Sustainability reporting in Norway - An assessment of performance in the context of legal demands and socio-political drivers

Business Strategy and the Environment

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 207-222

  Vormedal, Irja H ^a   Ruud, Audun ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

Author keywords

Corporate social responsibility; Non financial disclosures; Norway; Sustainability reporting; Transparency

Indexed keywords

CORPORATE STRATEGY; LEGAL SYSTEM; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; REGULATORY APPROACH; SUSTAINABILITY; VOLUNTARY APPROACH;

EURASIA; EUROPE; NORTHERN EUROPE; NORWAY; SCANDINAVIA;

EID: 68249133604     PISSN: 09644733     EISSN: 10990836     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bse.560     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Adams CA, Frost GR. 2006. Accessibility and functionality of the corporate web site: implications for sustainability reporting. Business Strategy and the Environment 15: 275-287.
2. Adams CA, Hill WY, Robert CB. 1998. Corporate social reporting practices in Western Europe: legitimating corporate behaviour? British Accounting Review 30(1): 1-21.
3. Andriof J, Waddock S, Husted B, Sutherland Rahman S. 2002. Unfolding Stakeholder Thinking: Theory, Responsibility and Engagement. Greenleaf: Sheffi eld.
4. Bendell J. 2003. Talking for Change? Refl ections on effective stakeholder dialogue. In Unfolding Stakeholder Thinking 2: Relationships, Communication, Reporting and Performance, Andriof J, Waddoc S, Husted B, Sutherland Rahman S (eds). Greenleaf: Sheffield.
5. Ball A, Owen DL, Gray R. 2000. External transparency or internal capture? The role of third-party statements in adding value to corporate environmental reports. Business Strategy and the Environment 9: 1-23.
6. Bellona. 2004. Stadig Økende Interesser for SRI Investeringer. http://www.bellona.no/norwegian_import_area/ oekonomi/kapital/fou/32492 [15 August 2006].
7. Commission of the European Communities (ComEC). 2006. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee. Implementing the Partnership for Growth and Jobs: Making Europe a Pole of Excellence on Corporate Social Responsibility. European Commission: Brussels.
8. Donaldson T. Preston LE. 1995. The stakeholder theory of the corporation: concepts, evidence and implications. Academy of Management Review 20(1): 65-91.
9. Ehrenclou K. 2006. Corporate Social Responsibility and the Influence of Non-Governmental Organizations - Tactics, Mechanisms and Legitimacy, Master Thesis, Centre for Development and the Environment, University of Oslo.
10. Elkington J. 1999. Cannibals with Forks: the Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. Oxford: Capstone.
11. Ethical Corporation. 2005a. Why Mandatory Reporting has Fallen from the EU Agenda. www.ethicalcorp.com/content_print.asp?ContentID=3833 [17 August 2005].
12. Ethical Corporation. 2005b. Corporate Responsibility Progress in Scandinavia. Ethical Corporation, www.ethicalcorp.com
13. Ethical Council (Etikkrådet). 2006. Etikkrådet. http://odin.dep.no/etikkradet/norsk/ [15 August 2006].
14. European Commission (EC). 2002. Communication from the Commission Concerning Corporate Social Responsibility: a Business Contribution to Sustainable Development. European Commission: Brussels.
15. Freeman RE. 1984. Strategic Mangement: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston: MA: Pitman.
16. Freeman RE. 2002. Foreword. In Unfolding Stakeholder Thinking: Theory, Responsibility and Engagement, Andriof J, Waddoc S, Husted B, Sutherland Rahman S. (eds). Greenleaf: Sheffield. 7-8.
17. Gilbert S. 2002. The Transparency Evolution. Environmental Law Institute: Washington, DC. Reprinted with permission from The Environmental Forum Nov/Dec.
18. Gouldson A. 2005. Voluntary regulation and industrial capacities for environmental improvement: the case of the EU eco-audit regulation (EMAS) in the United Kingdom. In Industrial Transformation: Environmental Policy Innovation in the United States and Europe, de Bruijn T, Norberg-Bohm V (eds). MIT Press: London. 229-252.
19. Gray R, Javad M, Power DM, Sinclair DC. 2001. Social and environmental disclosure and corporate characteristics: a research note and extension. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting 28(3/4): 327-356.
20. GRIP. 2006. Prisen for Beste Rapportering på Samfunnsansvar og Miljø Avvikles, letter from Helge Fredriksen to GRIP's contacts. http://www.grip.no/Miljorapportering/pris/nedleggelse.pdf. [20 August 2006]
21. Holden Meehan. 1999. The Millennium Guide to Ethical and Environmental Investment. Holden Meehan: Bristol.
22. Holgaard JE, Herreborg Jørgensen T. 2005. A decade of mandatory environmental reporting in Denmark. European Environment 15: 362-373.
23. Isenmann R, Lenz C. 2002. Internet use for corporate environmental reporting: current challenges - technical benefits - practical guidance. Business Strategy and the Environment 11: 181-202.
24. Kolk A. 2003. Trends in sustainability reporting by the Fortune Global 250. Business Strategy and the Environment 12: 279-291.
25. Kolk A. 2004. A decade of sustainability reporting: developments and significance. International Journal of Environment and Sustainable Development 3(1): 51-64.
26. Kolk A, Walhain S, van de Wateringen S. 2001. Environmental reporting by the Fortune Global 250: exploring the influence of nationality and sector. Business Strategy and the Environment 10: 15-28.
27. KPMG. 2005a. KPMG International Survey of Corporate Responsibility Reporting 2005. http://www.kpmg.no/download/202733/115800/ KPMG%20CR%20Survey%202005.pdf [1 March 2006].
28. KPMG. 2005b. KPMGs Undersokelse av Selvskapers Ikke-Finansielle Rapportering 2005. KPMG SustainAbility Services: Oslo.
29. Maltby J. 1997. Setting its own standards and meeting those standards: voluntarism versus regulation in environmental reporting. Business Strategy and the Environment 6: 83-92.
30. Mathis A, de Bruijn T. 2006. Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting in the Netherlands. An Assessment of the Transparency of the Largest Firms. ProSus, Centre for Environment and Development, University of Oslo.
31. Midttun A, Gautesen K, Gjølberg M. 2006. The political economy of CSR in Western Europe. Corporate Governance Volume 6, Number 4. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
32. Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA). 2006. Næringslivets Samfunnsansvar - Nasjonale Tiltak. Kompakt. http://www.dep.no/ud/ norsk/tema/mr/ansvar/tiltak/bn.html [16 August 2006].
33. Morgenbladet. 2005. Et historisk oppdrag fra det norske folk. Morgenbladet 10 June. http://www.morgenbladet.no/apps/pbcs.dll/ article?AID=/20050610/OAKTUELT001/106100020/0/OAKTUELT001 [15 August 2006].
34. Munkelien EB, Goyer PR, Fratczak I. 2005. CSR in the Scandinavian countries. A review of voluntary versus regulated. In Corporate Social Responsibility, Accountability and Governance: Global Perspectives, Demirag I (ed.). Greenleaf: Sheffield. 182-197.
35. Noci G. 2000. Environmental reporting in Italy: current practice and future developments. Business Strategy and the Environment 9: 211-223.
36. Norwegian Accounting Act (Lov om Årsregnskap m.v. Regnskapsloven). http://www.lovdata.no/all/tl-19980717-056-003.html#3-3 [1 December 2005].
37. Nyquist S. 2003. The legislation of environmental disclosures in three Nordic Countries - a comparison. Business Strategy and the Environment 12: 12-25.
38. Ørstavik G. 2006. Interview. Oslo, 15 August.
39. Owen D. 2006. Emerging issues in sustainability reporting. Business Strategy and the Environment 15: 217-218.
40. Ruud A. 2005. Corporate environmental reporting in Norway: beyond emission control? In Industrial Transformation: Environmental Policy Innovation in the United States and Europe, de Bruijn T, Nordberg-Bohm V (eds). MIT Press: Cambridge, MA. 335-361.
41. Ruud A, Larsen O. 2002. Miljørapportering in Årsberetningen: Følger Norske Bedrifter Regnskapslovens Pålegg? Report 8/02, ProSus, Centre for Development and the Environment, University of Oslo.
42. Ruud A, Larsen O. 2003. Miljørapportering i Større Norske Foretak: Fungerer Regnskapsloven Etter Intensjonen? Report 5/03, ProSus, Centre for Development and the Environment, University of Oslo.
43. Sinclair P, Walton J. 2003. Environmental reporting within the forest and paper industry. Business Strategy and the Environment 12: 326-337.
44. Slater A, Glibert S. 2004. The evolution of business reporting: make room for sustainability disclosure. Environmental Quality Management October. pp 41-48.
45. Solomon A, Lewis L. 2002. Incentives and disincentives for corporate environmental disclosure. Business Strategy and the Environment 11: 154-169.
46. SustainAbility. 2004a. Risk and Opportunity. Best Practice in Non-Financial Reporting. SustainAbility: London.
47. SustainAbility. 2004b. The global reporters. Sustainability Reporting Assessment Methodology June 2004. http://www.sustainability.com/ [1 December 2005].
48. Tregidga H, Milne MJ. 2006. From sustainable management to sustainable development: a longitudinal analysis of a leading New Zealand environmental reporter. Business Strategy and the Environment 15: 219-241.
49. UK Government. 2004. Corporate Social Responsibility - A Government Update. Department of Trade and Industry. www.csr.gov.uk. [15 August 2006]
50. Wheeler D, Elkington J. 2001. The end of the corporate environmental report?or the advent of cybernetic sustainability reporting and communication. Business Strategy and the Environment 10: 1-14.