Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/323859 
Year of Publication: 
2025
Citation: 
[Journal:] Business Strategy and the Environment [ISSN:] 1099-0836 [Volume:] 34 [Issue:] 5 [Publisher:] Wiley [Place:] Hoboken, NJ [Year:] 2025 [Pages:] 5887-5900
Publisher: 
Wiley, Hoboken, NJ
Abstract: 
This study documents a significant disagreement between the biodiversity footprints of three major providers. This disagreement mainly stems from fundamental disagreement on the underlying methods and data (measurement), while providers agree to a large part on which firm operations contribute to a loss in biodiversity and how they are aggregated (scope and weight). The disagreement is especially high for large firms with a high biodiversity footprint and firms from the industries of Energy, Consumer Staples, and Basic Materials. A transparent and detailed ESG disclosure can decrease the disagreement. The results highlight the importance of being careful when integrating biodiversity footprint into financial decision‐making, regulations, and academic research. The results also underline the need for further standardized and transparent biodiversity disclosure on firm level.
Subjects: 
biodiversity
biodiversity footprint
disagreement
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Creative Commons License: 
cc-by Logo
Document Type: 
Article
Document Version: 
Published Version

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.