Biodiversity reporting: Comparing listed entities in the United Kingdom and South Africa

Purpose: This research conducts an analysis of biodiversity reporting among a sample of companies listed on the stock exchanges of South Africa (SA) and the United Kingdom (UK). The aim is to present empirical evidence on how organisations address and report on biodiversity-related matters to their...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Dino Da Mata, Timothy Lai, Dusan Ecim, Warren Maroun, Dannielle Cerbone
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: AOSIS 2025-01-01
Series:South African Journal of Business Management
Subjects:
Online Access:https://sajbm.org/index.php/sajbm/article/view/4713
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1823858208015384576
author Dino Da Mata
Timothy Lai
Dusan Ecim
Warren Maroun
Dannielle Cerbone
author_facet Dino Da Mata
Timothy Lai
Dusan Ecim
Warren Maroun
Dannielle Cerbone
author_sort Dino Da Mata
collection DOAJ
description Purpose: This research conducts an analysis of biodiversity reporting among a sample of companies listed on the stock exchanges of South Africa (SA) and the United Kingdom (UK). The aim is to present empirical evidence on how organisations address and report on biodiversity-related matters to their stakeholders and investors. Design/methodology/approach: A disclosure schematic is developed and applied to the selected companies using content analysis to analyse their biodiversity-related disclosures and draw comparisons between the two jurisdictions. Findings/results: Results indicate that South African organisations demonstrate a higher level of visibility in their biodiversity reporting when compared to their UK counterparts. The primary reason for this is because of a higher biodiversity ranking and hosting more biodiversity hotspots, which impact South African organisations. However, UK companies tend to provide more quantitative and valuation-based disclosures because of their advanced management information systems, professional standards network support and access to financial resources. In general, it is observed that biodiversity reporting is still in its nascent stage in both jurisdictions and offers limited insight into the understanding of biodiversity by organisations and their ability to incorporate direct and indirect impacts into their business models, risk assessment and strategy implementation. Practical implications: The disclosure schematic serves as a valuable tool for evaluating biodiversity reporting in different national contexts and provides a framework for companies developing biodiversity action plans. The findings help stakeholders assess organisations’ progress in achieving biodiversity objectives and integrating biodiversity considerations into business operations. Originality/value: This study makes two unique contributions to the literature. First, it provides one of the first comparative analyses of biodiversity reporting between a developing and developed economy, offering novel insights into how different jurisdictional contexts influence reporting practices. Second, it develops and applies a comprehensive disclosure schematic that enables evaluation of both symbolic and substantive biodiversity reporting approaches, advancing our understanding of how organisations integrate biodiversity considerations into their reporting and operations.
format Article
id doaj-art-8ac4118c9a614434b705a170cef6eb14
institution Kabale University
issn 2078-5585
2078-5976
language English
publishDate 2025-01-01
publisher AOSIS
record_format Article
series South African Journal of Business Management
spelling doaj-art-8ac4118c9a614434b705a170cef6eb142025-02-11T13:27:05ZengAOSISSouth African Journal of Business Management2078-55852078-59762025-01-01561e1e1710.4102/sajbm.v56i1.47131437Biodiversity reporting: Comparing listed entities in the United Kingdom and South AfricaDino Da Mata0Timothy Lai1Dusan Ecim2Warren Maroun3Dannielle Cerbone4School of Accounting, Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management, University of the Witwatersrand, JohannesburgSchool of Accounting, Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management, University of the Witwatersrand, JohannesburgSchool of Accounting, Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management, University of the Witwatersrand, JohannesburgSchool of Accounting, Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management, University of the Witwatersrand, JohannesburgSchool of Accounting, Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management, University of the Witwatersrand, JohannesburgPurpose: This research conducts an analysis of biodiversity reporting among a sample of companies listed on the stock exchanges of South Africa (SA) and the United Kingdom (UK). The aim is to present empirical evidence on how organisations address and report on biodiversity-related matters to their stakeholders and investors. Design/methodology/approach: A disclosure schematic is developed and applied to the selected companies using content analysis to analyse their biodiversity-related disclosures and draw comparisons between the two jurisdictions. Findings/results: Results indicate that South African organisations demonstrate a higher level of visibility in their biodiversity reporting when compared to their UK counterparts. The primary reason for this is because of a higher biodiversity ranking and hosting more biodiversity hotspots, which impact South African organisations. However, UK companies tend to provide more quantitative and valuation-based disclosures because of their advanced management information systems, professional standards network support and access to financial resources. In general, it is observed that biodiversity reporting is still in its nascent stage in both jurisdictions and offers limited insight into the understanding of biodiversity by organisations and their ability to incorporate direct and indirect impacts into their business models, risk assessment and strategy implementation. Practical implications: The disclosure schematic serves as a valuable tool for evaluating biodiversity reporting in different national contexts and provides a framework for companies developing biodiversity action plans. The findings help stakeholders assess organisations’ progress in achieving biodiversity objectives and integrating biodiversity considerations into business operations. Originality/value: This study makes two unique contributions to the literature. First, it provides one of the first comparative analyses of biodiversity reporting between a developing and developed economy, offering novel insights into how different jurisdictional contexts influence reporting practices. Second, it develops and applies a comprehensive disclosure schematic that enables evaluation of both symbolic and substantive biodiversity reporting approaches, advancing our understanding of how organisations integrate biodiversity considerations into their reporting and operations.https://sajbm.org/index.php/sajbm/article/view/4713biodiversitynature-related disclosuressustainability reportingsouth africaunited kingdom
spellingShingle Dino Da Mata
Timothy Lai
Dusan Ecim
Warren Maroun
Dannielle Cerbone
Biodiversity reporting: Comparing listed entities in the United Kingdom and South Africa
South African Journal of Business Management
biodiversity
nature-related disclosures
sustainability reporting
south africa
united kingdom
title Biodiversity reporting: Comparing listed entities in the United Kingdom and South Africa
title_full Biodiversity reporting: Comparing listed entities in the United Kingdom and South Africa
title_fullStr Biodiversity reporting: Comparing listed entities in the United Kingdom and South Africa
title_full_unstemmed Biodiversity reporting: Comparing listed entities in the United Kingdom and South Africa
title_short Biodiversity reporting: Comparing listed entities in the United Kingdom and South Africa
title_sort biodiversity reporting comparing listed entities in the united kingdom and south africa
topic biodiversity
nature-related disclosures
sustainability reporting
south africa
united kingdom
url https://sajbm.org/index.php/sajbm/article/view/4713
work_keys_str_mv AT dinodamata biodiversityreportingcomparinglistedentitiesintheunitedkingdomandsouthafrica
AT timothylai biodiversityreportingcomparinglistedentitiesintheunitedkingdomandsouthafrica
AT dusanecim biodiversityreportingcomparinglistedentitiesintheunitedkingdomandsouthafrica
AT warrenmaroun biodiversityreportingcomparinglistedentitiesintheunitedkingdomandsouthafrica
AT danniellecerbone biodiversityreportingcomparinglistedentitiesintheunitedkingdomandsouthafrica