university documents handle the concept of sustainability and a survey of professors’ and students’ perceptions of sustainability. The analysis shows that both professors and students in the Management and Accounting disciplines need to extend their understanding about the economic and environmental aspects of sustainability. The results of this study provide information that can guide the efforts made by institutions of higher learning for training their professors and offering a comprehensive education for their students in all three components of sustainability.