Exploring the use of online corporate sustainability information

Abstract

Whilst the supply, exclusivity and prominence of online corporate sustainability information has increased in recent years, comparatively little is known about what information is used by whom. This paper explores which user groups access online corporate sustainability information, and assesses the relative use of sustainability reports and other forms of social and environmental information disseminated on corporate Websites. To collect the necessary empirical data, the paper analyses 4,652,471 successful requests for information made by the users of 10 UK FTSE 350 corporate Websites.

Keywords:

• Internet reporting
• Sustainability
• Corporate social responsibility

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge the comments of journal reviewers and the financial support of the UK Economic and Social Science Research Council (E-Society grant number RES-335-25-0038).

Notes

1 Although derived from the United Nations definition of sustainable development (WCED, 1987), the term has evolved from prior terminology such as corporate social responsibility or triple bottom line reporting to describe forms of social and environmental accounting. For a discussion of the development of the term, sustainability, and a critique of its appropriateness, see O’Dwyer and Owen (2005), Lamberton (2005), Buhr (2007), and Milne and Gray (2007).

2 The term, online reporting, refers to the communication of information via the World Wide Web and the wider Internet.

3 See also Brown (2007) and Jones (1999).

4 For example, see Gray et al. (1995), Mathews (2004), and Owen et al. (2000).

5 Websites used to disseminate independent sustainability information on particular companies in the form of ‘counter’, ‘shadow’ or ‘silent’ accounts (see for example, Dey, 2007).

6 Prior research has shown that size is positively related to the volume of sustainability reporting (for example, see Adams et al., 1998; Cormier et al., 2005).

7 Due to the commercial sensitivity of corporate Web server logs, our conditions of data access prevent the disclosure of company names.

8 A ‘visit’ or ‘session’ is commonly defined as a series of information requests made within 30 min of each other (Rowbottom, Allam, & Lymer, 2005; Zawitz, 1998).

9 For example, automated agents such as ‘Robots’, ‘Spiders’ and ‘Pushed Pages’.

10 The data will be subject to noise if Web pages have been mistakenly requested by users.

11 Adams and Frost (2004) find that 41% of surveyed firms track individual users whilst 77% identified the number of Website visitors.

12 This sample period covers the 2003 and 2004 year ends and attempts to cover a full ‘reporting cycle’. During this time, no specific legislation required UK companies to provide sustainability information.

13 No clear distinction is made between competitors, customers and suppliers where competitors were often collaborators in some markets or projects, e.g. in banking syndication or joint ventures.

14 No separation is made between professional investors and creditors, as requests frequently originated from large financial services organisations providing banking, broking, analysis and asset management.

15 Professional investors have been found to rely on private disclosure channels rather than public disclosures to collect corporate information (see for example, Holland, 2004; Solomon & Solomon, 2006).

16 Web pages are classified by their placement, name/description and the nature of information disclosed. The categories are informed by observed online reporting practice (for example, KPMG, 2005; Lymer et al., 1999) and by the involvement of the authors in projects enabling them to observe contemporary disclosures, including short listing Websites for ‘sustainability’ and other awards on behalf of UK representative bodies. Whilst allocations introduce some ‘noise’ into the analysis, classifications were undertaken separately by three researchers, and the results were presented to a selection of reporting companies to assess their validity and conformity to company expectations. The allocations assume users are motivated to request information primarily by the name of the page/hyperlink.