Desarrollo de informes de sostenibilidad para explotaciones agropecuarias del País Vasco a través del método Delphi
Development of sustainability reports for farming operations in the Basque Country using the Delphi method
Resumen
En las últimas décadas, la divulgación de informes de sostenibilidad ha aumentado significativamente en todo el mundo. La mayoría de organizaciones que publican estas memorias son grandes empresas y pertenecen al sector secundario y terciario. Este trabajo, basándose en la teoría de los stakeholders, intenta contribuir a la elaboración de informes de sostenibilidad específicamente diseñados para explotaciones agropecuarias. Utiliza la metodología de Delphi para recabar información de los diferentes actores que representan a su vez diversos grupos de agentes en el seno de las organizaciones involucradas. Las conclusiones indican una diferencia en las evaluaciones de los 3 subgrupos de expertos que conforman el panel.
Descargas
Citas
[Alfsen and Bye, 1990] K.H. Alfsen, T. Bye. Norwegian experience in natural resource accounting. Development, 3 (1990), pp. 119-130
[Alfsen and Greaker, 2007] K.H. Alfsen, M. Greaker. From natural resource and environmental accounting to construction of indicators for sustainable development. Ecological Economics, 61 (2007), pp. 600-610
[Altman, 1997] B.W. Altman. Defining community of stakeholder and community stakeholder management: A theory elaboration study. Research Stakeholder Theory 1997–1998: The Sloan Foundation Minigrant Project, The Clarkson Centre For Business Ethics, University of Toronto, (1997)
[Alvarez Etxeberria, 2010] I. Alvarez Etxeberria. Las memorias de sostenibilidad: un instrumento para la gestión de la sostenibilidad. Revista Española de Financiación y Contabilidad, 38 (2010), pp. 677-697
[Archel and Husillos, 2009] P. Archel, J. Husillos. Últimos desarrollos sobre RSC en España: ¿un avance hacia la sostenibilidad?. CIRIEC España, 65 (2009), pp. 59-84
[Azapagic, 2004] A. Azapagic. Developing a framework for sustainable development indicators for mining and mineral industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 12 (2004), pp. 639-662
[Azapagic and Stichnothe, 2009] A. Azapagic, H. Stichnothe. A life cycle approach to measuring sustainability. Chemistry Today, 27 (2009), pp. 44-46
[Basque Government, 2002] Basque Government. (2002). La Estrategia Ambiental Vasca de Desarrollo Sostenible 2002–2020. Sociedad Pública de Gestión Ambiental IHOBE, available from www.euskadi.net/contenidos/plan_programa_proyecto/eavds_pma/es_9688/adjuntos/pma0206.pdf [accessed 09.12.13].
[Bills and Gross, 2005] N. Bills, D. Gross. Sustaining multifunctional agricultural landscapes: comparing stakeholder perspectives in New York (US) and England (UK). Land Use Policy, 22 (2005), pp. 313-321
[Blacconiere and Patten, 1994] W.G. Blacconiere, D.M. Patten. Environmental disclosures, regulatory costs and changes in firm value. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 18 (1994), pp. 357-377
[Boiral, 2013] O. Boiral. Sustainability reports as simulacra?. A counter-account of A and A+ GRI reports. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 26 (2013), pp. 1036-1071 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12226
[Burrit and Schaltegger, 2010] R.L. Burrit, S. Schaltegger. Sustainability accounting and reporting: fad or trend?. Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal, 23 (2010), pp. 829-846
[Cañibano, 2002] L. Cañibano. Proyecto Meritum: Directrices para la gestión y difusión de información sobre intangibles. Fundación Airtel, (2002)
[Cañibano and Alberto, 2008] L. Cañibano, F. Alberto. El control institucional de la información financiera: aplicación de un estudio DELPHI. Revista Española de Financiación y Contabilidad, XXXVII (2008), pp. 795-829
[Chaffin and Talley, 1980] W. Chaffin, W. Talley. Individual stability in Delphi studies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 16 (1980), pp. 67-73
[Charkham, 1994] J. Charkham. Keeping good company: A study of corporate governance in five countries. Claredon, (1994)
[Clarkson, 1995] M.B.E. Clarkson. A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20 (1995), pp. 92-117
[Correa and Moneva, 2011] M.C. Correa, J.M. Moneva. Special issue on ‘social responsibility accounting and reporting in times of sustainability downturn/crisis. Spanish Accounting Review, 14 (2011), pp. 187-211
[Criado et al., 2008] I. Criado, M. Fernández, F.J. Husillos, C. Larrinaga. Compliance with mandatory environmental reporting in financial statements: The case of Spain (2001–2003). Journal of Business Ethics, 79 (2008), pp. 246-272
[Dajani et al., 1979] J.S. Dajani, M.Z. Sincoff, W.K. Talley. Stability and agreement criteria for the termination of Delphi studies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 13 (1979), pp. 83-90
[Deegan et al., 2002] C. Deegan, M. Ranking, J. Tobin. An examination of the corporate social and environmental disclosures of BHP from 1983–1977. A test of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 15 (2002), pp. 312-343
[Donaldson and Preston, 1995] T. Donaldson, L.E. Preston. The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20 (1995), pp. 65-91
[EUSTAT, 2013] EUSTAT. (2013). PIB y su distribución en Euskadi. EUSTAT, available from www.eustat.es/estadisticas/tema_477/opt_0/ti_PIB_y../temas.html.[accessed 10.12.13].
[Freedman and Patten, 2004] M. Freedman, D.M. Patten. Evidence on the pernicious effect of financial report environmental disclosure. Accounting Forum, 28 (2004), pp. 27-41
[Freeman, 1984] R.E. Freeman. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman, (1984)
[Galanc and Mikus, 1986] T. Galanc, J. Mikus. The choice of an optimum group of experts. Technical Forecasting and Social Change, 30 (1986), pp. 245-250
[Global Reporting Initiative, 2002] Global Reporting Initiative. (2002). Sustainability reporting guidelines [online]. Available from http://www.globalreporting.org [accessed 13.07.11]
[Gray, 2002] R. Gray. The social accounting project and accounting organizations and society privileging engagement, imaginings, new accountings and pragmatism over critique?. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 27 (2002), pp. 687-708
[Gray et al., 1995] R.H. Gray, R. Kouhy, S. Lavers. Corporate social and environmental reporting: a review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 8 (1995), pp. 47-77
[Jones, 1995] T.M. Jones. Instrumental Stakeholders theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review, 20 (1995), pp. 404-437
[KPMG, 2008] KPMG. International survey of corporate responsibility reporting. KPMG, (2008)
[Lamberton, 2005] G. Lamberton. Sustainable sufficiency – An internally consistent version of sustainability. Sustainable Development, 13 (2005), pp. 53-68
[Landeta, 1999] Landeta. El método Delhi: Una técnica de previsión para la incertidumbre. Ariel, (1999)
[Larrinaga et al., 2002] C. Larrinaga, J.M. Moneva, F. Llena, F. Carrasco, C. Correa. Accountability and accounting regulation: The case of the Spanish environmental disclosure standard. European Accounting Review, 11 (2002), pp. 723-740
[Linstone and Turoff, 2002] Linstone, H. A., & Turoff, M. (2002). The Delphi Method: Techniques and applications [online]. Available from http://www.is.njit.edu/pubs/delphibook [accessed 30.06.11]
[Llena et al., 2007] F. Llena, J.M. Moneva, B. Hernández. Environmental Disclosure and compulsory accounting standards: The case of Spanish annual reports. Business Strategy and the Environment, 16 (2007), pp. 50-63
[MacCarthy and Atthirawong, 2003] B.L. MacCarthy, W. Atthirawong. Factors affecting location decisions in international operations: A Delphi study. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 23 (2003), pp. 794-818 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000000599
[Maignan and Ferrel, 2000] I. Maignan, O.C. Ferrel. Measuring corporate citizenship in two countries: The case of United States and France. Journal of Business Ethics, 23 (2000), pp. 283-297
[Milne and Gray, 2007] M.J. Milne, R. Gray. Future prospects for corporate sustainability reporting. Sustainability, accounting and accountability, pp. 184-208
[Mudd, 2008] G.M. Mudd. Sustainability reporting and water resource: A preliminary assessment of embodied water and sustainable mining. Mine Water Environment, 27 (2008), pp. 136-144
[Novakowski and Wellar, 2008] N. Novakowski, B. Wellar. Using the Delphi technique in normative planning research: Methodological design considerations. Environment and Planning A, 40 (2008), pp. 1485-1500
[Okoli and Pawlowski, 2004] C. Okoli, S. Pawlowski. The Delphi method as a research tool: An example, design considerations and applications. Information and Management, 42 (2004), pp. 15-29
[Oliver, 2002] I. Oliver. An expert panel-based approach to the assessment of vegetation condition within the context of biodiversity conservation Stage 1: the identification of condition indicators. Ecological Indicator, 2 (2002), pp. 223-237
[Parker, 2005] L.D. Parker. Social and environmental accountability research: A view from the commentary box. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 18 (2005), pp. 842-860
[Patten and Crampton, 2004] D.M. Patten, W. Crampton. Legitimacy and the Internet: An examination of corporate web page environmental disclosures. Advances in Environmental Accounting and Management, 2 (2004), pp. 31-57
[Regier, 1986] W. Regier. Directions in Delphi developments: dissertations and their quality. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 29 (1986), pp. 195-204
[Richey et al., 1985] J. Richey, B. Mar, R. Horner. The Delphi technique in environmental assessment: Implementation and effectiveness. Journal of Environmental Management, 21 (1985), pp. 135-146
[Rowe and Wright, 1999] G. Rowe, G. Wright. The Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: issues and analysis. International Journal of Forecasting, 15 (1999), pp. 353-375
[Sánchez et al., 1999] P. Sánchez, C. Caminade, C. Escobar. En busca de una teoría sobre la medición y gestión de los intangibles en la empresa: Una aproximación metodológica. Revista Vasca de Economía Ekonomiaz, 45 (1999), pp. 188-213
[Schaltegger and Wagner, 2006] S. Schaltegger, M. Wagner. Integrative management of sustainability performance measurement and reporting. Internal Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Performance Evaluation, 3 (2006), pp. 1-19
[Shameek and Cohen, 1997] K. Shameek, M. Cohen. Information as regulation: The effect of community right-to-know laws on toxic emissions. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 32 (1997), pp. 109-124
[Sharma and Gupta, 1993] H. Sharma, A. Gupta. Present and future status of system waste: a national-level Delphi in India. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 44 (1993), pp. 199-218
[Svendsen and Wheeler, 2003] A. Svendsen, D. Wheeler. A model relationship. Ca Magazine, (2003),
[Swanson, 1999] D.L. Swanson. Towards an integrative theory of business and society: A research strategy for corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 24 (1999), pp. 506-521
[Unerman, 2000] J. Unerman. Reflections on quantification in corporate social reporting content analysis. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 13 (2000), pp. 667-680
[Unerman et al., 2007] J. Unerman, J. Bebbington, B. O¿Dwyer. Sustainability, Accounting and Accountability. Routledge, (2007)
[Veleva et al., 2001a] V. Veleva, J. Bailey, N. Jurczyk. Using sustainable production indicators to measure progress in ISO 14001, EHS system, and EPA achievement track. Corporate Environmental Strategy, 8 (2001), pp. 326-338
[Veleva et al., 2001b] V. Veleva, M. Hart, T. Greiner, C. Crumbley. Indicators of sustainable production. Journal of Cleaner Production, 9 (2001), pp. 447-452
[Veleva et al., 2003] V. Veleva, M. Hart, T. Greiner, C. Crumbley. Indicators for measuring environmental sustainability: A case study of the pharmaceutical industry. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 10 (2003), pp. 107-119
[Verdeyen et al., 2004] V. Verdeyen, J. Put, V. Buggenhout. A social stakeholder model. International Journal of Social Welfare, 13 (2004), pp. 325-331
[Vergragt and Szejnwald, 2007] P.J. Vergragt, H.B. Szejnwald. Sustainable mobility: From technological innovation to societal learning. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15 (2007), pp. 1104-1115
[Wheeler and Sillanpaa, 1998] D. Wheeler, M. Sillanpaa. Including the stakeholders: The business case. Long Range Planning, 31 (1998), pp. 201-210
[Wiggering et al., 2006] H. Wiggering, C. Dalchow, M. Glemnitz, K. Helming, K. Müller, A. Schultz, U. Stachow, P. Zander. Indicators for multifunctional land use – Linking socio-economic requirements with landscape potentials. Ecological Indicators, (2006), pp. 238-249
Las obras que se publican en esta revista están sujetas a los siguientes términos:
1. Ediciones de la Universidad de Murcia (EDITUM) y ASEPUC conservan los derechos patrimoniales (copyright) de las obras publicadas, y favorece y permite la reutilización de las mismas bajo la licencia de uso indicada en el punto 2.
2. Las obras se publican en la edición electrónica de la revista bajo una licencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 4.0 Internacional. Permite copiar, distribuir e incluir el artículo en un trabajo colectivo (por ejemplo, una antología), siempre y cuando no exista una finalidad comercial, no se altere ni modifique el artículo y se cite apropiadamente el trabajo original. Esta revista no tiene tarifa por la publicación Open Access. ASEPUC y EDITUM financian los costes de producción y publicación de los manuscritos.
3. Condiciones de auto-archivo. Se permite y se anima a los autores a difundir electrónicamente la versión publicada de sus obras, ya que favorece su circulación y difusión y con ello un posible aumento en su citación y alcance entre la comunidad académica.
