Integrating sustainability information through value chain disclosures: insights from the wood-based industries

Atanasov, Atanas (2025): Integrating sustainability information through value chain disclosures: insights from the wood-based industries. Published in: 18th International Scientific Conference WoodEMA 2025 WOOD FOR THE FUTURE: INTEGRATING SUSTAINABILITY ACROSS INDUSTRIES : pp. 105-110.

Abstract

As sustainability increasingly shapes business strategy and stakeholder expectations, integrating sustainability information across the value chain has become essential. This paper examines the role of sustainability disclosures as a mechanism for integrating environmental, social, and governance (ESG) information within the wood-based industries in light of new reporting requirements. We analyze how value chain disclosures contribute to transparency, accountability, risk management, and sustainability performance. Companies that adopt a comprehensive approach to sustainability disclosure tend to demonstrate higher levels of stakeholder engagement and long-term strategic alignment with sustainability goals. However, challenges persist, including data fragmentation, limited supplier collaboration, and a lack of standardization in reporting formats. The paper also highlights the challenges faced by wood-based industries in maintaining effective supply chain collaborations and the need for innovative solutions to overcome barriers to sustainability. It advocates for a holistic approach that encompasses product design, recycling technologies, and waste management strategies to maximize resource utilization and minimize waste. Overall, the paper provides valuable insights into how wood-based industries can integrate sustainability information through value chain disclosures to achieve long-term sustainability and competitive advantage.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: value chain disclosures, sustainability information, CSRD, CSDDD, wood-based industries
• Subjects: M - Business Administration and Business Economics ; Marketing ; Accounting ; Personnel Economics > M4 - Accounting and Auditing > M41 - Accounting; Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q5 - Environmental Economics > Q56 - Environment and Development ; Environment and Trade ; Sustainability ; Environmental Accounts and Accounting ; Environmental Equity ; Population Growth

References

1. Accountancy Europe. (2025, June 24). Views on CSRD scope reduction: Omnibus proposal. https://accountancyeurope.eu/publications/accountancy-europes-views-onomnibus-proposal-to-reduce-csrd-scope/

2. Boiral, O. and Saizarbitoria, I. (2015). Managing biodiversity through stakeholder involvement: why, who, and for what initiatives? Journal of Business Ethics, 140(3), 403-421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2668-3

3. Burritt, R. and Schaltegger, S. (2014). Accounting towards sustainability in production and supply chains. The British Accounting Review, 46(4), 327-343.

4. Eccles, R. G., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014). The Impact of Corporate Sustainability on Organizational Processes and Performance. Management Science, 60(11), 2835-2857.

5. FAO. (2020). Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

6. Georgieva, D. V. (2024). Achieving innovativeness through participation in global value chains: views of managers of Bulgarian furniture enterprises. Proceedings of 17th International Scientific Conference WoodEMA 2024: Green deal initiatives, sustainable management, market demands, and new production perspectives in the forestry-based sector, 145-151.

7. Hahn, R., & Kühnen, M. (2013). Determinants of sustainability reporting: A review of results, trends, theory, and opportunities in an expanding field of research. Journal of Cleaner Production, 59, 5-21. 8. KPMG. (2020). The Time Has Come: The KPMG Survey of Sustainability Reporting 2020.

9. Larsen, S., Bentsen, N., & Stupak, I. (2019). Implementation of voluntary verification of sustainability for solid biomass—a case study from Denmark. Energy Sustainability and Society, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13705-019-0209-0

10. Lombardo, E. (2024). Why adopt sustainable forest management certifications? Main drivers in Italy and Germany. The Journal Agriculture and Forestry, 70(1).

11. Malovrh, Š., Bećirović, D., Marić, B., Nedeljković, J., Posavec, S., Petrović, N., … & Avdibegović, M. (2019). Contribution of forest stewardship council certification to sustainable forest management of state forests in selected Southeast European countries. Forests, 10(8), 648. https://doi.org/10.3390/f10080648

12. Paul, S., Ali, S., Hasan, M., Paul, S., & Kabir, G. (2022). Critical success factors for supply chain sustainability in the wood industry: an integrated PCA-ISM model. Sustainability, 14(3), 1863. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031863

13. Pizzi, S. (2018). The relationship between non-financial reporting, environmental strategies and financial performance. empirical evidence from Milano Stock Exchange. Administrative Sciences, 8(4), 76. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci8040076

14. Santos, A., Carvalho, A., Barbosa‑Póvoa, A. P., Marques, A., & Amorim, P. (2019). Assessment and optimization of sustainable forest wood supply chains – a systematic literature review. Forest Policy and Economics, 105, 112-135.

15. Ševčík, M., Hájek, M., & Mikulková, A. (2014). Specifics in the introduction of sustainability reporting by companies in the forestry sector. Journal of Forest Science, 60(6), 226-235.

16. Oleksich, Z., & Fominov, R. (2024). Country-by-country reporting of leading EU-Ukraine forestry companies: environmental capital disclosure comparative study. Social Economics, (67), 49-59. https://doi.org/10.26565/2524-2547-2024-67-05