Door Katherine Miles Hill

De bedrijfs leiders achter veel van de belangrijke merken van de wereld zijn lang overtuigd van de voordelen van duurzaamheid rapportering geweest.

80% van de hoogste 15 Van de de merkenkwestie van de Handelsweek globale de duurzaamheidsrapporten die op de Globale Duurzaamheid worden gebaseerd die van het Initiatief van de Rapportering Richtlijnen meldt, en meer dan 1000 organisaties hebben hun vrijwillige goedkeuring van de over de hele wereld Richtlijnen verklaard. Het geval is verschillend in China waar de meerderheid van bedrijven niet het concept heeft vernomen, zijn voordelen niet, begrepen en zeker nog niet van de Richtlijnen GRI op de hoogte is. Maar de dingen veranderen. China, beroemd voor zijn uitvoer, heeft onlangs het idee ingevoerd.

De rapportering van de duurzaamheid is een vrij nieuw begrip voor ondernemingen. Het wordt soms ook genoemd drievoudige bodemlijn, niet-financiële, of collectieve sociale verantwoordelijkheid rapporterend en het verwijst naar organisaties die formeel informatie over hun sociale, milieu en economische prestaties onthullen.

Dit type van rapportering kwam in de recente jaren '90 in de V.S. en Europa, in antwoord op eisen te voorschijn door externe bewaarders (zoals gemeenschappen, niet-gouvernementele organisaties, en consumenten) voor grotere verantwoordingsplicht en transparantie door bedrijven op kwesties die hen beïnvloeden. Tezelfdertijd begonnen de interne krachten (zoals werknemers, investeerders, hoger beheer) binnen organisaties ook de waarde van duurzaamheid rapportering en het bedrijfsgeval achter het te erkennen. Meer onlangs heeft het globale beleidsdebat rond duurzaamheidskwesties de behoefte aan bedrijven versterkt om duurzaamheid te gebruiken rapporterend om hun vooruitgang mee te delen naar het verminderen van hun sociale, economische en milieueffecten, en het vernieuwen rond nieuwe mogelijkheden die door een verplichting aan een duurzamere toekomst worden geboden.

While the concept of sustainability reporting surfaced 10 years ago, in China sustainability reporting is in its infancy but steadily growing. A study on sustainability reporting in China by SynTao found that 18 enterprises published reports in 2006, three times the number published in 2005. External stakeholders including foreign investors have been pressuring companies to disclose their sustainability performance. Within China, the Central Development and Reform Committee and the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock exchanges have urged state owned enterprises and listed companies to publish a sustainability report.

The latest environment incidents and product safety scandals involving Chinese companies have also shifted the attention within the business community to begin managing these risks. They are beginning to identify both internal and external benefits of moving towards sustainable business models and reporting is an important element of these newly emerging management systems.

More companies recognize that the process of producing reports enables them to internally identify operational shortcomings, inefficiencies, and potential risks, which is the first step towards their resolution and mitigation. Gathering sustainability information appeals to budget holders who look to save money in order to deliver shareholder value. Information gathered through this process also facilitates the benchmarking of company performance. This information can be used as an internal management tool, but also externally to bring brand and reputation benefits.

Risk disclosure and transparency builds customer confidence in a company’s brand, products and services. It gives companies a competitive edge - some businesses even attribute increases in their market share and increased profits to their approach to sustainability. It can also improve a company’s access to capital because the investment community trusts companies who openly present sustainability information. While other companies in China are involved in product recalls due to safety concerns, promoting sustainable credentials is a way for other companies to differentiate their business proposition. In the global market place sustainability reporting is a way to convince consumers, regulators and investors that Chinese companies uphold the same values as their US and European counterparts. It can be a tool to fix the damaged “Made in China” brand.

As the benefits of sustainability reporting have become more widely recognized, and with growing numbers of reporting companies worldwide, a framework for reporting has become a necessity. The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), a multi stakeholder network and a collaborating centre of the United Nations Environment Programme, has pioneered a global sustainability reporting framework. At the heart of the Framework lie the Sustainability Reporting Guidelines – first issued in 2000, then 2002, and finally the third iteration (G3 Guidelines) were released in 2006. These Guidelines facilitate transparency and comparability among companies that use it.

In addition, to the universally applicable core Guidelines the framework contains Sector Supplements which contain specialized reporting guidance for companies in various industry sectors – such as mining and metals, automotive, and retail and apparel, in response to the unique sustainability challenges they face. To date more than 1000 organizations, including many of the worlds leading brands, have declared their voluntary adoption of the Guidelines. Consequently the G3 Guidelines have become the de facto global standard for reporting.

But who gives GRI the authority to set these standards? The Guidelines and Sector Supplements are produced through a consensus-seeking process with stakeholders drawn globally from business, civil society, labor, and professional institutions. So it is not GRI itself who sets the standards, rather a cross section of global stakeholders who share the vision that reporting on economic, environmental, and social performance by all organizations should become as routine and comparable as financial reporting. GRI’s role is as a convener of this process. GRI facilitates consensus among geographically and sector representative groups with various levels of reporting expertise. These groups convene to develop the various elements of the reporting framework. Their work also must undergo a public comment process, and eventually be approved by the various governance bodies, including the Board of Directors and the Technical Advisory Committee, that oversee the GRI and its due process.

The resultant G3 Guidelines are a free global public good and have been translated into many languages including Mandarin. The G3 Guidelines are exactly that, guidelines to help organizations identify which indicators they should be reporting on. For companies new to reporting, the best place to start is seeing whether data is already being collected on any of the recommended indicators. Initially, prioritize which indicators meet the disclosure requirements demanded by stakeholders interested and most relevant to the sector.

It is evident that there is a change in the thinking about how business is conducted in China. Just as in other parts of the world, as businesses recognize the benefits of disclosing their sustainability performance especially to strengthen the “Made in China” brand; reporting is only going to gain in popularity in the country. As companies voluntarily start to report this information, the GRI G3 Guidelines provide the best place to begin this process.

The G3 Guidelines can be accessed free of charge in English and Mandarin, as well as other languages, via the GRI web portal www.globalreporting.org. Hard copies of the G3 Guidelines can also be ordered on line at cost price plus postage and packing.

Katherine Miles Hill, Communications Coordinator at Global Reporting Initiative