This a icle is dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he
C ea i e Commons A ibu ion 4.0 In e nacional License
ins i u ua
enp esa
Ins i u o de Economía Aplicada a la Emp esa
Managemen Le e s / Cuade nos de Ges ión
jou nal homepage: h ps://ojs.ehu.eus/index.php/CG
ISSN: 1131-6837 / e-ISSN: 1988-2157
Managemen Le e s
Cuade nos de Ges ión
Enp esa Ins i u ua, UPV/EHU
Conocimien o en Ges ión/Managemen Knowledge
Volume 24 / Numbe 1 (2024) • ISSN: 1131-6837 / e-ISSN: 1988-2157
h p://www.ehu.eus/cuade nosdeges ion/ e is a/es/
Dissemina ion analysis o SDGs in sus ainabili y epo s o enhance co po a e
communica ion s a egy
Análisis del g ado de di usión de los ODS en las memo ias de sos enibilidad o ien ado a la es a egia
de comunicación co po a i a
Pila Buil
a
, Elena L. Sanju jo-San Ma in
b
, José A. Al a o-Tanco*
a School o Communica ion, Uni e si a In e nacional de Ca alunya, C/Immaculada 22, Ba celona, 08017, España –[email protected]– h ps://o cid.o g/0000-0002-2328-9199
b Facul ad de Ciencias Económicas y Emp esa iales, Uni e sidad de Na a a, Campus Uni e si a io, Edi icio de Amigos, Pamplona (Na a a), 31009, España –esanju -
jo@una .es– h ps://o cid.o g/0000-0001-8502-974X
* Co esponding au ho : Facul ad de Ciencias Económicas y Emp esa iales, Uni e sidad de Na a a, Campus Uni e si a io, Edi icio de Amigos, Pamplona (Na a a),
31009, España–jal a o@una .es– h ps://o cid.o g/0000-0001-5257-272X
ARTICLE INFO
Recei ed 14 Decembe 2022,
Accep ed 31 May 2023
A ailable online 8 No embe 2023
DOI: 10.5295/cdg.221876ja
JEL: M14
ABSTRACT
The Sus ainable De elopmen Goals (SDGs) a e a he hea o he managemen o public and p i a e en e -
p ises. O ganiza ions ha e inco po a ed he SDGs in o hei business s a egy by de eloping ac ions ha hey
dissemina e in hei epo s. In he las decade, academic esea ch has paid special a en ion o his de elopmen ,
publishing a g owing numbe o s udies on he subjec wi h he eme gence o a speci ic line o esea ch in he a ea
o sus ainabili y: sus ainabili y epo ing. In his con ex , his pape aims o show a me hodology ha se es as
a ool o analyze he disclosu e o SDGs in he sus ainabili y epo s. This me hodology has h ee s ages. Fi s , a
lexicog aphic analysis o sus ainabili y epo s has been ca ied ou , second, a co espondence analysis, and hi d,
ou lining h ough “guided ques ions” how he in o ma ion ob ained can be use ul o analyze SDG communica ion
s a egy. Fo u he illus a ion he me hodology has been applied o a company in he Spanish ag i- ood sec o :
Eb o Foods. This wo k has bo h academic and p o essional implica ions by p o iding a guideline o SDG dissem-
ina ion analysis in sus ainabili y epo s and, on he o he hand, by p o iding he business wo ld wi h an analysis
ool ha se es o imp o e communica ion s a egies in he ield o sus ainabili y.
Keywo ds: Non- inancial Repo ing, Sus ainabili y Repo s, Sus ainable De elopmen Goals (SDGs), Sus ainabili-
y Moni o ing, Communica ion S a egy, Ag i- ood Business.
RESUMEN
Los Obje i os de Desa ollo Sos enible (ODS) ocupan un luga cen al en la ges ión de las emp esas públicas y
p i adas. Las o ganizaciones han inco po ado los ODS en su es a egia de negocio desa ollando acciones que
di unden en sus memo ias. En la úl ima década, la in es igación académica ha p es ado especial a ención a es a
ealidad publicándose un c ecien e núme o de es udios al espec o y apa eciendo una línea de in es igación es-
pecí ica en el á ea de la sos enibilidad: sus ainabili y epo ing. En es e con ex o, es e abajo iene como obje i o
p esen a una me odología que si a como he amien a pa a analiza el g ado de di usión de los ODS en las
memo ias de sos enibilidad. Dicha me odología cons a de es e apas: en p ime luga , un análisis lexicog á ico de
las memo ias de sos enibilidad; en segundo luga , un análisis de co espondencias y; inalmen e, se mues a, en
o ma de p egun as-guía cómo la in o mación ob enida puede se de ayuda pa a la es a egia de comunicación de
los ODS. Pa a ilus a es a me odología, se ha aplicado en los in o mes de sos enibilidad del pe íodo 2016-2021
en una emp esa del sec o ag oalimen a io: Eb o Foods. Es e abajo iene implicaciones an o de ipo eó ico
como p ác ico, al apo a una pau a de análisis de la di usión de los ODS en las memo ias de sos enibilidad y, po
o a pa e, al acili a al mundo emp esa ial una he amien a de análisis que si a pa a mejo a las es a egias de
comunicación en el ámbi o de la sos enibilidad.
Palab as cla e: In o mación no inancie a; In o mes de Sos enibilidad, Obje i os de Desa ollo Sos enible (ODS),
Análisis de la Sos enibilidad, Es a egia de Comunicación, Sec o Ag oalimen a io.
Managemen Le e s / Cuade nos de Ges ión 24/1 (2024) 73-84
74 Pila Buil, Elena L. Sanju jo-San Ma in, José A. Al a o-Tanco
1. INTRODUCTION
In Sep embe 2015, he Uni ed Na ions (UN) Gene al As-
sembly app o ed he 2030 Agenda o Sus ainable De elopmen ,
de ining 17Sus ainable De elopmen Goals (SDGs) and mo e
han 169 a ge s o be achie ed. This esolu ion u ges en i ies,
bo h public and p i a e, ci il socie y and UN agencies hem-
sel es o subsc ibe and commi o he 2030 Agenda.
As o 2016, he companies mos commi ed o sus ainable
de elopmen , and consequen ly also o he SDGs, began o in-
co po a e aspec s such as no a ion, classi ica ion and he e mi-
nology o he 2030 Agenda in hei sus ainabili y epo s.
Today, he design o a sus ainabili y s a egy is no longe a
di e en ia ing elemen in he compe i i eness o companies. Na-
ional and in e na ional public bodies equi e, wi h hei egula-
ions, ha companies ake he SDGs in o accoun in he design
o hei s a egies. Di e en ia ing ea u es a e, on he one hand,
he deg ee o de elopmen o he measu es associa ed wi h hese
s a egies and, on he o he hand, hei le el o in luence on e -
iciency indica o s.
Fo all hese easons, i is logical ha a line o esea ch as-
socia ed wi h sus ainabili y and he SDGs has eme ged ela ing
o he way companies communica e hei sus ainabili y s a egy.
This implies ha we ind ou sel es acing no only a esea ch op-
ic o g owing ele ance o he academic wo ld, bu also a line
o knowledge unde cons uc ion, since, as G ueso-Gala and
Camisón Zo noza (2022) poin ou , “li le is known abou he
s uc u e and ex en o esea ch in his academic ield” (p.175).
These same au ho s poin ou ha much o he wo k on sus ain-
abili y epo ing has been published in ecen yea s. Wi hin he
opics co e ed by his ield, i is wo h highligh ing s udies ha
ha e conduc ed analyses on sus ainabili y in o ma ion in he doc-
umen s p epa ed by companies (Ga cía-Benau e al., 2022), he
ac o s ha in luence he quali y o hese epo s (Ga cía-Sánchez
e al., 2019, 2020a), o he ole o s akeholde s as key elemen s o
p essu e o p omo e a communica i e s a egy (Ga cía-Sánchez
e al., 2022; Yamane & Kaneko, 2021), among o he wo ks.
The gene al ocus o his s udy seeks o en ich he esea ch
line o sus ainabili y epo ing, emphasizing how sus ainabili y
epo s enable academics and p ac i ione s o analyze how he
e olu ion o he deg ee o de elopmen o each o he SDGs is
made isible. Speci ically, he aim o he pape is o p esen a
me hodology ha se es as a ool o analyze he deg ee o dis-
semina ion o he SDGs in sus ainabili y epo s. Thus, he con-
ibu ion o his wo k is wo old. F om an academic poin o
iew, he aim is o en ich he sus ainabili y epo ing li e a u e by
p oposing a me hodology o analyzing he dissemina ion o he
SDGs in companies. Second, aking he business pe spec i e as
a e e ence, his me hodology enables communica ion manage s
o ind ou he le el o ansmission o SDG ac i i ies in such a
way ha hey can be p epa ed and o lea n di e en exe cises
which allow hem o ob ain in o ma ion ele an o guiding de-
cision-making.
The a icle is s uc u ed as ollows. In he nex sec ion, his
esea ch is amed. This is ollowed by a desc ip ion o he me h-
odology p oposed o analyzing he deg ee o dissemina ion o
he SDGs in sus ainabili y epo s. Subsequen ly, he case o Eb o
Foods is de eloped and he esul s ob ained a e analyzed. Finally,
he conclusions p esen he academic and p ac ical implica ions
o he wo k, as well as u u e lines o esea ch.
2. RESEARCH CONTEXT AND JUSTIFICATION OF THE
STUDY
T adi ionally, la ge companies ha e disclosed non- inan-
cial in o ma ion (O íz & Didychuck, 2021) as i s isibili y can
imp o e ela ions wi h in e nal and ex e nal agen s (Ma oun,
2017), he eby inc easing he company’s c edibili y (B amme
& Pa elin, 2006). Bea ie and Dhanani (2008) analyzed changes
in annual epo s o English lis ed companies be ween 1965 and
2004 no ing ha inancial con en had been elega ed o a ech-
nical appendix, while he e had been an “inc ease — om 10%
o 51%— o companies p o iding a sepa a e sec ion dealing wi h
co po a e social esponsibili y issues —social, en i onmen al o
communi y— ela ed issues” (p.201).
Du ing his pe iod, he dissemina ion o non- inancial in o -
ma ion has been h ough annual o o he independen epo s,
such as he in eg a ed epo (De Villie s & Van S aden, 2011;
O íz & Didychuck, 2021). The decision o publish non- inancial
in o ma ion in he annual epo o in he sus ainabili y epo
is explained by he s akeholde heo y. This heo y, o mula ed
by F eeman (1984), de ines s akeholde s as people who a ec he
company in achie ing i s mission and who, in u n, a e in luenced
by said mission. Th ough he adop ion o ce ain issues o a sus-
ainable na u e in hei epo s, companies seek o ob ain legi -
imacy, which indica es hei deg ee o commi men o mee he
expec a ions o in e nal and ex e nal agen s (Sie a-Ga cía e al.,
2022). As he Global Repo ing Ini ia i e (GRI) signal in GRI (2020)
poin s ou , “sus ainabili y epo ing can help o ganiza ions o all
sizes —in all sec o s and anywhe e in he wo ld— o be e unde -
s and and manage hei impac on he economy, socie y and he
en i onmen , educing isks and seizing new oppo uni ies. They
no only lay he ounda ion o anspa ency and open dialogue on
impac s, bu also e lec he g owing expec a ions o esponsible
business p ac ices by many in e nal and ex e nal s akeholde s, in-
cluding in es o s, policy make s, capi al ma ke s and ci il socie y”
(p.4). While annual epo s a e o ien ed owa ds in es o s, sus-
ainabili y epo s a e aimed a a wide audience (Dawkins, 2004).
In any case, as shown in Figu e 1, non- inancial con en does
an impac on inancial epo s and is indeed aken in o accoun
by in es o s. In ac , i is di icul o speak o “non- inancial” sus-
ainabili y da a, since en i onmen al o social dimensions ha e
an impac on egula o s, employees o in es o s, among o he s
(Wo kí a, 2021, p.4).
Sus ainabili y epo ing
Quali a i e and quan i a i e
in o ma ion on he
economic, en i onmen al
and human impac o he
o ganiza ion's ac i i y
Financial epo ing
Financial isks and
oppo uni ies ela ed o he
impac o publicly displaying
he o ganiza ion's ac i i ies
Figu e 1
Rela ionship be ween sus ainabili y epo ing and inancial epo ing
Sou ce: Based on GRI (2020, p.11).
Managemen Le e s / Cuade nos de Ges ión 24/1 (2024) 73-84
Dissemina ion analysis o SDGs in sus ainabili y epo s o enhance co po a e communica ion s a egy 75
In ecen yea s, non- inancial epo ing has gained special
ele ance due o egula o y p essu e. Thus, in 2014, he Pa lia-
men o he Eu opean Union and he Council app o ed a Di-
ec i e obliging PIEs (Public In e es En i ies) wi h mo e han
500employees o disclose non- inancial in o ma ion (Eu opean
Pa liamen , 2014), speci ically ele an en i onmen al, social,
labo , human igh s and di e si y issues, as well as o igh co -
up ion and b ibe y. La e in 2017, he Eu opean Commission
es ablished guidelines on non- inancial epo ing (Eu opean
Pa liamen , 2017).
Subsequen ly, in June 2022, he Council and he Eu opean Pa -
liamen eached a poli ical ag eemen on he Di ec i e on Co po-
a e Sus ainabili y Repo ing, which will apply o all la ge compa-
nies and companies lis ed on egula ed ma ke s, and also o lis ed
SMEs (Council o he Eu opean Union, 2022). This new egula ion
will be a s ep owa ds making i manda o y o all companies o
de elop non- inancial epo s and egula e hei con en .
The eali y is ha he e has been an exponen ial g ow h in
non- inancial epo ing in he las decade. As he bibliome ic
analysis o G ueso-Gala and Camisón Zo noza (2020) s a es,
“al hough his esea ch opic eme ged in he 1970s, 90% o he
a icles ha e been published in he las 10yea s, indica ing he
in e es on he pa o esea che s and he g owing impo ance
o his issue in he las decade” (p.188).
The 2030 Agenda ep esen s an oppo uni y o p og ess in
sus ainabili y epo ing. In ac , in 2018, Uni ed Na ions Global
Compac (UNGC) and Global Repo ing Ini ia i e (GRI) ecom-
mended ha companies inco po a e SDG epo ing in o hei
exis ing p ocesses in o de o d i e SDG “cul u e” (UNGC,
2018). In he con ex o he SDGs, in eg a ed epo ing is en-
isaged as a p omising app oach o e eal he co po a e jou ney
owa ds achie ing he SDGs (Adams, 2017). Rosa i and Fa ia
(2019a) de ine in eg a ed epo ing as he p ac ice o publicly
disclosing how a company is add essing he SDGs.
In he las decade, as no ed abo e, he e has been inc easing
in e es on he pa o esea che s in s udying he dissemina ion
o SDGs in company epo ing (Bebbing on & Une man, 2018;
Rosa i & Fa ia, 2019b). Wi h he excep ion o Rosa i and Fa ia
(2019b; 2019a), who analyze o ganiza ions loca ed in coun ies
ou side Eu ope o he s udy by Acke s and Eccles (2015) ocused
on Sou h A ica, empi ical wo ks end o ocus on se e al Eu o-
pean coun ies (Hummel & Szekely, 2022; Ma ínez-Fe e o &
Ga cía-Meca, 2020), o on one Eu opean coun y, such as I aly
(Izzo e al., 2020; Pizzi e al., 2020), Po ugal (Fonseca & Ca al-
ho, 2019), G eece (Tsalis e al., 2020), Cen al and Eas e n Eu-
ope (Nichi a e al., 2020), Uk aine (Ko nieie a, 2020) o Spain
(Sie a-Ga cía e al., 2022; Valle -Bellmun e al., 2022). Fo hei
pa , a ious consul ing i ms ha e also p oduced epo s in he
ield o sus ainabili y epo ing, add essing he con en s ela ed
o he SDGs. Fo example, he consul ing i m KPMG began o
ca y ou his ype o analysis in 1993. In i s la es publica ion,
i analyzes in o ma ion om 5,800companies in 58coun ies,
e i o ies and ju isdic ions (KPMG, 2022).
Al hough mos companies s a ed epo ing on he SDGs in
2016, he e is a g owing end o disclose commi men o he
SDGs (Izzo e al., 2020).
Mo eo e , acco ding o Sie a-Ga cía e al. (2022), “ epo ing
on he SDGs di e s signi ican ly among companies and ends o
emphasize posi i e con ibu ions, while he e is a no able lack o
anspa ency on hei nega i e impac s” (p.879). Thus a s udy by
KPMG (2022, p.48) highligh ed ha 86% o N100 companies and
90% o G250 companies ollow a one-sided iew in hei epo ing
ocused solely on he posi i e impac s o he SDGs. In u n, ac-
co ding o a epo by Ox am (2018), “communica ion on how he
business wo ld is ansla ing he SDGs in o conc e e goals, s a e-
gies and ac ions is e y pa chy” (p.5), unde lining he dange ha
epo ing on he SDGs emains a simple ac ion o communica-
ion. In ac , he e is alk o an SDGs washing e ec in he dissem-
ina ion o he SDGs e e ing o a mo e o mal han subs an i e
mains eaming (Adams e al., 2020; Rinaldi e al., 2018). The use
o he SDGs as “washing” consis s, acco ding o he Uni ed Na-
ions Global Compac and he in e na ional body Global Repo -
ing Ini ia i e (GRI), o “ epo ing on posi i e con ibu ions o he
Global Goals while igno ing signi ican nega i e impac s” (GRI,
2018, p.7). Despi e he ac ha in some coun ies a egula ion has
been passed ha obliges companies o publish non- inancial in-
o ma ion, acco ding o Acke s and Eccles (2015), his egula ion
may lead o companies e e ing o he SDGs wi h a ick box ap-
p oach, he eby doing he minimum necessa y o appea c edible.
Along hese lines, he Ox am epo (2018) p esen s how “walk-
ing he walk” and “ alking he alk” on he SDGs a e no he same
hing, and in ac hese wo s eps may be misaligned. In his sense,
Izzo e al. (2020) no e sho comings in ha speci ic indica o s o
measu e compliance a e missing.
Despi e he sho comings ha epo ing may p esen , he SDGs
ep esen an oppo uni y o business (López, 2020; PWC, 2019)
and achie ing SDGs is he challenge o he coming yea s (Busco
e al., 2018). In his p ocess o inco po a e and d i e he SDGs in
companies, a pla o m called “Business Repo ing on he SDGs” has
been launched (UNGC, 2018). The wo o ganiza ions ha ha e
launched his pla o m, UNGC and GRI, de ine epo ing as an
ins umen ha engages in e nal and ex e nal s akeholde s; sup-
po s sus ainable decision-making p ocesses a all le els wi hin he
company; shapes business s a egy; guides inno a ion and os e s
pe o mance and alue c ea ion; and a ac s in es men .
In addi ion o he guidelines de eloped by he UNGC and he
GRI, nume ous o ganiza ions ha e o e ed guidelines and ecom-
menda ions o imp o e he dissemina ion o he SDGs by com-
panies (Adams, 2017; Adams e al., 2020). These indica ions hus
ill he gap le by he Di ec i e app o ed by he Eu opean Union,
which did no speci y he o ma o he epo in which non- i-
nancial in o ma ion should be collec ed (Eu opean Pa liamen ,
2014). Howe e , acco ding o a compa a i e analysis o some o
he indica o s, he p essing issue is how o collec and s uc u e
in o ma ion on SDGs om o ganiza ions and hen build he da a
ma ix o he compila ion o olun a y na ional e iews o ensu e
compa abili y and consis ency a egional, na ional and in e go -
e nmen al le els (Ko nieie a, 2020).
I is in his con ex o he dissemina ion o he SDGs in compa-
ny epo s ha he p esen esea ch is si ua ed. Ou objec i e is no
o analyze compliance wi h speci ic s anda ds in he p epa a ion
o sus ainabili y epo s, bu o p esen a me hodology o show
he deg ee o dissemina ion o he SDGs in sus ainabili y epo s.
In u n, he me hodology we p opose aims o add ess a ecom-
menda ion made by ACCA (Associa ion o Cha e ed Ce i ied Ac-
coun an s), IIRC (In e na ional In eg a ed Repo ing Council) and
Managemen Le e s / Cuade nos de Ges ión 24/1 (2024) 73-84
76 Pila Buil, Elena L. Sanju jo-San Ma in, José A. Al a o-Tanco
WBA (Wo ld Benchma king Alliance) o de elop guidelines on
how o ganiza ions can app oach he in e dependencies be ween
he SDGs, o which i is essen ial, i s o all, o place he SDGs
on a map (Adams e al., 2020). The e o e, ou esea ch a emp s
o design a me hodology ha acili a es a mo e e ec i e and dy-
namic con ol o e he deg ee o dissemina ion and he weigh o
he SDGs in sus ainabili y epo s in o de no only o moni o ,
bu also o align and join e o s in decision-making. Fo his ea-
son, he esea ch o Hummel and Szekely (2022) has been aken
as a s a ing poin o de e mine he dissemina ion o SDGs wi hin
sus ainabili y epo s, and ex and co espondence analysis ech-
niques ha e been used.
Ci ing he s udies in his sec ion allows us o jus i y ha he
objec o ou wo k ep esen s a con ibu ion o he be e anal-
ysis o he SDGs in sus ainabili y epo s. In sho , as has been
jus i ied in he p e ious pa ag aphs, al hough he e is a eal and
g owing in e es in s udying he dissemina ion o he SDGs in
co po a e epo s, he e is a gap on how o measu e and quan i y
he SDGs in his ype o documen . This wo k is hus si ua ed
in a line o esea ch, “ he non- inancial epo ing g oup”, as i is
aimed a he dissemina ion o he SDGs in sus ainabili y epo s,
iden i ied by G ueso-Gala and Camisón Zo noza (2022) and
Pizzi e al. (2020), among o he au ho s.
3. METHODOLOGY
In his sec ion we p opose he combina ion o wo echniques,
lexicog aphic and co espondence analysis, o s udy he deg ee o
dissemina ion o he SDGs in sus ainabili y epo s. In he me h-
odology p esen ed, lexicog aphic analysis is used in he i s s age
and hen, du ing a second s age, he co espondence echnique
is used. Thanks o he in o ma ion ob ained h ough hese wo
echniques, in he hi d s age, a se ies o guiding ques ions a e
p oposed o decision-making by he company in he con ex o
sus ainabili y epo ing. In his ega d, i should be no ed ha al-
hough he e a e o he wo ks ha combine ex analysis and co -
espondence analysis, such as Ga cía-Sánchez e al. (2021), his
hi d s age ep esen s a con ibu ion ha does no appea as such
in o he wo ks. The sequencing o hese h ee s ages gi es ise
o he me hodology linking he quali a i e and quan i a i e ech-
niques used, which is shown g aphically in Figu e2.
S age1: Lexicog aphic Analysis S age 2: Co espondence Analysis S age 3: Guiding ques ions o companies
Figu e 2
S ages o he analysis o SDG dissemina ion in sus ainabili y epo s
Sou ce: Own elabo a ion.
3.1. Lexicog aphic analysis
This s age con ains h ee basic elemen s: base documen s,
sea ch c i e ia and so wa e analysis. Rega ding he i s elemen ,
he analysis is pe o med on epo s published openly by he
companies. In his ega d, gi en he a ious ypes o documen s
a ailable, we conside ha sus ainabili y epo s may be he mos
app op ia e, al hough his me hodology can be applied o any
epo o documen whe e i makes sense o analyze he deg ee
o dissemina ion o he SDGs.
As o he sea ch c i e ia, we ollowed he p e ious wo k o
Hummel and Szekely (2022), aking as a e e ence he keywo ds
iden i ied by hese au ho s in he academic ield o analyze he
p esence o SDGs in ex s. Appendix I shows he able used as
a basis o his sea ch. Hummel and Szekely (2022) examine
he disclosu e o SDGs in he annual epo s o companies in
he STOXX Eu ope-400 index. These au ho s jus i y he use
o hese keywo ds h ough he s udy de eloped in Hobe g and
Maksimo ic (2015) and applied i in Hummel e al. (2022) and
Hummel and Rö zel (2019). We conside ha his c i e ion is
he e o e alida ed by esea ch wo ks and i s pe ec ly wi h he
objec i e o ou p oposal.
Rega ding he so wa e, NVi o o Ske ch Engine, among o h-
e s, can be used. In his wo k, Ske ch Engine, a leading co pus
o lexicog aphic s udy (Kilga i e al. 2015), has been used.
Al hough he bibliog aphic e e ences o his so wa e a e om
he a ea o language (Ba s, 2016; Hi a a & Hi a a, 2019), i is
e y use ul when analyzing he ansi ion o companies owa ds
he inco po a ion o he communica ion o he 2030 Agenda and
he econ e sion o hei own objec i es wi hin he SDGs. These
p og ams wo k on he ex o selec ed annual epo s and ac-
coun o each o he keywo ds e e ed o in Appendix I.
Wi h his, hey pe o m he analysis by di iding he o al
numbe o cha ac e s o he ex o co pus in o K pa s. This
pa i ion is he esul o di iding he numbe o imes a wo d
o in e es appea s in he ex by he numbe o cha ac e s. The
di ision o K pa s subsequen ly leads o calcula ing a ela i e
measu e o how many imes he wo d o in e es appea s, by he
esul ing numbe o pa s in o which he ex has been di ided.
3.2. Co espondence analysis
Once he lexicog aphic analysis has been pe o med, co -
espondence analysis, a mul i a ia e desc ip i e echnique o
a double-en y in o ma ion able, is applied. Co espondence
ac o analysis da es back o 1962. The i s o al exposi ion o
his ype o echnique was made by he ma hema ician Jean-Paul
Benzec i, la e published in Benzec i (1980). Al hough ini ial-
ly designed o s udy con ingency ables, i was la e ex ended o
comple e disjunc i e ables o o dinal da a, posi i e measu es,
mul iple ables and any able o dependence ela i e o a se o
ows and columns on hei o als ( ow p o iles and column p o-
iles). The e a e nume ous s a is ical analysis so wa e p og ams
ha p o ide his analysis, such as SPSS o STATA, o ci e wo o
he mos widely used.
Ou app oach is o ca y ou a compa a i e analysis o he e o-
lu ion o e a ime ho izon o he deg ee o dissemina ion o he
SDGs h ough he inco po a ion o e minology speci ic o he 2030
Agenda. To his end, we ha e in o ma ion on he di e en SDGs
men ioned in he epo s and also he yea o publica ion o he
epo . Using he equencies o appea ance o he key e ms, he
SDGs a e o de ed om highes o lowes incidence and also hei
appea ance in he epo s he eby allowing a compa ison be ween
Managemen Le e s / Cuade nos de Ges ión 24/1 (2024) 73-84
Dissemina ion analysis o SDGs in sus ainabili y epo s o enhance co po a e communica ion s a egy 77
hem. This compa a i e analysis was comple ed by iden i ying he
di e en epo s wi h he p io i y lines o ac ion de e mined by he
Uni ed Na ions, in o which he SDGs can be classi ied ( he so-called
5Ps): People; P ospe i y; Plane ; Peace and Pa ne ship.
3.3. Guiding ques ions o companies
As explained abo e, a ious o ganiza ions ha e de ined a se ies
o guidelines o companies o in eg a e he SDGs in o co po a e
p ocesses. Thus, GRI (2019) es ablishes he ollowing 5s eps: 1s
Unde s and he SDGs; 2nd De ine p io i ies: addi ional guidelines;
3 d Se a ge s; 4 h In eg a e; and 5 h Repo and communica e. In
his las s ep, e ec i e epo ing guidelines a e de eloped om he
poin o iew o communica ion. Among he poin s highligh ed
by GRI (2019, 2020) he e a e h ee ha ha e se ed as a e e ence
o de ine he a eas o imp o emen ha could be enhanced wi h
he in o ma ion ob ained in he me hodology p esen ed, hese be-
ing he ollowing: anspa ency, alignmen and impac . Rega ding
he i s , GRI (2020) aims o show anspa ency s anda ds in he
con ex o sus ainabili y epo ing. GRI (2019) highligh s ha he
SDGs encou age anspa ency and accoun abili y in companies.
The me hodology p esen ed is in line wi h his by allowing com-
munica ion manage s o con i m ha he deg ee o dissemina ion
o he SDGs co esponds o wha hey eally wan ed o commu-
nica e. Rega ding alignmen , GRI (2019) poin s ou ha p io i i-
za ion in epo ing is “ o align he company’s s a egy, e o s and
esou ce alloca ion wi h he SDG a ge s” (p. 8). The me hodolo-
gy p oposed in his pape is a i s s ep owa ds his objec i e, as
will be seen in he case s udy. Finally, wi h ega d o impac , GRI
(2019) add esses he p ocess o p io i izing impac s and iden i y-
ing SDGs o a company o ac i ely engage and epo on, while
GRI (2020) ocuses on making he impac o he SDGs anspa -
en . We belie e ha he in o ma ion ga he ed in s eps1 and 2 will
allow us o answe ques ions ha lead o a be e unde s anding o
he impac o he SDGs om a compa a i e poin o iew be ween
hem o e ime.
Table1 shows he use ulness o he in o ma ion ob ained in
e ms o ou pu s gene a ed in he communica ion s a egy. Fol-
lowing he in eg a ed e alua ion amewo k o he In e na ional
Associa ion o Measu emen and E alua ion o Communica-
ion (AMEC, 2023), he e m ou pu e e s o he in o ma ion
ha is b oadcas and eaches he di e en audiences, he e o e,
i basically e e s o dis ibu ion and exposu e, unlike he e m
ou akes, which e e s o he change in beha iou o a i ude gen-
e a ed in he audiences.
In summa y, h ee key axes a e aken in o accoun in he anal-
ysis o he ou pu s: anspa ency, alignmen and impac . These
a e hen linked o ele an aspec s in he con ex o sus ainabili y
epo ing in o de o inally o mula e ques ions ha can help
in he dissemina ion phase. Thus, he ques ions can guide com-
munica ion manage s o iden i ying a eas o imp o emen in
he dissemina ion o he SDGs and, he e o e, help hem in he
design o hei co po a e communica ion s a egy in o de o im-
p o e he company’s sus ainable posi ioning.
Table 1
Guiding ques ions o companies
A eas o
imp o emen Key aspec s in he con ex o sus ainabili y epo ing Ques ions o be answe ed ha can be suppo ed by he
in o ma ion ob ained in S eps 1 and 2
T anspa ency Consis ency be ween wha is ac ually made isible and wha is
in ended o be made isible.
Do he sus ainabili y epo s show he SDGs ha he
company has p io i ized and wo ked on?
T anspa ency A oid “sa u a ion” in dissemina ion. Make sus ainabili y
communica ion as global as possible and no ocused on a ew SDGs.
A e he SDGs unbalanced om a dissemina ion poin o iew?
T anspa ency The in o ma ion ob ained makes i possible o jus i y wi h
indica o s he deg ee o isibili y o each SDG.
Do he SDGs ha e a dissemina ion in he sus ainabili y
epo s ha can con ibu e o gene a e us in he company
among he di e en s akeholde s?
Alignmen Achie ing alignmen be ween business s a egy and sus ainabili y
s a egy.
Is he e con inui y be ween he company’s alues and he axes
a ound which he SDGs a e buil in he company and which
you ha e dissemina ed?
Alignmen I is essen ial ha he sus ainabili y s a egy is aligned wi h he
company’s s a egy.
Is he e consis ency be ween wha he sus ainabili y epo s
e lec abou he ole o he SDGs in he company and he
sus ainabili y s a egy?
Alignmen Assis he chie communica ion o ice in “ elling a s o y” o
explain he company’s e olu ion owa ds sus ainabili y.
Is he e con inui y wi h espec o he company’s SDG
dissemina ion in he di e en iscal yea s?
Impac To help he company posi ion i sel wi hin i s sec o . Can I c ea e a benchma k wi h espec o o he companies in
he indus y in he ield o SDGs?
Impac Op imizing communica ion policy e o s. Is he company’s wo k on SDGs maximized in i s sus ainabili y
epo o , on he con a y, does he epo unde play he
eali y?
Sou ce: Own elabo a ion.
Managemen Le e s / Cuade nos de Ges ión 24/1 (2024) 73-84
78 Pila Buil, Elena L. Sanju jo-San Ma in, José A. Al a o-Tanco
4. ILLUSTRATION OF THE METHODOLOGY AT EBRO
FOODS
4.1. Why Eb o Foods?
In 2015, he Uni ed Na ions De elopmen P og am (UNDP)
p omo ed he c ea ion o an Ad iso y Council o wo k wi h
he UN as an equal pa ne in de elopmen . Fo his Council,
he UNDP selec ed hi een p i a e companies, leade s in di -
e en sec o s wo ldwide, wi h Eb o Foods being one o hose
chosen. Eb o Foods has he e o e been a poin o e e ence o
in e na ional o ganiza ions since he incep ion o his p og am,
unde lining ha i is a pionee in sus ainabili y epo ing. Fu -
he mo e, we a e dealing wi h a global company, which supplies,
manu ac u es and ma ke s i s p oduc s all o e he wo ld. This
makes he scope o i s sus ainabili y s a egy pa icula ly b oad
and en iches he s udy o how o de elop he companies co -
esponding SDGs. Acco ding o i s websi e, i is “ he i s ood
company in Spain, he i s ice company in he wo ld and we
ha e an impo an global posi ioning in he p emium pas a
and esh pas a ca ego ies”. I is no he i s ime ha he case
o Eb o Foods has been used in a esea ch jou nal: De Ma ías
(2016) analyzed he in e na ionaliza ion p ocess based on he
sequen ial heo ies o he in e na ionaliza ion o companies and
o his pu pose, de eloped he case o Eb o Foods as an exam-
ple o a g adual and in ense in e na ionaliza ion p ocess. In ad-
di ion, he company has been publishing sus ainabili y epo s
since 2016 p o iding open access (Eb o Foods, 2016, 2017, 2018,
2019, 2020a, 2021), al hough since 2018 hey ha e been called
“sus ainabili y and social esponsibili y epo s”.
F om he poin o iew o communica ion, he company has
designed a non- inancial in o ma ion policy, d awing up a eely
accessible documen (Eb o Foods, 2020b), de ailing he p inci-
ples and c i e ia ha should go e n inancial, non- inancial and
co po a e communica ion in he company. Eb o Foods is, he e-
o e, a benchma k company in a eas such as in e na ionaliza-
ion, communica ion policy on he social impac o he company
and, o cou se, om he poin o iew o size and ma ke sha e.
The e o e, he in e es in he esul s does no only conce n he
company i sel bu ele an conclusions can also be d awn by he
es o he sec o .
4.2. Applica ion o he me hodology o he case o Eb o Foods
A. Lexicog aphic analysis
The s udy has been ca ied ou on he sus ainabili y and so-
cial esponsibili y epo s published by Eb o Foods on i s websi e
(www.eb o oods.es) and which, as men ioned abo e, ange om
2016 o 2021. The analysis o hese six epo s shows he e olu-
ion in he deg ee o p io i iza ion o he SDGs ha he company
has ollowed and, on he o he hand, due o he ex ensi e leng h
o hese epo s (abou 100 pages) p o ides a aluable amoun o
in o ma ion on which o pe o m he p oposed analyses.
On he websi e h ps://www.eb o oods.es/ se/ods/#nues-
o- abajo he company iden i ies he se en SDGs ha , due o i s
business ac i i y, i has p io i ized and o which i con ibu es di-
ec ly, and which a e he ollowing: SDG1: “End Po e y”; SDG2:
“Ze o Hunge ”; SDG8: “Decen Wo k and Economic G ow h”;
SDG10: “Reducing Inequali ies”; SDG12: “Responsible P oduc-
ion and Consump ion”; SDG13: “Clima e Ac ion” and SDG17:
“Pa ne ships o Achie e he Goals”. Using he keywo ds in Ap-
pendix I o hese se en SDGs as a e e ence, a sea ch was ca ied
ou using he Ske ch Engine p og am. This in o ma ion is he basis
o he co espondence analysis in he ollowing s age and p o-
ides ele an in o ma ion o answe he ques ions in Table3.
B. Co espondence analysis
F om he lexicog aphic analysis and wi h he help o he key-
wo ds associa ed wi h each SDG, we ob ained Table2, which
shows he absolu e equency o each SDG in each annual sus-
ainabili y epo (ASR). This able allows us o see he deg ee o
isibili y o each SDG. This in o ma ion is pa icula ly ele an
o de e mine he di e en deg ee o impo ance o each SDG in
e ms o communica ion s a egy. In his sense, i allows us o de-
ec whe he he e is a ce ain deg ee o o e - o unde -dissemi-
na ion o he SDGs. A g aphic ep esen a ion o his in o ma ion
is shown in Figu e3, which, oge he wi h Table2, will help us o
answe di e en ques ions in S age3.
Table 2
F equency o occu ence o he SDGs
in Eb o Foods’ sus ainabili y epo s
Annual sus ainabili y epo s
ASR 16 ASR 17 ASR 18 ASR 19 ASR 20 ASR 21 To al
SDG1 0 0 0 2 10 104 107
SDG2 2 3 0 12 40 6 81
SDG8 28 33 34 36 30 102 236
SDG10 83 82 205 259 0 74 703
SDG12 27 35 43 94 120 377 586
SDG13 1 2 2 4 30 156 168
SDG17 0 0 0 1 0 105 106
To al 141 153 284 408 230 924 1987
Sou ce: Own elabo a ion.
Figu e 3
Compa a i e analysis o he SDGs p io i ized
by Eb o Foods in each ASR
Sou ce: Own elabo a ion.
Managemen Le e s / Cuade nos de Ges ión 24/1 (2024) 73-84
Dissemina ion analysis o SDGs in sus ainabili y epo s o enhance co po a e communica ion s a egy 79
On he o he hand, he co espondence analysis makes i
possible o o de he se en SDGs o di ec in e es as selec ed
by Eb o Foods in e ms o highes o lowes incidence o ap-
pea ance in he epo s. This anking, acco ding o he deg ee
o ansmission, is ep esen ed in Figu e4. We can app ecia e
ou clea ly di e en ia ed g oups ha explain, in some way,
he e olu ion o he epo s when i comes o dissemina ing
he SDGs. The epo s o he i s wo yea s, 2016 and 2017,
a e aligned wi h SDG8: “Decen wo k and economic g ow h”.
In he ollowing wo yea s, 2018 and 2019, he epo s a e
aligned wi h SDG10: “Reducing inequali ies”. The yea 2020
ocused on SDG12: “Responsible p oduc ion and consump-
ion”, and SDG2: “Ze o hunge ”. In he 2021 epo , he SDGs
wi h he highes deg ee o dissemina ion a e SDG1: “End Po -
e y”, SDG13: “Clima e Ac ion” and SDG17: “Pa ne ships o
Achie e he Goals”.
Figu e 4
Co espondence analysis be ween he annual epo s (AR)
om 2016 o 2021 and he p io i y SDGs o Eb o Foods
Sou ce: Own elabo a ion.
The same analysis can be ca ied ou by placing he di e en
SDGs in he p io i y lines o ac ion de ined in he 2030 Agenda,
which a e: plane , people, p ospe i y, peace and pa ne ship. Fig-
u e5 shows ha he i s epo s a e mo e aligned h ough he
dissemina ion o ce ain SDGs wi h he p ospe i y axis, while
he 2020 epo is aligned wi h people and he las yea ’s epo is
aligned wi h plane and pa ne ship.
Figu e 5
Co espondence analysis be ween annual epo s and p io i y a eas
o he case o Eb o Foods
Sou ce: Own elabo a ion.
C. Guiding ques ions
As explained in Sec ion3, his me hodology allows he com-
pany o e lec on he ansmission o i s ac i i ies ela ed o he
SDGs in i s sus ainabili y epo s, h ough he o mula ion o a
se ies o ques ions. Thus, Table3 shows he ques ions de ined in
Table1 and he esul s ob ained wi h espec o he da a ob ained
in S ages2 and 3.
Table 3 helps he company o analyze he ex en o which he
company is dissemina ing in o ma ion on SDGs. This in o ma ion
would help he communica ion eam o e lec on some key issues
o do wi h anspa ency, alignmen and impac when designing
he company’s communica ion s a egy. Speci ically, i is obse ed
ha he commi men ha he company claims o assume in e ms
o SDGs, selec ing speci ic SDGs, is no always dissemina ed in
he sus ainabili y epo s. This ac gene a es in o ma ion gaps in
some o he epo s wi h espec o some SDGs, he e o e, i could
be hough (al hough his is no necessa ily he case) ha no ac-
ions ha e been ca ied ou in he speci ic a ea o he SDG indi-
ca ed as i does no ha e an in o ma i e p esence in he epo s. In
addi ion, he amoun o in o ma ion dissemina ed on some SDGs
is disp opo iona e o o he s. The e o e, when analyzing he ou -
pu s gene a ed in he sus ainabili y epo s ela ed o he ac ions
ca ied ou by he company on SDGs, anspa ency seems o be
well esol ed in he communica ion s a egy; howe e , alignmen
and impac a e wo clea a eas o imp o emen .
Managemen Le e s / Cuade nos de Ges ión 24/1 (2024) 73-84
80 Pila Buil, Elena L. Sanju jo-San Ma in, José A. Al a o-Tanco
Table 3
Rele an in o ma ion o decision making in he case o Eb o Foods
Guiding ques ions Resul s in he case o Eb o Foods
Do he sus ainabili y epo s show he
SDGs ha he company has p io i ized
and wo ked on?
The e a e SDGs ha ha e been p io i ized by he company ha a e no shown in ce ain
epo s, as shown in Table 2 and Figu e 3. I can be seen ha he SDGs may ha e a low le el o
dissemina ion in he epo o a speci ic yea , while hey may ha e a g ea e p esence in he
epo o ano he yea .
A e he SDGs unbalanced om a
dissemina ion poin o iew?
Figu e 4 shows ha he e is an imbalance in he SDGs. Thus, SDGs 1, 13 and 17 a e subs an ially
included in he ASR21, bu e y sca cely in he emaining yea s.
Do he SDGs ha e a dissemina ion in he
sus ainabili y epo s ha can con ibu e
o gene a e con idence in he company
among he di e en s akeholde s??
Eb o Foods is a benchma k company in he ield o sus ainabili y. The ac ha he SDGs ha e
di e en weigh s is no an obs acle o gene a ing us in he company. Ne e heless, his ac
mus be e y well a gued in he epo so ha s akeholde s accep i and i does no gene a e
dis us . The in o ma ion ob ained om Figu es4 and 5 shows he g ouping o he SDGs a ound
ce ain yea s and he 5Ps.
Is he e con inui y be ween he company’s
alues and he axes a ound which he
SDGs a e buil in he company and which
you ha e dissemina ed?
The i s epo s (2016 o 2019) a e mo e aligned h ough disclosu e on ce ain SDGs wi h he
P ospe i y axis; while ha o 2020 does so wi h he People axis and ha o he las yea o 2021 does
so wi h Plane and Pa ne ships. All o his is shown in Figu e5.
Eb o Foods has 13 alues (leade ship, anspa ency, hones y, esponsibili y, in eg i y, cul u e
o e o , ocus on gene a ing alue, en i onmen al esponsibili y, se ice oca ion, people
o ien a ion, inno a ion, long- e m sus ainabili y and s ic compliance wi h cu en legisla ion).
Two o hem (cul u e o e o and o ien a ion o alue gene a ion) a e aligned wi h he
P ospe i y axis.
A alue de ined by Eb o Foods, people o ien a ion, ully coincides wi h he People axis. And inally,
he e is a alue ha is en i onmen al esponsibili y, which is also iden i ied wi h he Plane axis.
Howe e , he e is no alue linked o he Alliances axis, as can be seen om he in o ma ion ob ained
and analyzed on he SDGs dissemina ed in he sus ainabili y epo s, as shown in Figu e4.
Is he e consis ency be ween wha he
sus ainabili y epo s e lec abou he
ole o he SDGs in he company and he
sus ainabili y s a egy?
Taking he CSR model and he p io i iza ion o some SDGs as a e e ence o he sus ainabili y
s a egy, i is no un il 2021 ha a ele an weigh o all he SDGs is obse ed, some hing ha
does no occu in he es o he yea s, as shown in Table2 and Figu e3.
Is he e con inui y wi h espec o he
company’s SDG dissemina ion in he
di e en iscal yea s?
In he i s ou yea s, he e is con inui y in one SDG o wo yea s. Thus, in 2016 and 2017,
SDG8: “Decen wo k and economic g ow h”; and in 2018 and 2019, SDG10: “Reducing
inequali ies”. Howe e , in he ollowing yea s, hey ocus on o he SDGs, speci ically, in 2020, on
SDG12: “Responsible p oduc ion and consump ion” and SDG2: “Ze o hunge ”; and, inally in
2021, on SDG1: “End po e y”, SDG13: “Clima e ac ion”; SDG17: “Pa ne ships o achie e goals”.
I is wo h no ing he low equencies in he ASR in 2020.
Can I c ea e a benchma k o o he
companies in he indus y in he a ea o
SDGs?
The in o ma ion gene a ed allows he dissemina ion o he company’s SDG- ela ed ac i i ies o be
audi ed and o e s compa abili y wi h o he companies in he sec o . The company could use his
me hodology o pe o m compa a i e analyses and see how i s ands up o i s benchma k companies.
Is he company’s wo k on SDGs
maximized in i s sus ainabili y epo
o , on he con a y, does he le el o
dissemina ion unde play he eali y?
The s udy o he epo s shows ha in some yea s no in o ma ion is dissemina ed on ac i i ies
ha he company is ca ying ou in a speci ic SDG, so ha in some yea s he e is an absence o
in o ma ion dissemina ion. Thus, in he epo s o he i s h ee yea s: 2016, 2017 and 2018,
SDG1: “End Po e y” and SDG14: “Pa ne ships”, do no ha e any dissemina ion.
The e o e, he esul s show ha he dissemina ion o he SDGs ha has been designed wi h he
communica ion s a egy does no always gene a e he ele an ou pu s on he ac i i ies linked o
he SDGs ha he company ca ies ou .
Sou ce: Own elabo a ion.
5. CONCLUSIONS
5.1. Academic con ibu ion
This wo k p esen s a me hodology o analyzing annual
epo s on he e olu ion o he deg ee o dissemina ion o he
SDGs. In e ms o academic implica ions, his wo k is amed
in he sus ainabili y epo ing li e a u e, bu also in he ield o
Communica ion. F om he la e pe spec i e, he social and eg-
ula o y p essu e on companies means ha sus ainabili y is no
longe a means by which o di e en ia e hemsel es om com-
pe i o s, bu mus be in eg a ed in o a cul u e o inno a ion wi h
social impac . In his ega d, he li e a u e on his opic is ex-
ensi e and one o he key elemen s highligh ed is he ole o
Managemen Le e s / Cuade nos de Ges ión 24/1 (2024) 73-84
Dissemina ion analysis o SDGs in sus ainabili y epo s o enhance co po a e communica ion s a egy 81
communica ion as a ans e sal elemen in all s ages o inno a-
ion (P e e mann, 2017). The e o e, assessing how he “way o
doing sus ainabili y” is communica ed is key o show o wha
ex en sus ainabili y is in eg a ed in he DNA o he compa-
ny and hus in i s ela ionship wi h s akeholde s. In his sense,
Ga cía-Sánchez e al. (2020b) shows ha companies ha ha e a
commi men o he 2030 Agenda may no make adequa e use o
in o ma ion o manage s akeholde pe cep ions. The e o e, his
me hodology can be a ool o p omo e a cul u e o sus ainabili y
epo ing wi hin companies.
This me hodology akes a s ep o wa d in ha i makes i
possible o g aphically and nume ically ep esen he ea men
o he SDGs, as well as he ela ionship be ween hem, es ablish-
ing ela ionships be ween ypes o SDGs. This is ele an because
i makes he con ibu ion o he SDGs isible no only indi idu-
ally, bu globally, and his has a di ec impac on seeing he SDGs
in a global dimension ha can be in eg a ed in o he cul u e and
alues o he company.
5.2. P ac ical implica ions
F om he poin o iew o he implica ions o companies, he
esul s ob ained om he analysis a e pa icula ly aluable o
he communica ion manage . They allow he company o de e -
mine he way in which he achie emen o he SDGs is made
isible and o decide whe he changes should be made in he
p esen a ion o sus ainabili y epo s o show he esul s o s ake-
holde s. In addi ion, i os e s e lec ion on he decisions ha
can bene i om he in o ma ion ob ained in he h ee s ages
o he p ocess in he ield no only o communica ion anspa -
ency, bu also o he alignmen and impac o communica ion
s a egies. Mo eo e , his me hodology is easily eplicable and
enables empi ical wo k based on compa a i e analysis be ween
companies in he same sec o o wi h simila cha ac e is ics. Fi-
nally, we belie e ha he simplici y o his me hodology makes
i pa icula ly ele an o companies wi h ewe esou ces, such
as SMEs (especially unlis ed companies), which can con ol he
disclosu e o in o ma ion on sus ainabili y and b ing i in o line
wi h hei s a egy.
5.3. Fu u e lines
The comple ion o his wo k may lead o se e al u u e s ud-
ies. We would like o men ion h ee possibili ies. The i s one
would, gi en he di e si y o epo ypologies whe e he p ac-
ices associa ed wi h he SDGs a e explained, consis o ca ying
ou a compa a i e analysis o he esul s in di e en ypes o e-
po s wi hin he same company. Second, based on he conclu-
sions ob ained by applying he me hodology o he case o Eb o
Foods, case s udies could be de eloped o analyze in dep h he
sus ainabili y communica ion s a egy o a company, conduc -
ing in e iews/su eys wi h he communica ion eam ha would
enable a ho ough analysis, among o he aspec s, o he di icul-
ies and limi a ions ha exis when i comes o dissemina ing
ac i i ies linked o he SDGs. A hi d line would be o ca y ou
a compa a i e analysis be ween companies in he same sec o o
wi h simila cha ac e is ics, in o de o de e mine he deg ee o
dissemina ion o he SDGs.
6. REFERENCES
Acke s, B., & Eccles, N.S. (2015). Manda o y co po a e social esponsi-
bili y assu ance p ac ices: The case o King III in Sou h A ica. Ac-
coun ing, Audi ing & Accoun abili y Jou nal, 28(4), 515-550. h ps://
doi.o g/10.1108/AAAJ-12-2013-1554.
Adams, C. A. (2017). The Sus ainable De elopmen Goals, in eg a ed
hinking and he in eg a ed epo . In eg a ed Repo ing (IR), 1-52.
Adams, C.A., D uckman, P.B, & Pico , R.C. (2020). Sus ainable de elopmen
goal disclosu e (SDGD) ecommenda ions. ACCA: London, UK.
Adams, C.A., (2020). Sus ainable de elopmen goals disclosu e (SDGD)
ecommenda ions: eedback on he consul a ion esponses, ACCA,
IIRC, WBA.
AMEC (2023). Ma co de e aluación in eg ada de AMEC. h ps://ame-
co g.com/amec amewo k/es/
Ba s, K. (2016). Using he ske ch engine co pus que y ool o language
eaching. The Language Teaching, 40(2), 23-26.
Bea ie, V., & Dhanani, A. (2008). In es iga ing p esen a ional change in
UK annual epo s. A longi udinal pe spec i e. Jou nal o Business
Communica ion, 45(2), 181-222.
Bebbing on, J., & Une man, J. (2018). Achie ing he Uni ed Na ions
Sus ainable De elopmen Goals: An enabling ole o accoun ing
esea ch. Accoun ing Audi ing & Accoun abili y Jou nal, 31(1), 2–24.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1108/ AAAJ-05-2017-2929.
Benzec i, J. P. (1980). L' Analyse des Données: L' Analyse des Co es-
pondances. (Tome 2). Dunod, Pa ís.
B amme , S., & Pa elin, S. (2006). Volun a y en i onmen al disclosu es by
la ge UK companies. Jou nal o Business Finance & Accoun ing, 33(7‐8),
1168-1188. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.1468-5957.2006.00598.x
Busco, C., G anà, F. & Izzo, M.F. (2018). Sus ainable De elopmen Goals
and In eg a ed Repo ing. Rou ledge: London, UK.
Council o Eu opean Union (2022). A ailable a h ps://www. consilium.
eu opa.eu/es/p ess/p ess- eleases/2022/06/21/new- ules-on-sus ai-
nabili y-disclosu e-p o isional-ag eemen -be ween-council-and-eu-
opean-pa liamen /) (accessible decembe 2022).
Dawkins, J. (2004). Co po a e esponsibili y: he communica ion cha-
llenge. Jou nal o Communica ion managemen , 9(2), 108-119. h -
ps://doi.o g/10.1108/13632540510621362
De Ma ías, D. (2016). The Food indus y in e na ionaliza ion p ocess.
The case o Eb o Foods. Re is a de Di ección y Adminis ación de
Emp esas, 23, 36-52.
De Villie s, C., & Van S aden, C.J. (2011). Whe e i ms choose o disclo-
se olun a y en i onmen al in o ma ion. Jou nal o Accoun ing and
Public Policiy, 30(6), 504-525
Eb o Foods (2016). In o me anual de sos enibilidad del año 2016.
A ailable in h ps://www.eb o oods.es/wp-con en /uploads/in o -
me_anual/in o meanual2016/pd /2-0-in o me-de-sos enibilidad.
pd (accessible Decembe 2022)
Eb o Foods (2017). In o me anual de sos enibilidad del año 2017.
A ailable in h ps://www.eb o oods.es/wp-con en /uploads/in o -
me_anual/in o meanual2017/pd /2-0-in o me-de-sos enibilidad.
pd (accessible Decembe 2022)
Eb o Foods (2018). In o me anual de sos enibilidad del año 2018.
A ailable in h ps://www.eb o oods.es/wp-con en /uploads/in o -
me_anual/in o meanual2018/pd /2-0-in o me-de-sos enibilidad.
pd (accessible Decembe 2022)
Eb o Foods (2019). In o me anual de sos enibilidad del año 2019.
A ailable in h ps://www.eb o oods.es/wp-con en /uploads/in o -
me_anual/in o meanual2019/pd /2-0-in o me-de-sos enibilidad.
pd (accessible Decembe 2022)
Eb o Foods (2020a). In o me anual de sos enibilidad del año 2020.
A ailable in h ps://www.eb o oods.es/wp-con en /uploads/in o -
Managemen Le e s / Cuade nos de Ges ión 24/1 (2024) 73-84
