University Social Responsibility Reporting in Alignment with Sustainability Development Goals: A Conceptual Framework
Abstract
Universities must consider the greenhouse gas effect, the biggest component of global warming due to a large amount of electrical energy utilization. Not to mention the use of paper and water, which are irreplaceable resources in relatively significant quantities. Therefore, universities must carry out social responsibility as a form of concern for sustainability. This study aims to design a conceptual framework for the University Sustainability Report (USRR), which aligns with the SDGs. The first thing to do is determine materiality based on the 2016 and 2021 GRI Standard concepts for specific disclosures. The results of the study found that the topics were specific to the economical category - indirect economic impacts (SDGs 1 and 11); environmental category – electricity consumption (SDGs 7 and 12); while the social categories – employee rights (SDGs 16), contributions and donations (SDGs 1), customer satisfaction and service (SDGs 17), welfare and work safety (SDGs 3); training and development (SDGs 4 and 16); and equal opportunities (SDGs 5 and 10). General disclosure refers to SEOJK 16/2021, namely the sustainability strategy; university profile; explanation of the highest leadership, and university governance. The USRR framework is based on materiality findings involving stakeholders.
Downloads
References
Bellantuono, N., Pontrandolfo, P., & Scozzi, B. (2016). Capturing the Stakeholders’ View in Sustainability Reporting: A Novel Approach. MDPI Sustainability Journal.
Bertelsmann Stiftung and Sustainable Development Solutions Network. (2018). Global Responsibilties: Implementing the Goals. SDG Index and Dashboards 2018. Diakses dari https://www.sdgindex.org/reports/sdg-index-and-dashboards-2018/
Deegan, C. (2004). Financial Accounting Theory. McGrow-Hill Book Company; Sidney.
Donaldson, T. & Preston, L.E. (1995). The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review 20: 65-91.
Freeman, R.E. (1984). Strategic Management. A stakeholder approach. Pitman: Boston.
Gray, R., Kouhy, R., & Lavers, S. (1995). Constructing A Research Database of Social and Environmental Reporting by UK Companies. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Accountability. Vol. 8, pp. 47-77.
Hąbek, Patrycja & Radosław Wolniak. (2015). Assessing the quality of corporate social responsibility reports: the case of reporting practices in selected European Union member states. Silesia University of Technology: Poland.
Jones, S., G. Frost, J. Loftus, and S. van der Laan. (2007). An Empirical Examination of the Market Returns and Financial Performance of Entities Engaged in Sustainability Reporting. Australian Accounting Review Vol. 17 No. 1 pp. 78.
Kurniawan, T., Sofyani, H., dan Rahmawati, E. (2018). “Pengungkapan Sustainability Report dan Nilai Perusahaan: Studi Empiris di Indonesia dan Singapura”. Kompartemen: Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi, Vol. XVI, No1, 1-20.
Panuluh, S. dan Meilia R.F. (2016). Perkembangan Pelaksanaan Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) di Indonesia. Briefing Paper 02. International NGO Forum on Indonesian Development (INFID).
PwC. (2016). 19th Annual Global CEO Survey: Redifining business success in a changing world. Diakses dari https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/ceo-survey/2016/landing-page/pwc-19th-annual-global-ceo-survey.pdf diakses pada 21 Juli 2019.
Sánchez, Isabel M. G., Nazim Hussain, Jennifer M., & Emiliano R. (2019). Impact of disclosure and assurance quality of corporate sustainability reports on access to finance. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 2019, 1–17.
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 571 - 610.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
