The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Scoring corporate environmental and sustainability reports using GRI 2000, ISO 14031 and other criteria
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the extent to which current voluntary corporate environmental reports meet the requirements of two new sets of guidelines: (i) the Global Reporting Initiative GRI 2000 sustainability reporting guidelines and (ii) the ISO 14031 environmental performance evaluation standard. We converted them to comprehensiveness scoring systems then used them along with three existing comprehensiveness scoring systems to evaluate the 1999 reports of 40 of the largest global industrial companies. Many of the reports scored highly with the existing systems, but the GRI and ISO guidelines are much more detailed and comprehensive, and resulted in much lower scores. In particular, the economic and social topics that make up 42% of the potential GRI score and the environmental condition indicators that make up 22% of the ISO 14031 score were minimally addressed in all of the companies' environmental reports. Current reporting practices of the companies whose reports we examined here are well below the standards reflected in the GRI and ISO 14031 guidelines, even when the reports scored well with existing report scoring systems. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. and ERP Environment
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship
Porter, M. E., & Linde, C. V. D. (1995) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.9.4.97 · Cited by 13,365
WHY COMPANIES GO GREEN: A MODEL OF ECOLOGICAL RESPONSIVENESS.
Bansal, P., & Roth, K. (2000) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/1556363 · Cited by 4,020
CORPORATE SOCIAL PERFORMANCE AND ORGANIZATIONAL ATTRACTIVENESS TO PROSPECTIVE EMPLOYEES.
TURBAN, D. B., & GREENING, D. W. (1997) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/257057 · Cited by 3,149
Corporate Environmental Disclosure Strategies: Determinants, Costs and Benefits
Cormier, D., & Magnan, M. (1999) · Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance · doi:10.1177/0148558x9901400403 · Cited by 533
Cited by
Milne, M. J., & Gray, R. (2013) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1543-8 · Cited by 1,240
Ameer, R., & Othman, R. (2012) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-011-1063-y · Cited by 796
Integrative management of sustainability performance, measurement and reporting
Schaltegger, S., & Wagner, M. (2006) · International Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Performance Evaluation · doi:10.1504/ijaape.2006.010098 · Cited by 515
The state of sustainability reporting in universities
Lozano, R. (2011) · International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education · doi:10.1108/14676371111098311 · Cited by 494
Accounting for the Unaccountable: Biodiversity Reporting and Impression Management
Boiral, O. (2016) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-014-2497-9 · Cited by 384
Metadata
- Authors
- Morhardt, J. E., Baird, S., & Freeman, K.
- Venue
- Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-11-19
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 215-233
- ISSN
- 1535-3958 (ISSN-L)
- 1535-3966
- OpenAlex
- W2093403603
- Cited by
- 339
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 20.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Scoring corporate environmental and sustainability reports using GRI 2000, ISO 14031 and other criteria. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/csr.26
- The paper
- Morhardt, J. E., Baird, S., & Freeman, K. (2002). Scoring corporate environmental and sustainability reports using GRI 2000, ISO 14031 and other criteria. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.26
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.