SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMPANY: DIRECTIONS AND PROSPECTS OF RESEARCH
УДК 330.342.146
Abstract
The sustainable development agenda and the practice of its implementation are currently one of the most relevant areas of research work of domestic and foreign scientists. The purpose of the article is to systematize the existing areas of measuring sustainable development and substantiate the prospects for future research in this area. Based on the results of the study, seven main areas of existing research in the field of sustainable development were identified: ESG information, sustainable development factors, monitoring of environmental indicators, accounting for carbon emissions, methods for analyzing the company's sustainable development, non-financial reporting, safety and efficiency of implementing sustainable development. In addition, the proposed approaches to solving the identified problems are described and the prospects for future research are substantiated. The author's attention is focused on the need for unification and standardization of the formation and disclosure of ESG data by business entities, the importance of a systematic and holistic approach to studying sustainable development issues. The obtained ambiguous results of the implementation of the sustainable development agenda by companies of various types of activities, confirmed in empirical studies of scientists from different countries, require the development of a methodology for assessing the economic security of the company's sustainable development.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Файзуллин Ф. С. Устойчивое развитие — приоритетное направление исследований Академии наук республики Башкортостан // Проблемы востоковедения. 2016. № 4 (74). С. 20-23.
Конюшков Д. Е. Формирование и развитие концепции экосистемных услуг: обзор зарубежных публикаций // Бюллетень Почвенного института им. В. В. Докучаева. 2015. № 80. С. 26-49.
Novillo-Ortiz D., Quintana Y., Holmes J., Borbolla D., Marin H. Leveragin data and information systems on the sustainable development goals // International Journal of Medical Informatics. 2021. Vol. 152. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34074600/ (дата обращения: 03.06.2024).
Мантаева Э. И., Голденова В. С., Слободчикова И. В. Стандарты ESG-концепции устойчивого развития // Научные труды Вольного экономического общества России. 2023. Т. 242. № 4. С. 93-104.
Ferreira-Quilice Т., Hernandez-Maestro R., Gonzalez Duarte R. Corporate sustainability transitions: Are there differences between what companies say and do and what ESG ratings say companies do? // Journal of Cleaner Production. 2023. Vol. 414. URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652623016785?via%3Dihub (дата обращения: 03.06.2024).
Lee C., Zhong Q., Wen H., Song Q. Blessing or curse: How does sustainable development policy affect total factor productivity of energy-intensive enterprises? // Socio-Economic Planning Sciences. 2023. Vol. 89. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2023.101709 (дата обращения: 03.06.2024).
Баева Л. В. Факторы устойчивого развития и дестабилизации современного социума: социально-философский анализ // Каспийский регион: политика, экономика, культура. 2020. № 1 (62). С. 128-133.
Habibulloev S., Han F., Bakhtiyorov Z., Xuankai M. A, Nuhzor O. Factors influencing sustainable development in Ecotourism settlements: A comparative analysis // Heliyon. 2024. Vol. 10. URL: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4507847 (дата обращения: 03.06.2024).
Гоголева Т. Н., Бахтурина Ю. И. Экологический учет в системе видов учета // Международный бухгалтерский учет. 2015. № 3 (345). С. 2-13.
Попов Л. А. Экологический учет как элемент устойчивого развития экономики // Управление экономическими системами: электронный научный журнал. 2014. № 6 (66). С. 4-17.
Chen H., Cheng T. 11 — Shades of green: HOPF for stand-ardized environmental performance indicators // Sustainable Resource Management. 2021. Pр. 241-271. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-824342-8.00017-1.
Arshad A., Shahzad F., Rehman I., Sergi B. A systematic literature review of block-chain technology and environmental sus-tainability: Status quo and future re-search // International Review of Economics & Finance. 2023. Vol. 88. Pр. 1602-1622, DOI: 10.1016/j. iref. 2023.07.044.
Стародубец Н. В., Белик И. С., Никулина Н. Л., Аликберова Т. Т. Оценка и прогнозирование углеродного следа металлургических предприятий Свердловской области // Journal of Applied Economic Research. 2023. Т. 22. № 3. С. 572-599.
Kaplan R., Ramanna K., Roston М. Robust reporting principles to improve today's carbon-trading markets. URL: https://hbr.org/2023/07/accounting-for-carbon-offsets (дата обращения: 03.06.2024).
Любушин Н. П., Бабичева Н. Э., Купрюшина О. М., Ханин Д. Г. Методика формирования показателей оценки устойчивого развития экономических субъектов в условиях больших вызовов // Экономический анализ: теория и практика. 2021. Т. 20. № 11. С. 1994-2020.
Tseng M. L., Wu K. J., Ma L., Kuo T., Sai F. A hierarchical framework for assessing corporate sustainability performance using a hybrid fuzzy synthetic method-DEMATEL // Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.10.01444. (дата обращения: 03.06.2024).
Корнилова А. В. Эколого-социально-экономические индикаторы корпоративной ответственности: методика формирования // Известия Тульского государственного университета. Экономические и юридические науки. 2018. № 3-1. С. 47-67.
Engida T., Rao X., Berentsen P., Lansink A. Measuring Corporate Sustainability Performance — The Case of European Food and Beverage Companies // Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018. Vol. 195. Pр. 734-743. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.095.
Ефимова О. В. Анализ устойчивого развития компании: стейкхолдерский подход // Экономический анализ: теория и практика. 2013. № 45 (348). С. 41-51.
Krajnc D., Glavic P. How to compare companies on relevant dimensions of sustainability // Ecological Economics. 2005. № 55. Рp. 551-563.
Cardoni A., Kiseleva E., Terzani S. Evaluating the Intra-Industry Comparability of Sustainability Reports: The Case of the Oil and Gas Industry // Sustainability. 2019. URL: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:159379965 (дата обращения: 03.06.2024).
Бабичева Н. Э., Сёмкин С. А. Интегрированная отчетность как детерминанта изменения целевых установок экономического анализа устойчивого развития в условиях вызовов // Экономический анализ: теория и практика. 2021. Т. 20. № 12. С. 2210-2232.
Глазьев С. Ю., Безруков Л. Б., Долголаптев А. В., Ларин Н. В., Сывороткин В. Л., Федоров В. М. Климатические изменения и энергопереход // Экономические стратегии. 2023. № 6 (192). С. 16-29. DOI: 10.33917/es-6.192.2023.16-29.
Murashima M. Do investors' reactions to environmentally friendly news announcements differ across industries? A comparative analysis of Japan's food and automotive industries // Journal of Business Economics and Management. 2022. No 23. Рp. 1315-1333.
REFERENCES
Fajzullin F. S. Sustainable development is a priority direction of research of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Bashkortostan. Problems of Oriental Studies. 2016. No. 4 (74). Pp. 20-23.
Konyushkov D. E. Formation and development of the concept of ecosystem services: review of foreign publications. Bulletin of the Soil Institute named after V. V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. No. 80. Pp. 26-49.
Novillo-Ortiz D., Quintana Y., Holmes J., Borbolla D., Marin H. Leveragin data and information systems on the sustainable development goals. International Journal of Medical Informatics. 2021. Vol. 152. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34074600 (date of access: 03.06.2024).
Mantaeva E. I., Goldenova V. S., Slobodchikova I. V. ESG standards for sustainable development. Scientific works of the Free Economic Society of Russia. 2023. Vol. 242. No. 4. Pp. С. 93-104.
Ferreira-Quilice Т., Hernandez-Maestro R., Gonzalez Duarte R. Corporate sustainability transitions: Are there differences between what companies say and do and what ESG ratings say companies do? Journal of Cleaner Production. 2023. Vol. 414. URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652623016785?via%3Dihub (date of access: 03.06.2024).
Lee C., Zhong Q., Wen H., Song Q. Blessing or curse: How does sustainable development policy affect total factor productivity of energy-intensive enterprises? Socio-Economic Planning Sciences. 2023. Vol. 89. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2023.101709 (date of access: 03.06.2024).
Baeva L. V. Factors of sustainable development and destabilization of modern society: socio-philosophical analysis. Caspian region: politics, economics, culture. 2020. No. 1 (62). Pp. 128-133.
Habibulloev S., Han F., Bakhtiyorov Z., Xuankai M. A, Nuhzor O. Factors influencing sustainable development in Ecotourism settlements: A comparative analysis. Heliyon. 2024. Vol. 10. URL: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4507847 (date of access: 03.06.2024).
Gogoleva T. N., Baxturina Yu. I. Environmental accounting in the system of accounting types. International accounting. 2015. No. 3 (345). Pp. 2-13.
Popov L. A. Environmental accounting as an element of sustainable economic development. Management of economic systems: electronic scientific journal. 2014. No. 6 (66). Pp. 4-17.
Chen H., Cheng T. 11 — Shades of green: HOPF for standardized environmental performance indicators. Sustainable Resource Management. 2021. Pp. 241-271. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-824342-8.00017-1.
Arshad A., Shahzad F., Rehman I., Sergi B. A systematic literature review of block-chain technology and environmental sustainability: Status quo and future re-search. International Review of Economics & Finance. 2023. Vol. 88. Pp. 1602-1622. DOI: 10.1016/j.iref.2023.07.044.
Starodubecz N. V., Belik I. S., Nikulina N. L., Alikberova T. T. Assessment and forecasting of the carbon footprint of metallurgical enterprises in the Sverdlovsk region. Journal of Applied Economic Research. 2023. Vol. 22. No. 3. Pp. 572-599.
Kaplan R., Ramanna K., Roston М. Robust reporting principles to improve today's carbon-trading markets. 2023. URL: https://hbr.org/2023/07/accounting-for-carbon-offsets (date of access: 03.06.2024).
Lyubushin N. P., Babicheva N. E.'., Kupryushina O. M., Xanin D. G. Methodology for the formation of indicators for assessing the sustainable development of economic entities in the context of great challenges. Economic Analysis: Theory and Practice. 2021. Vol. 20. No. 11. Pp. 1994-2020.
Tseng M. L., Wu K. J., Ma L., Kuo T., Sai F. A hierarchical framework for as-sessing corporate sustainability perfor-mance using a hybrid fuzzy synthetic method-DEMATEL. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2017. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.10.01444. (date of access: 03.06.2024).
Kornilova A. V. Ecological, socio-economic indicators of corporate responsibility: methods of formation. News of Tula State University. Economic and legal sciences. 2018. No. 3-1. Pp. 47-67.
Engida T., Rao X., Berentsen P., Lansink A. Measuring Corporate Sustainability Performance- The Case of European Food and Beverage Companies. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018. Vol. 195. Pp. 734-743. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.095.
Efimova O. V. Analysis of the company's sustainable development: stakeholder approach. Economic Analysis: Theory and Practice. 2013. No. 45 (348). Pp. 41-51.
Krajnc D., Glavic P. How to compare companies on relevant dimensions of sustainability. Ecological Economics. 2005. No. 55. Pp. 551-563.
Cardoni A., Kiseleva E., Terzani S. Evaluating the Intra-Industry Comparability of Sustainability Reports: The Case of the Oil and Gas Industry. Sustainability. 2019. URL: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:159379965 (date of access: 03.06.2024).
Babicheva N. E., Syomkin S. A. Integrated reporting as a determinant of changing the targets of economic analysis of sustainable development in the face of challenges. Economic Analysis: Theory and Practice. 2021. Vol. 20. No. 12. Pp. 2210-2232.
Glaz'ev S. Yu., Bezrukov L. B., Dolgolaptev A. V., Larin N. V., Sy'vorotkin V. L., Fedorov V. M. Climate change and energy transition. Economic strategies. 2023. No. 6 (192). Pp. 16-29. DOI: 10.33917/es-6.192.2023.16-29.
Murashima M. Do investors' reactions to environmentally friendly news announcements differ across industries? A comparative analysis of Japan's food and automotive industries. Journal of Business Economics and Management. 2022. No. 23. Pp. 1315-1333.
Economics Profession Business is a golden publisher, as we allow self-archiving, but most importantly we are fully transparent about your rights.
Authors may present and discuss their findings ahead of publication: at biological or scientific conferences, on preprint servers, in public databases, and in blogs, wikis, tweets, and other informal communication channels.
Economics Profession Business (EPB) allows authors to deposit manuscripts (currently under review or those for intended submission to EPB) in non-commercial, pre-print servers such as ArXiv.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
