No abstract

No abstract

This paper discusses the measurement and assessment of corporate sustainability by a composite indicator. The aim of the paper is a construction of a composite indicator "Index corporate sustainability" (ICS). A tool for measuring and assessing corporate sustainability is an appropriately designed model called the "Sustainable Environmental, Social, Governance and Economic Model (SEESG Model)". The composite indicator ICS integrates 5 financial (economic) and 14 non-financial, environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) performance indicators Iji, which are determined in a stepwise fashion from a basic set of performance indicators using the principal component analysis (PCA) modelling. The composite indicator ICS is one of the possible ways to create a tool for measuring and assessing corporate sustainability that allows for the assessment of companies by a set of financial and non-financial indicators in various areas of their performance, thus enabling a detailed analysis and determination of the impact of various performance areas and factors in complex corporate performance. An important characteristic of the composite indicator is the possibility to easily make comparisons and rankings of companies in a particular sector, and estimate whether they are heading towards sustainability. The use of benchmarking for company-to-company comparisons makes it possible to interpret summary information and to quantify differences in the performance of individual companies using graphic visualization. For this reason, ICS can be offered as a consistent and flexible benchmarking for owners, managers and investors. Using this indicator, they can incorporate sustainability into their decision-making processes, and achieve economic growth and ensure protection of the environment and social values.

A wide range of climate change mitigation policies have been developed around the world and these policies have become one of the major concerns, however there is still debate among scientists about what are the main external benefits and how to account for them and prepare effective climate change mitigation policies that might be widely accepted by society in general. One of the main ways to assess external benefit of climate change mitigation in energy sector is to conduct Willingness to Pay (WTP) assessments for climate change mitigation options by households. There are many studies on WTP assessment for climate stability conducted in recent years. The paper surveys the existing literature on WTP for climate change mitigation policy in the energy sector. The aim of the paper is to identify the common variables across a varied set of WTP studies in order to establish a basis for comparison. The key variables selected for analysis of WTP studies for climate change mitigation in energy sector addressed in the paper are: the WTP assessment methods; the main attributes used for comparing alternatives in WTP studies, targeted climate change mitigation policies in energy sector, mathematical model used to estimate WTP, the main socio-demographic factors having impact on WTP for climate change mitigation policies. The analysis of WTP studies for climate change mitigation is grouped in two areas: renewables and energy efficiency measures in households. The paper provides analytical structure for future studies to evaluate the effects of variation in key comparative elements upon WTP.

According to human capital theory the higher education is considered as an investment decision. In order to be beneficial from economic point of view and in comparison with other investment opportunities, investment in education should give a higher rate of return on investment. Knowledge about the return on investment can help to make competent decisions, which would have an economic benefit in the future. Evaluating the investment in human capital (education) as an individual decision, since the vast majority of individuals for gained education should pay themselves and only a part of the price shall be covered by the state, the rate of return on investment becomes an increasingly important evaluation criterion. Making an investment decision it is very important to allocate resources properly. For the individual the costs of this investment include poor wages and direct costs. It can be assumed that individuals with higher education will be paid more than the others without education. Thus, the investment in higher education (human capital) is useful as long as there is a positive difference between marginal benefit and marginal costs. Higher education is a guarantee of a higher life quality. But, in order to ensure the higher life quality, such main factors as individual skills and labour productivity should be eximined. Investment in human and physical capital doesn't only promote the growth of labour market. The investment such as lower inflation rates and freer trade (lower limits) also stimulates the economic growth. The ability to absorb easily technological change increases labour productivity and efficiency. Education, lifelong learning and health are very important investment in human capital. The foreign scientists performed researches and proved that income growth of individuals depends on the level or degree of education the individual has gained. Rate of return on investment in human capital is positive even after direct and indirect costs estimation. The individuals with higher education have higher incomes in comparison with individuals with college education. Education is one of the most important development factors of the modern knowledge based economy. However, educational and scientific development requires the long-term and huge investment. This investment also should be assessed from the social aspect. On the one hand investment in human capital should be stimulated; on the other aspect it should assess their effectiveness. As the investment in human capital is a complex problem from both practical and scientific aspect, so the practice of such evaluation and applied methods do not give an unambiguous answer. It is very important to evaluate the effectiveness of this investment, to estimate the detention of the time, the money flows: incomes (revenues) and outcomes (expenditures).Keywords: human capital, investment in human capital, rate of return on investment, internal rate of return (IRR), shortperiod return on revenue.