Corporate sustainability reporting in the apparel industry
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify the reported indicators in corporate sustainability reports, other documents and the web sites of 14 apparel brands belonging to the Sustainable Apparel Coalition (SAC). Design/methodology/approach A content analysis of the corporate sustainability reports, other documents and web sites of the 14 SAC apparel brands was conducted to identify indicators related to sustainability. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected on all reported sustainability initiatives, actions, and indicators. A normative business model was developed for the categorization of the indicators and a cross-case analysis of the apparel brand's sustainability reporting was conducted. Findings In total, 87 reported corporate sustainability indicators were identified. The study finds that there is a lack of consistency among them. The majority of the indicators dealt with performance in supply-chain sustainability while the least frequently reported indicators addressed business innovation and consumer engagement. Originality/value This paper provides one of the first in-depth reviews of the indicators reported by apparel brands within their web sites and other forms of corporate sustainability reporting.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it