Both UN Agenda 2030 and the Directive n. 2014/95/EU have recently promoted a marked improvement in sustainability disclosure, especially for larger companies or groups. Starting from this premise, we carried out an original study on the financial materiality of the E-S-G (environmental, social and governance) information of primary companies listed on major European indices in Belgium, France, Germany, Italy and Spain (BEL, CAC, DAX, FTSE-MIB, IBEX). Within the Stakeholder Theory and the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)–Corporate Social Perfomance (CSP) framework, our empirical analysis examined the impact of non-financial results (assessed through sustainability indicators) on economic (financial and market) performance in the timespan 2014–2017. We propose a different approach from previous studies, based on a PLS (Partial least squares)/SEM (Structural equation modeling) methodology together with the unprecedented consideration of “ESG” measures (Environmental, Social and Governance), either absolute (scores) or relative (extra-performance over industry sector). We find that, despite the absolute level of the individual ESG scores not being impactful, the “distance” from the industry average–normal figures (excess or abnormal ESG performance) is positively relevant, collaterally revisiting the notion of competitive advantage in sustainability terms. Corporate size is shown to be a significant background factor (as slack resources proxy). Social, environmental and governance responsibility (to all stakeholders) appear to be important as a competitive factor of the modern firm.

The present article deals with a new, modern business management paradigm founded on both the social and the environmental responsibility of firms intended as powerful instruments to match the issue of sustainability with corporate performance and value creation (thus evolving from the classical shareholder value to a new, more comprehensive, shared value view). The Directive 2013/34/EU required the disclosure of large enterprises and groups’ non-financial and diversity information. At the same time, a growing number of proactive companies that behave with real initiatives more compliant to the so-called Stakeholder Theory have become quite familiar to produce CSR and sustainability reports periodically to share with the community their relevant responsibility actions and achievements (3 P results or triple-bottom-line performance, as a for-profit, people, planet). Such a complex, behavioral, and informative approach follows the corporate governance setting and management strategy within the ethical domain (business ethics). In this perspective, we conduct a systematic research study on the economic literature that showed a focus on the possible relation between the responsible behavior/information and the economic/financial performance of firms, analyzing both the empirical findings and theoretical works significantly investigating the effect of sustainability indicators on financial and market results. According to the general studies, socially responsible policies can produce a positive impact on company performance by many advantages such as the reduction of operating costs and financial risks, an increase of efficiency and competitiveness, the improvement of the company’s reputation, and a related increase in consumer confidence; despite preceding studies pointed out that CSR investments and responsibility policies (representing the result of an agency conflict between managers and shareholders) would generate just an increase in costs and a consequent decline in the performance of companies. The consideration of the ESG (environmental, social, and governance) – which completes the CSR issue – and its new goals in the long run, even as a component of the holistic enterprise risk management system, finally enables us to reinterpret the fundamental competitive advantage of firms in a sustainability key. In particular, the environmental, social, and governance extra-performance over the industry may show to be more ‘value-relevant’ than the absolute ESG ratings itself. In conclusion, the social, environmental, and governance responsibilities (to all stakeholders) are building a set of dynamic capabilities and actions which reveal a new competitive (X) Factor of the modern corporation. Keywords: CSR, Environmental-Social-Governance, Economic Performance, Value Creation; Stakeholder Theory, Sustainability Disclosure.

We explore the interplay between the three missions of the modern university (teaching, research, and ‘third mission’: education, scientific productivity, and socio-economic interaction with non-academic environments), with a focus on the Italian public university. We execute a path analysis compliant with the isomorphic ‘one-size-fits-all’ university management framework, revisited under a stakeholder approach in light of students’ needs and expectations. We investigate the impact of the university’s knowledge-based missions on student outcome: student satisfaction and early job placement (data from nearly 400,000 respondents per year from 2011–2014) epitomizing both educational effectiveness/attractiveness and competitiveness. Although performances do not appear to all be correlated with each other, there is a positive relationship between research and third mission quality, and finally between the socio-economic mission and student satisfaction. This kind of mission-related evaluation can shape the institutional decisions (government policy and funding) and influence management priorities or behavior by revealing the way the quality of academic productivity and knowledge transfer to communities can create value from the point of view of the core stakeholder (university students). Our findings across missions offer a new perspective, while the innovative structural method helps to reconcile the three institutional goals in one big picture.

No abstract

Although excluded from the scope of IFRS 3, business combinations under common control (BCUCCs) are widespread transactions that take place all over the world in different forms, often as a reorganization or restructuring among related parties. These transactions occur when entities are ultimately - not transiently - controlled by the same party/ies before and after the combination (which is neither a capital market nor an arm's length transaction and devoid of economic substance: indeed, no change of control is entailed). The scarce and fragmentary literature, not to mention the lack of clear consensus on the topic, contributes to the prevailing concerns on how to account for BCUCCs. In this complex context, the purpose of this work is to assess the possible and various accounting methods and identify the most suitable, accredited and consistent techniques.