大減速？バリューチェーン視点から見たサステナビリティ報告境界の変化軌跡 1990–2020
The great slowdown? Trajectories of sustainability reporting boundary change from a value chain perspective 1990–2020 (原題)
Emelie Havemo, Jakob Rehme
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
スウェーデンの鉄鋼関連企業の単一バリューチェーンを対象に、1990〜2020年のサステナビリティ報告境界の変化を分析。境界は大きく拡大したが2010〜2020年は鈍化し、拡張は主に上流に限定され下流・社会面には及ばなかった。完全なバリューチェーン視点を用いた企業は皆無で、企業中心の報告ロジックが依然支配的であることを示す。
English
Analyzing a single Swedish steel-adjacent value chain across 1990–2020, the study finds sustainability reporting boundaries expanded substantially but slowed between 2010 and 2020, with extensions mainly upstream. No firm adopted a holistic full value-chain perspective, revealing persistent firm-centric reporting logic. The authors propose a framework distinguishing scope and depth of boundaries.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
SSBJ・Scope 3開示が本格化する日本では、バリューチェーン全体への境界拡張が進まない構造的要因を示す貴重な長期実証。企業の開示設計や投資家対話の論点整理に資する。
In the global GX context
Directly informs the ISSB/CSRD push toward value-chain and Scope 3 disclosure, empirically showing that boundary expansion stalls without institutional pressure. Useful evidence for global debates on why firm-centric reporting persists.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:報告境界のscope/depthフレームワークと長期軌跡の実証は、開示研究の方法論的参照点になる。
🏢実務担当者:バリューチェーン開示の現実的限界を理解し、Scope 3対応の優先順位設計に活用できる。
🏛政策担当者:バリューチェーン開示義務化が企業行動をどこまで変えるか、制度設計の根拠として参照可能。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Purpose As sustainability has become an increasingly urgent and critical challenge, firms have faced growing expectations to broaden the scope of accountability by extending their sustainability reporting boundaries. This article analyses sustainability boundary change from a value chain perspective across different phases of sustainability reporting. Design/methodology/approach We analysed sustainability boundaries, i.e. the extent to which a firm accounts for impacts across its own operations and wider value chain, in a single value chain of steel-adjacent firms in Sweden, using a firm- and value chain-level assessment framework developed in the article. Reports from 1990, 2000, 2010 and 2020 were analysed qualitatively and quantitatively to identify boundary trajectories based on an institutional theory framing. Findings Boundaries expanded significantly between 1990 and 2020; however, this trajectory slowed between 2010 and 2020 as sustainability reporting became stabilised as a practice, with extensions primarily occurring upstream rather than downstream or societally. No firms were found to use holistic reporting by including a full value chain perspective. Research limitations/implications Firm-centric reporting is shown to be the dominant approach over time; this sits in tension with mounting expectations to report on sustainability topics more broadly. It is suggested that future studies explore other institutional contexts, countries and value chain configurations to support and expand on the findings. Studies on a more granular level than the 10-year increments used in this study could also reveal nuances of boundary extension over time. Originality/value We distinguish between scope and depth, two dimensions of sustainability boundaries, to develop a framework of boundary approaches: firm-limited reporting, insular reporting, value chain aware reporting and holistic reporting. Based on these, we identify opportunities and challenges for adopting a value chain perspective in sustainability reporting, noting that, while the number of topics (i.e. depth) can be increased by using reporting frameworks like Global Reporting Initiative, incorporating topics at the value chain level (i.e. scope) remains a key challenge for firms due to the firm-centric logic used in both financial and sustainability reporting.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1108/aaaj-01-2024-6861first seen 2026-10-30 05:05:55 · last seen 2026-11-06 05:02:07
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。