The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Sustainable or not sustainable? The role of the board of directors
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Environmental degradation, scarcity of resources, and societal issues have been reshaping the strategic agendas and governance mechanisms of many organizations. From a traditional perspective, the duty of the board of directors (BOD) has always been to the owners and investors of the firm. With the beginning of the 21st century, a social paradigm has emerged, reflecting broader directors' responsibilities in not only fulfilling shareholders' interests but also addressing stakeholders' needs. Both research and practice emphasize a metamorphosis of the board's task, which is not restricted to maximizing shareholder's value but also involves going out into the real world and tackling the emerging concerns regarding social and ecological practices. Following the premises of stakeholder theory, this study examines the association between the determinants of the board of directors and sustainable performance. Based on the Dow Jones Sustainability (DJSI) and Standard and Poor's Global Broad Market Indices (S&P Global BMI), with a matching sample of 478 multinational companies, the results reveal a significant and positive relationship between sustainability and the board's size, gender diversity, average age of directors and number of committees. From a cross-national perspective, the study confirms the existence of dissimilarities in the characteristics of the boards of directors of European (EU) and non-European (non-EU) firms vis-a-vis sustainable performance. The practical implications of the study can be useful for policymakers and governance systems in identifying the nature of the “green” board. In light of the managerial inference, the study delivers an explicit recommendation on the composition of the board of directors and stakeholder management to promote sustainability adoption.
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
Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes
Oliver, C. (1991) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1991.4279002 · Cited by 8,950
Healy, P. M., & Palepu, K. G. (2001) · Journal of Accounting and Economics · doi:10.1016/s0165-4101(01)00018-0 · Cited by 8,097
Clarkson, P. M., Li, Y., Richardson, G. D., & Vasvari, F. P. (2008) · Accounting, Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/j.aos.2007.05.003 · Cited by 3,570
Stakeholder Theory: The State of the Art
Parmar, B. L., Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Purnell, L., & de Colle, S. (2010) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2010.495581 · Cited by 2,755
The Eco-Efficiency Premium Puzzle
Derwall, J., Guenster, N., Bauer, R., & Koedijk, K. (2005) · Financial Analysts Journal · doi:10.2469/faj.v61.n2.2716 · Cited by 965
Hawn, O., Chatterji, A., & Mitchell, W. (2014) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2418300 · Cited by 339
Cited by
Uyar, A., Kilic, M., Koseoglu, M. A., Kuzey, C., & Karaman, A. S. (2020) · Tourism Management Perspectives · doi:10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100714 · Cited by 264
Metadata
- Authors
- Chams, N., & García-Blandón, J.
- Venue
- Journal of Cleaner Production
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-07
- Volume
- 226
- Pages
- 1067-1081
- ISSN
- 0959-6526 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2939543586
- Cited by
- 213
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 23.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Sustainable or not sustainable? The role of the board of directors. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.118
- The paper
- Chams, N., & García-Blandón, J. (2019). Sustainable or not sustainable? The role of the board of directors. Journal of Cleaner Production. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.118
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.