EM - Escola de Minas

Agora exibindo 1 - 3 de 3

Transparency of materiality analysis in GRI-based sustainability reports.
(2020) Machado, Bianca Alves Almeida; Dias, Lívia Cristina Pinto; Fonseca, Alberto de Freitas Castro
While materiality analysis is often regarded as essential to sustainability reporting, there is a shortage of empirical studies about its transparency in published reports. This study had a three-fold objective: (a) identify stakeholders and respective techniques of engagement in the materiality analysis; (b) quantify disclosures of materiality-related indicators; and (c) explore the influence of assurance, standard, and headquarters' location in the transparency of materiality analysis. Based on a quantitative content analysis of 140 GRI-based sustainability reports, this study found that, overall, organizations did not disclose comprehensive and detailed information about their approaches to identifying material topics. About 22% of the evaluated indicators were not fully disclosed in the sample. Non-parametric tests suggested that third-party assurance, type of GRI standard, and location of headquarters are unlikely to affect the rates of transparency. The study calls for further standardization and methodological development of materiality analysis in sustainability reporting.
Sustainability reporting among mining corporations : a constructive critique of the GRI approach.
(2012) Fonseca, Alberto de Freitas Castro; McAllister, Mary Louise; Fitzpatrick, Patricia
The environmental crisis is giving rise to growing public demand for socially responsible and ecologically viable mining practices. Large mining corporations are responding by advancing the idea of a sustainable mining industry. These responses are accompanied by concerted efforts to advertise a company’s relative progress in this direction through the publication of sustainability reports based on the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Framework. Many scholars contest the effectiveness of that framework, arguing that GRIbased reports can mislead decision-makers who are concerned with sustainability, or even camouflage unsustainable practices, particularly at the site level. Few scholars, however, have scratched below the surface of criticism in order to consider how to improve the effectiveness of that framework. This article takes a closer look at this problem by answering the following question: What needs to be changed in mining corporations’ GRI-based frameworks for the purpose of promoting more meaningful and reliable sustainability performance information? This article followed a qualitative methodological approach based on literature reviews and 41 semi-structured interviews. The analysis was guided by an evaluation of the extent to which the predominant GRI-based approach to sustainability reporting meets a number of principles of sustainability assessment and reporting, known as the BellagioSTAMP principles. This paper outlines a number of specific changes that should be promoted in mining corporations’ frameworks if their reports are to provide meaningful and accurate information about sustainability progress. Such changes include a more systematic consideration of site-level performance, scenario building, and legacy effects. Overall, this article corroborates the view that meaningful and reliable standardized disclosures of contributions to sustainability are unlikely to emerge any time soon. The geographical dispersion of mining facilities imposes substantial difficulties to the contextualization of sustainability evaluations.
Measuring what? : a comparative anatomy of five mining sustainability frameworks.
(2013) Fonseca, Alberto de Freitas Castro; McAllister, Mary Louise; Fitzpatrick, Patricia
Recent years have seen a proliferation of frameworks for assessing and reporting mining sustainability. While these frameworks vary substantially in scope and approach, they all seem to share the purported goal of better informing decision-makers about the future implications of mining to the environment and society. Whether they do so, however, remains an open question. The purpose of this paper is to describe, compare and critically analyse five sustainability assessment and reporting frameworks used by, or proposed for, the mining industry. Based on literature reviews, the paper highlights the underlying assumptions of those frameworks and presents a diagram that helps to clarify aspects such as temporal orientation, geographical scope and quantity of indicators. Three out of the five frameworks follow a siloed approach to assessing mining sustainability, overlooking trade-offs and synergies among variables and sustainability dimensions. None of the frameworks seems to fully shed light on the problem of mineral scarcity and the effective legacy of mineral operations. The paper concludes by emphasizing the need to carefully consider the information generated by the analysed frameworks and suggest more fruitful ways to foster sustainability reports.

EM - Escola de Minas

Notícias

Navegar

Filtros

Configurações

Ordenar por

Resultados por página

Resultados da Pesquisa