Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe study employs a lifecycle perspective to investigate the relationship between corrupt practices and sustainability reporting. The final sample is composed of 1388 firms from four European countries, namely France, Germany, UK, and Sweden. Data were retrieved from the Thomson Reuters database from 2015 to 2022. The findings revealed that corruption significantly reduces sustainability disclosure across different life cycle stages, albeit with varying magnitudes, perhaps due to the misallocation of resources and lack of incentives. The findings also showed that the detrimental effects of corruption on sustainability reporting is most profound during the "Shake‐Out" stage of a company life cycle. By adopting a lifecycle perspective, the research offers a new and in‐depth understanding of corruption's impact on environmental disclosure, offering policymakers and regulators valuable insights into enhancing environmental and sustainability practices.

Three quarters of all medications marketed today do not carry Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved labeling for use in neonates, infants, children and adolescents. This has been stated by the pediatric pharmacology research unit Network which is established by the national institute of Child Health and Human Development in the United States. It is shocking to note that few drugs, only approximately 20% of all drugs marketed in the United States, have been labeled for use by infants and children. Eighty percent or more of drugs approved since 1962 have been approved and labeled for use in adults with a disclaimer in the labeling that they are not approved for use by children (as indicated by the American Academy of Pediatrics in September 12,1996). Many commercially available drugs are only licensed for use in adults and are not used according to the product licensing in pediatric practice. Only minorities of the currently marketed drugs have undergone pediatric clinical trials and have approved labeling for use in children. These include common antimicrobial agents, medications for fever, vaccines and some asthma and allergy medications. However, most drugs used to treat illnesses in children have never been formally tested or approved for pediatric use and lack even basic dosage recommendations for children in their labeling. These include such routinely used medications as dopamine (used to treat shock), cisapride (used to treat abnormal regurgitation of stomach contents in infants and small children), ketorolac (the only available injectable non-narcotic pain reliever), midazolam (used as a sedative and to treat convulsions) and adenosine (used to treat life threatening abnormal heart beats) and the list is much longer. The treatment of pediatric patients with drugs in hospitals is being impeded by a shortage in the availability of licensed drugs in an appropriate formulation. There are several reasons for this situation, ethical problem of research in children, the reluctance of parents to allow their children to participate in drug trials and the technical challenges small study participants bring along. Possibly because of the underestimation of the problem, there is a lack of funding from governments, health care providers and industry. As a result, pediatric drug trials are relatively scarce and in many cases contain only a limited number of patients. The purpose of licensing is to ensure that medicines are examined for safety, efficacy and quality. Most medicines administered to adults have a product license that outlines the particular indication, dose and route of administration for a drug. However, many medicines used for children are not licensed for use in children or are used outside the terms of product license ('off label'). This means that the risks or benefits of using a drug in that particular situation have not been examined by the licensing authority. The aim of this review is to emphasize the need to make studies and to focus on dosing and safety data for children in an appropriate pediatric population a requirement during clinical trials of each new drug with potential use by children. This review also discusses the operation of the licensing system and the use of unlicensed and off-label drugs in children.

AbstractDuring the pandemic, all countries of the world were affected by a health pandemic was the largest in the twenty‐first century, which affected the performance of companies and put them in a difficult situation with the escalation of uncertainty. Our study evaluates the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on firms' financial performance and the moderating role of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance in this relationship. Based on a large international panel dataset that includes nine countries from G20 extracted from the Thomson Reuters EIKON database for the period from 2016 to 2021, a set of statistical analyses was applied, including descriptive statistics, correlation matrix, fixed effect regression, and robust regression using GMM model. The findings indicate that the pandemic negatively affected financial performance significantly, while the performance of ESG limits this effect. Thus, companies engaged in ESG activities are the least affected during the pandemic. Fulfilling stakeholders' demands enhances companies' performance during crises and corporate directors' resort to maintaining the performance of ESG as one of the effective strategies during the crisis to reduce the impact of COVID‐19 on financial performance. This study shows that compliance with ESG issues can mitigate negative financial impacts during crises and that while implementing ESG practices is costly, it satisfies stakeholders and generates financial gains for companies. Theoretically, we directed the theoretical lens to research through crisis and stakeholder theories to explain events.

AbstractThis study is motivated by the absence of similar research that investigates the link between terrorism level and social and environmental performance measured by the ESG score. This study adopts cross‐country panel data represented by 5082 worldwide companies during the period 2011 to 2020. The terrorism level has been measured using the Global Terrorism Index as reported by The Institute for Economics and Peace Limited. Our findings indicate that the occurrence of terrorist events has a significant negative impact on ESG performance, both collectively and individually, due to the various consequences. Many businesses may suspend operations in countries where the threat of terrorism is increasing, resulting in a flight of investors and the disruption of development projects, which may weaken overall economic performance and voluntary projects. Thus, it is likely to result in undermining companies' environmental and social practices. In addition, as fears of terrorist attacks grow, the general system of corporate governance may deteriorate, halting sustainable development initiatives in these countries. Terrorist attacks introduce complex moral dilemmas, challenge stakeholder priorities, affect a company's legitimacy, and reshape the institutional landscape. Companies must navigate these multifaceted challenges, balancing immediate stakeholder concerns, reputation restoration, compliance obligations, and evolving societal expectations. Our findings are significant, with numerous implications for different stakeholders such as regulators, policymakers, investors, managers, and government agencies.

AbstractThis study provides a comprehensive systematic review of the sustainability reporting research focused on Africa. Using a systematic literature review approach, we synthesized 179 high‐quality journal articles obtained from the Scopus database. The study revealed that the extent and quality of SDGs and sustainability reporting in Africa are still very low and unsatisfactory. Also, we found that the existing studies mainly concentrated on the determinants of sustainability reporting, while limited research addressed the outcomes and sustainability assurance. Furthermore, the review indicates that firms in Africa predominantly focused on reporting their economic and social impacts while paying less attention to environmental protection. The study contributes to knowledge by providing an up‐to‐date and comprehensive review of sustainability reporting studies from important research contexts such as Africa. In doing so, we offer a more nuanced understanding of sustainability research in the region. We equally identified inconsistencies, gaps, and opportunities for future research.