Research Skills IFAS 4.

1 – Part 2
Saskia Putri Deandra
497595

- What is the goal of the method?

Social Value:
(1) change the way we understand the world around us, and make decisions about
where to invest resources (International 2017).
(2) move beyond making decisions based on financial cost or price alone. Instead, it
advocates seeking ‘Value for money’ in its widest sense by considering potential
social benefits (involving people, culture and interactions), economic benefits
(such as money flow and financial resources) and environmental benefits
(involving the place in which people live, the planet and use of resources)
(Council 2021).
or
There are two main reasons why it is important to measure social value.
Firstly, measuring and communicating the value of your social outcomes helps to
demonstrate the importance of your work to you, your staff, your clients, customers,
funders, investors or government agencies. Essentially, to all of your stakeholders, or
in other words, the people that matter to your organization. Being able to demonstrate
social value can be very beneficial especially during the current environment of
spending cuts and increased competition for financial resources.
Secondly, you can use the information to look forward and plan for your
organization and its objectives. This information can also be used to look back and
evaluate your own work. Knowing how well you are achieving your objectives can
help you plan your work more effectively. This approach encourages continuous
improvement, stronger management, and the explicit formulation of assumptions and
expectations. It may make your organization more attractive to your clients or
customers and help you win new contracts.
Organizations that have engaged in the process of measuring social value are
not only able to make a stronger case for additional funding but are also able to focus
their efforts on what really makes a difference. This helps an organization to plan
more strategically and allocate resources more effectively. This primer will help you
explore how to measure social outputs, outcomes and impact (Bhatt and Hebb 2013).

True Value:
(1) provides a way to formalize a corporate view of its material impact on the
environment and society calculated within the limits of financial determinism
(KPMG 2015b).
(2) helps leaders to understand how the company's “true” earnings (including its
socio-economic and environmental impacts) compare to its financial earnings.
(3) offers a process to develop a business case to recognize and manage social and
environmental impacts. Its focus is on providing help for its producers to put a
financial value on the potential risk to future earnings (NPV) posed by current
externalities being internalized (Coulson 2016)
- Clearly describe the key elements of the method that are part of the impact
measurement
- For each element clearly describe how that part is measured/ calculated/ valued
Social Value:
(1) Inputs – Resources of all kinds
Inputs are commonly seen as the cost of running an organization. For example,
if your organization is a computer training institute (the example shown in the
spreadsheet at the end of the primer), the total cost of running the institute is the
sum of all the inputs. This includes staff time, volunteer time, computer stations,
rent, lights, heat, and so on. In a broader sense, inputs are all the resources that are
invested in your organization’s activities. All of your stakeholders contribute to
the inputs of your organization. These resources could be monetary (i.e.
fees/donations/grants) or nonmonetary (staff and volunteers’ time or noncash, in-
kind items like donated supplies). When calculating the cost/inputs, you must
include both the monetary and non-monetary costs of delivering the activities.
The value of financial inputs is easy to establish. However, the value of non-
monetary inputs such as volunteer time is difficult to measure. In order to put a
monetary value on volunteer time, the hours given by volunteers are often
assigned a value equivalent to the average hourly rate for the type of work they
are doing. For example, if an administration volunteer does 5 hours a week in an
area where administration work is paid $20 per hour on average, their weekly
input would be $100. This value is given regardless of whether any money is paid
to the volunteer; it simply gives the input a market value to their contribution that
can be added up with other inputs (Bhatt and Hebb 2013).

(2) Activities – What the organisation does

(3) Outputs – The direct result of an activity
Outputs are the direct result of your program activities. They are a quantitative
summary of an activity and usually result in answering “how many…” questions.
For example, if your organization provides computer training, the output is “we
trained 25 people in computer programming”. It is important to remember that an
output has to be countable (i.e. the number of people trained, the number of
products sold, the number of group activities conducted, and so on). Another
 example is an organization providing food and shelter to homeless people. The
direct result of their activity (output) is to see how many people they have
provided with food and shelter (Bhatt and Hebb 2013).

(4) Outcomes – The longer term change it wants to see in people, communities, or
areas it affects
Defining outcomes
Outcomes are the observed effects of the outputs. Sometimes it takes years for
outcomes to take place, but there may be observable changes along the way.
Therefore, it is important to clarify the timeframe of the outcomes of your
programs. Outcomes can be divided as short term (6 months- 1 year), medium
term (1 - 3years) and long term (3-5 years). Long term outcomes are often
described as "impacts" and are described in more detail later in the primer.
Measuring outcomes is a way to ensure that your organization’s goals are
achieved. They play an important role in social metrics, especially in SROI;
therefore outcomes and indicators used to measure them will be explained
thoroughly.
Identifying Outcomes
Outcomes should be linked with your organization’s theory of change. This
will ensure that you are measuring right things. Therefore, the best place to start is
the outcome statement of the organization. Prepare an outcome statement that is
simple and realistic.
When developing an outcome statement use the SMART approach. These
statements should include outcomes that are simple; measurable; action oriented;
realistic; and timed. Avoid using outcomes that have little value to the audience.
Outcomes need to have a direction. As we will discuss in the next step, outcome
indicators are often expressed using terms like ‘more’, ‘fewer’, ‘less’, ‘increased’
or ‘decreased’. Moreover, as mentioned earlier, outcomes should be measurable
and timed (Bhatt and Hebb 2013).
Identifying Outcomes Indicator
Once the outcome statement is prepared and you have identified the
stakeholders, the next step is to focus on the indicators. Outcome indicators are
important because they can specify whether the outcome has occurred and by how
much. Stakeholders are often the best people to help you identify indicators, so
 ask them how they know that change has happened for them. In the
aforementioned example, the organization relies on participants’ feedback to
know if their social activities have increased. Government websites can also
provide information on changes in the use of public services. Sometimes you need
to use more than one indicator. Balancing subjective and objective indicators can
help offset the risk of having potentially skewed data that results from using to
few indicators.

(5) Expected Impact – The values it holds

True Value:
(1) Identify the value a company creates and reduces for society through its
externalities and express this in financial terms
True value analysts carry out a detailed assessment of your organization’s
most significant economic, social and environmental impacts, both positive and
negative.
The assessment is totally scalable: it can be applied to a single product or service,
to a company’s global operations or to the entire value chain including suppliers
and the downstream use of the company’s products.

(2) Understand future earnings risks and opportunities.

To understand how a company’s externalities – both positive and negative -
might be internalized in the future and what impact that would have on
profitability. For example, regulation can increase costs through new taxes, fines
or pricing systems or reward companies for their positive impacts. Stakeholder
action, such as worker or community protests, can halt or increase the cost of
production. Market dynamics, such as new markets for products and services that
create value for society and the environment, can significantly boost profit
potential. They analyze the company’s most significant externalities. Where the
risk of internalization is high, we use financial modeling techniques to assess the
potential impact on future earnings.

(3) Develop business cases that build and protect future value for shareholders by
increasing the value created for society.
 Marginal True Value Curve is used in this step to build and analyze business
cases for potential investments. The Marginal True Value Curve shows not only
the direct financial returns from an investment but also the likely additional
returns from internalized externalities and the value the investment will create for
society. This provides a broader, more holistic basis on which to analyse potential
investments.
For example, projects which are not viable when assessed on direct financial
returns alone, may deliver attractive returns when the likely internalization of
externalities is factored in. The societal value axis of the curve helps companies to
prioritize projects that deliver similar financial returns according to the value they
create for society, thereby enhancing the company’s own ‘true’ earnings (KPMG
2015a).
- Clearly describe in a practical way how the method can be applied by a firm (in
steps), preferably by illustrating the use of the tool with practical examples from (at
least two) organizations that have applied the tool
Social Value: SROI (Wellspring 2021)
The social value is calculated through two techniques:
Distance travelled (percentage of value achieved per outcome):
= Number of stakeholders per subgroup X percentage of value achieved
A distance travelled approach was used to measure change for some client, volunteer
and children’s outcomes. This method asked respondents to indicate how things have
changed on a scale of 1 to 7, where:
• 1 = A lot LESS now that they are involved with Wellsprings
• 4 = No change
• 7 = A lot MORE now that they are involved with Wellsprings
• N/A = Not relevant
The following three indicators were used to evidence the ‘increased capacity to
navigate daily life’ outcome.
• I am confident in who I am (weighted average of 2.0)
• I am confident doing things on my own (weighted average of 1.75)
• I know how to get the help I need (weighted average of 1.76) The weighted
averages of Likert statements (2.0, 1.75, 1.76) were then averaged to
determine the ‘distance travelled’ for the outcome, which is 1.84

To determine the ‘percentage of the value achieved’ for the outcome, the distance
travelled was divided by 3, which reveals the percentage of those respondents who
indicated a positive net change along the scale. Had all stakeholders selected ‘7’ in
response to the Likert statements above, they would be ‘travelling’ the full distance of
the outcome, making it to 100 per cent. For this outcome, clients travelled 61 per cent
of the journey to realisation of the outcome.
To determine the value of distance travelled before discount, we multiplied the
number of stakeholders per subgroup x percentage of value achieved x financial
proxy, as outlined below. 78 (number of clients excluding those experiencing family
violence) X [61% (percentage of the outcome value achieved) X $24,623 (financial
proxy per person $/yr)] = $1,175,505 (total value of the outcome for the client group
before discount

Value of distance travelled:

= Distance travelled X financial proxy
As outlined above, individual indicator weighted averages were averaged to
determine the ‘distance travelled’ for each outcome. However, a key limitation of the
approach is that the ‘distance travelled’ figure conceals differences between responses
by not providing information about the maximum and minimum responses in each
Likert question. It is important to acknowledge that not every client experience
positive change with some experiencing no change or negative change. The distance
travelled approach provides only the ‘net’ benefit of the cohort based on each
outcome. We also conducted an analysis of the maximum and minimum weighted
average values, which revealed that the averages ranged from 0.63 to 2.17, with no
negative weighted averages. The analysis also revealed the responses to the Likert
statements that were used to determine changes experienced for partners were
polarised:
• My partner is relaxed (weighted average of 2)
• I rely less on my partner (weighted average of 0.2)
Upon reflection, the statement ‘I rely less on my partner’ with A lot LESS now or A
lot MORE now was likely confusing for respondents and so was excluded from the
final analysis

Outcome incidence (number of people experiencing the outcome)

= Number potential individuals in the stakeholder group X percentage of
stakeholders that meet criteria for achieving the full value of the outcome
For example:
To determine the financial value of the client outcome ‘meeting basic
household/financial needs’
• The indicator used to determine the number of stakeholders who achieve this
outcome ‘meeting basic household/financial needs’ was the number of clients
who reported they have accessed external material aid (food and rent relief) as
a result of Wellsprings' support in the client survey.
• In the client survey 31 out of 59 respondents reported accessing external
material aid as a result of Wellsprings i.e. (31/59) = 53%
• To account for the value in the whole population group, this value was
extrapolated to the client group as follows:
Outcome incidence
= 95 clients X 53 per cent (31/59) those who reported experiencing this outcome in
the client survey
= 50 (rounded from 49.9)
49.9 (outcome incidence) X $36,244 (financial proxy per person $/year) = $1,809,128
total social value for the client group before discount per year

Social value determined through outcome incidence:

= Outcome incidence X financial proxy
The value was then discounted to determine the value associated with this outcome
that could be attributed to the Women’s Support Program, including attribution (how
much of the value is a result of the Women’s Support Program), deadweight (what
would have happened anyway), displacement (how much is a net benefit), benefit
period (how long does the value last), drop-off (how much does this value decrease
over time). The SROI is calculated by adding the value of all the discounted outcomes
divided by the input contributions required to deliver the Program.

True Value: (Safaricom and KPMG 2015)

Safaricom used KPMG’s True Value methodology to identify the company’s most
material socioeconomic and environmental impacts and to quantify them in financial
terms. The net of the monetized positive and negative impacts gives an indication of
the total value that the company created, and reduced, for Kenyan people in the year
ending 31 March 2015. In conjunction with the Safaricom team, professionals from
KPMG in South Africa and Kenya identified material impacts for inclusion in the
analysis. The selection was based on a review of sustainability trends in the
telecommunications sector, Safaricom’s annual report and sustainability report, and
input and validation from key internal stakeholders. The team then applied a
practicality lens to ensure it was possible to monetize the selected impacts using
Safaricom data and available proxies.
Where existing data was not available for material impacts, the team conducted
primary research:
• Safaricom’s economic value added: An Economic Impact Assessment
Methodology was used to measure the economic activity resulting from
Safaricom’s footprint in Kenya over FY15.
• Social value of M-PESA: Social Return on Investment (SROI) principles1
were used to quantify the social value created for stakeholders through using
Safaricom’s M-PESA’s product offering. Market research professionals from
TNS RS carried out an extensive data-gathering exercise to validate the extent
to which impacts were experienced by stakeholders.

The Results
 The value bridge above shows that the total value Safaricom created for
Kenyan society in FY15 was estimated at around 10 times greater than the actual
financial profit the company made in the same period. The company creates the
greatest value for society through the added economic value it generates from its
operations and capital expenditure and through the positive impacts of its M-PESA
mobile money transfer service.
This value is eroded by corruption in the Kenyan economy. This is not directly
related to Safaricom’s operations, but the assessment should acknowledge that
corruption is likely to prevent some of the economic value Safaricom creates from
reaching the people. Health and safety incidents and carbon emissions from fuel and
electricity consumption further reduce the value created.

Economic Footprint in Kenyan

 Safaricom’s increasing presence in the Kenyan market has supported
economic development by helping to grow the mobile industry, increasing
Kenya’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and creating jobs
 Safaricom’s investment in mobile networks has improved the quality of
service and reduced costs for a large portion of the Kenyan population.
Social Value of M-PESA
The KPMG True Value analysis estimates that M-PESA created total societal value of
KES 133.8 billion during FY15. This is 4 times the M-PESA transaction fees earned
by Safaricom in the same period, and means that M-PESA creates KES 79 of value
for Kenyan society with every transaction.
Strategic Planning Tool
Safaricom aims to transform the lives of Kenyans, to support sustainability and to
create shared value for both shareholders and society. The KPMG True Value
assessment will help Safaricom to achieve these goals by providing a basis for the
company to further increase the value it creates for society and to continue to reduce
its negative impacts. The analysis shows that the greatest potential for Safaricom to
drive positive economic and social change in Kenya lies in the continued innovation
of services that help people to improve their financial and personal wellbeing. It also
highlights how corruption could erode the socio-economic value that Safaricom
creates in Kenya. This finding emphasizes the importance of Safaricom’s initiatives to
uphold ethical standards, monitor behaviour and implement effective anti-corruption
measures.
 - List sources where more information/ good examples of the method can be found

Bhatt, Babita and Tessa Hebb. 2013. “A Social Metrics Primer.”

Çalişkan, Arzu Özsözgün. 2014. “How Accounting and Accountants May Contribute in
Sustainability?” Social Responsibility Journal 10(2):246–67.
Cantele, Silvia, Thomas A. Tsalis, and Ioannis E. Nikolaou. 2018. “A New Framework for
Assessing the Sustainability Reporting Disclosure of Water Utilities.” Sustainability
(Switzerland) 10(2):1–12.
CDP. 2015. “New Report Shows Just 100 Companies Are Source of over 70% of Emissions.”
Coulson, Andrea B. 2016. “KPMG ’ s True Value Methodology : A Critique of Economic
Reasoning on the Value Companies Create and Reduce for Society.”
Council, Bristol City. 2021. “Bristol City Council Social Value Policy.” (February).
GRI. 2018. “Home.”
International, Social Value. 2017. “What Is Social Value.”
Kaur, Amanpreet and Sumit Lodhia. 2016. “Influences on Stakeholder Engagement in
Sustainability Accounting and Reporting: A Study of Australian Local Councils.”
Developments in Corporate Governance and Responsibility 10:105–29.
KPMG. 2015a. “INTRODUCING KPMG TRUE VALUE.” 1–8.
KPMG. 2015b. “Valuing Your Impacts on Society.”
Makarenko, Inna and Alex Plastun. 2017. “The Role of Accounting in Sustainable
Development.” Accounting and Financial Control 1(2):4–12.
Oncioiu, Ionica, Anca Gabriela Petrescu, Florentina Raluca Bîlcan, Marius Petrescu, Delia
Mioara Popescu, and Elena Anghel. 2020. “Corporate Sustainability Reporting and
Financial Performance.” Sustainability (Switzerland) 12(10):1–13.
Orazalin, Nurlan and Monowar Mahmood. 2019. “Determinants of GRI-Based Sustainability
Reporting: Evidence from an Emerging Economy.” Journal of Accounting in Emerging
Economies 10(1):140–64.
Panda, Asish Kumar. 2020. “Firm Size & Sustainable Performance.” 8(6):943–58.
Safaricom. 2016. “True Value Report.” (October).
Safaricom. 2020. “Our Story.”
Safaricom and KPMG. 2015. “Safaricom Limited The Approach Quantifying the Value
Safaricom The Results.”
Social Value International. 2015. “The Seven Principles of Social Value The Seven
 Principles of Social Value.”
SSIR. 2015. “Measuring Social Value.”
Torre, Mario La, Fabiomassimo Mango, Arturo Cafaro, and Sabrina Leo. 2020. “Does the
ESG Index Affect Stock Return? Evidence from the Eurostoxx50.” Sustainability
(Switzerland) 12(16).
Wellspring. 2021. “Realising and Rebuilding Resilience.” (April).
- Use (scientific) resources to critically evaluate the method. What are key benefits and
key limitations of the method? Has the method been criticized by others? Describe
these critiques and provide your own opinion.
Social Value:
One recent project that proved particularly informative was a collaboration
between the United Kingdom’s National Health Service (NHS) and the Young
Foundation. The NHS commissioned the Young Foundation to develop a practical
tool for assessing service innovations and guiding investment decisions. The NHS is a
vast organization with a budget of around $150 billion, a workforce of some 1.2
million employees, and contracts with more than 30,000 social enterprises. It needed a
set of tools that would be both robust and flexible, and that could be used for decision
making as well as evaluation.
We started by scanning existing social value metrics, such as the ones
described in the table “10 Ways to Measure Social Value” on page 41. We found
hundreds of competing tools, of which foundations and NGOs generally use one
set, governments another, and academics yet another. In addition to discovering this
segmentation, our survey suggested two more reasons why so few metrics guide real
decisions. First, most metrics assume that value is objective, and therefore
discoverable through analysis. Yet as most modern economists now agree, value is
not an objective fact. Instead, value emerges from the interaction of supply and
demand, and ultimately reflects what people or organizations are willing to pay.
Because so few of the tools reflect this, they are inevitably misaligned with an
organization’s strategic and operational priorities.
The second reason that current measures of social value fail to influence
decision makers is that they conflate three very different roles: accounting to external
stakeholders, managing internal operations, and assessing societal impact. In the
business sector, decision makers use different tools for each of these tasks. An
airplane manufacturer, for instance, would use one set of metrics, mandated by laws
and regulations, to explain to external stakeholders how it spends its money. The
company would then use a second set of metrics to allocate resources in the building
of airplanes. (It is a brave manager who would let investors see these internal
accounts.) The company would then use entirely different kinds of measures to
explain how its activities affect larger economic indicators such as gross domestic
product.
 Yet in the social and public sectors, some proponents of new social value
measures claim that their metric can play all three roles. Not surprisingly, and despite
courageous efforts, these attempts to do three things at once have resulted in the
failure to do any one of them well (SSIR 2015).

True Value
Primarily this is a tool for financial management by the owners of a company
and its shareholders, investors, and economic policy makers. Producers of the
methodology may disclose their position on social and environmental impacts as a
starting point for engagement or seek to include stakeholders, in particular social and
environmental representatives, in the design and application of the methodology to
form a more inclusive and pluralist conception of risk and values for social and
environmental impacts. It is from this position that innovation may arise and, for
example, multiple capital considerations and intrinsic values may be recognised.
As a starting point for further research it is argued that the role of KPMG's
True Value methodology is closely aligned to accounting for externalities. However, a
conceptualisation of the methodology is far from clear and the contributions and
limitations of KPMG's methodology need to be considered in light of a much broader
body of work than other current initiatives in social and environment accounting and
reporting. Further, specific challenges to KPMG's reduction of society and the
environment to economic units come, for example, from Gray et al., (2010) who
argue narratives are symbolic representations of value and Coulson et al.'s, (2015)
who go beyond financial capital and explore framing of multiple capitals within
integrated reporting.
One objective for research could be to investigate stakeholder engagement in
the application of the methodology or with its findings (See the seminal work of Gray
et al., 1997). A brief review of producers reports on the True Value methodology
reveal different positions on stakeholder engagement. For example, Volvo Group
(2015) approach to applying the True Value methodology is to build societal costs
into its Total Cost of Ownership (of assets). To operationalise this they carried out
with KPMG "a comprehensive stakeholder dialogue and materiality analysis" to
identify and value socioeconomic and environmental impacts (Volvo, 2015; 3).
Alternatively, Holcim/ Verdantix (2014; 4) appear to only place emphasis on internal
stakeholders, including employee and management consultations perceptions of
sustainability when applying the methodology but provide no evidence of engagement
with the community or environmental representatives. In contrast, a report on NS
Dutch railways by KPMG (2015; 1) recognises that quantifying the value NS creates
for society is used as fact-based data for engagement with stakeholders presumably to
provide an ex-post rationalisation of corporate determinations of impact and
valuations.
Given such apparent differences on stakeholder engagement, the extent to
which this methodology finds a home in, for example, legitimacy theory or
stakeholder theory offers a potential agenda for future research (See for example,
Deakins, 2014 on legitimacy and stakeholder theory; and debate between Adams
(2008); Bebbington et al., (2008) and Unerman (2008) on CSR, risk and stakeholder
engagement). Researchers are also encouraged to use new theories to inquire about
these new social accountings that are being recognised (O'Dwyer and Unerman, 2016;
Gray et al, 2014; Unerman and Chapman, 2014; Gray, 2010).
An interesting question for further research is what difference does disclosure
and transparency of the application of the True Value methodology make with respect
to discharging accountability for externalities? In terms of governing the moral
economy of risk management at a minimum the producer can be held to account for
what they say they are doing or going to do (Power, 2007;92). It is important to
consider corporate claims made when employing the methodology and the design and
application of the methodology employed to substantiate this.
When applying the True Value methodology to scrutinise social and
environmental externalities and their potential effect on future earnings the
consequence that management action may result in more positive social and
environmental impacts may easily become a by-product of risk management rather
than an objective. Given recognition of the mega forces of society and the
environment, it is on core corporate values and moral reasoning as opposed to
economic reasoning that research and practice should arguably centre.
FRAMEWORK SASKI’S:
1. Environmental Problem
Our Mother Earth is currently facing a lot of environmental concerns. The
environmental problems like global warming, acid rain, air pollution, urban sprawl,
waste disposal, ozone layer depletion, water pollution, climate change and many more
affect every human, animal, and nation on this planet.
Over the last few decades, the exploitation of our planet and the degradation of
our environment has gone up at an alarming rate. As our actions have been not in
favor of protecting this planet, we have seen natural disasters striking us more often in
the form of flash floods, earthquakes, blizzards, tsunamis, and cyclones.
Pollution of air, water, and soil takes a huge number of years to recover.
Industry and engine vehicle fumes are the most obvious toxins. Substantial metals,
nitrates, and plastic are poisons in charge of pollution. Emissions from internal
combustion engines are an exemplary source of anthropogenic pollution. While water
contamination is brought about by oil slicks, acid rain, and urban sprawl; air
contamination is created by different gasses and poisons discharged by businesses and
manufacturing plants and burning of fossil fills; soil contamination is majorly created
by mechanical waste that takes supplements out of the soil.
Clean drinking water is turning into an uncommon thing. Water is turning
into a monetary and political concern as the human populace battles for this need.
Waste from industrial and agricultural activities pollute the water that is used by
humans, animals, and plants.
Land pollution simply means degradation of the earth’s surface as a result of
human activities like mining, littering, deforestation, industrial, construction, and
agricultural activities. Land pollution can have a huge environmental impact in the
form of air pollution and soil pollution which in turn can have an adverse effect on
human health.
Climate change is yet another environmental concern that has surfaced in the
last couple of decades. Environmental change has different destructive impacts that
include, but are not limited to, the melting of polar ice, change in seasons, new
sicknesses, and change in the general climate situation.
Environmental asset abuse is also an important environmental concern.
Fossil fuel utilization brings about the discharge of greenhouse gasses, which causes
environmental change. However, individuals are taking endeavors to move to
renewable energy sources.
According to economists like Nicholas Stern, the environmental problem that
led to climate crisis is a result of multiple market failures. Economists and
environmentalists have urged policymakers for years to increase the price of activities
that emit greenhouse gases (one of our biggest environmental problems), the lack of
which constitutes the largest market failure, for example through carbon taxes, which
will stimulate innovations in low-carbon technologies.
To cut emissions quickly and effectively enough, governments must not only
massively increase funding for green innovation to bring down the costs of low-
carbon energy sources, but they also need to adopt a range of other policies that
address each of the other market failures.
2. What kind of problem should we focus on? emission
A new report as the result of a collaboration between the Carbon Disclosure
Project (CDP) and the Climate Accountability Institute studying the Carbon Majors
Database to determine the role of companies in climate change. This is in contrast to
previous studies which only investigated greenhouse gas emissions by country. They
found that the fossil fuel industry was playing a major role in climate change. In fact,
according to the report, the amount of greenhouse gases emitted by the fossil fuel
industry for 28 years (1988-2015) is equal to 237 years from the industrial revolution
to 1988 (CDP 2015).
Even worse, the authors report that half of global industrial greenhouse gas
emissions come from 25 producers alone. Sitting in the top positions are the Chinese
state-owned coal mining company and the Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Aramco).
Both are responsible for 14.3 and 4.5 percent of global emissions since 1988 (CDP
2015).
Why emission?
Greenhouse gas emissions have passed the worst threshold that can be avoided
from the impact of global warming. The World Bank releases an assessment of the
earth's future if action is not taken to reduce the rate of carbon emissions. The average
temperature of the earth's surface is estimated to rise by 3 degrees Celsius or more.
This condition will cause various extreme impacts, such as heat waves, severe
drought, and massive floods in various regions.
3. Why Accounting for Social and Environmental Impacts Becomes More Important for
company’s performance? (ga harus 1 halaman tp atleast more than ½)
Companies can create serious economic, social and environmental problems
when carrying out their work to meet the needs of their stakeholders. However,
adopting a sustainable development approach in the company refers to minimizing the
company's effects to secure life on earth. To achieve this goal, it is necessary to
internalize the management of this risk effect as part of the company's strategy. In this
context, there is a close relationship between sustainable development and corporate
sustainability. In particular, the increasingly visible effects of business operations on
the environment on a global scale require businesses to consider sustainable
development a problem, similar to that of government (Jones, 2010a, 2010b).
Customers and other stakeholders are increasingly concerned with the environmental
and social impacts of the goods and services they consume, and they want to know
how these products contribute to society (Closs et al., 2011; ACCA, 2008). Energy
and the environment, relationships with customers and suppliers, benefits for workers
or contributions to society are some of the issues that people are curious about, where
traditional corporate reporting systems are unable to produce the information needed.
To create shareholder value, national and international companies strive to develop
new sustainable organizations that are socially and environmentally responsible
(Closs et al., 2011). These corporate institutional struggles also contribute to the
country's progress in sustainable development, a point emphasized at the Rio Summit.
Accounting is an important measurement system of business activities.
Therefore, there is increasing pressure on accounting and professional accountants to
further integrate sustainability into corporate decision-making systems to direct their
behavior towards sustainable development. The role of accounting is becoming
increasingly important, especially nowadays when insufficient natural resources and
social problems are increasing for present and future generations (Isaksson and
Steimle, 2009). The fact that the world's largest companies control 25 percent of the
world's economic output attaches greater importance to the role of companies
(Gardiner et al., 2003), and it is clear that sustainable development is almost
impossible to achieve without their contribution (Isaksson and Steimle, 2009). This is
also reflected in the agenda of the Rio⫹20 Summit which will be held in 2012 (PBB,
2012).
 With this, business leaders perceive the SDGs as new opportunities for the
development of their activities: 89% of CEOs note that a commitment to sustainable
development has a real impact on their industry (United Nations, 2016) and 71% of
businesses are already planning to consider SDGs in their activities (PwC, 2015).
Accountants are deeply involved in this process. They measure, evaluate and disclose
progress in the SDGs made by companies. Accountants act as guides and translators
of Triple Bottom Line ideas using the language of corporate sustainability. Bakker
(2012) of the World Business Forum for Sustainable Development noted that
"accountants will save the world". Accountants minimize information asymmetry and
assess investment risk, they create integrated reporting and integrated auditing,
provide and test sustainability accounting standards, reporting and auditing in new
business models. With specific professional skills and involvement in governance,
risk management, business analysis, decision support, due diligence, anti-corruption
activities and ensuring corporate transparency, professional accountants today are
reassessing their role due to the SDGs and corporate sustainability (Makarenko and
Plastun 2017).
The importance of accounting in achieving the SDGs is recognized by
professional international organizations. Among them are the International Federation
of Accountants (IFAC), the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA),
the Intergovernmental Working Group of Experts on International Standards of
Accounting and Reporting Council (ISAR), Fauna & Flora International, World
Business Forum on Sustainable Development, KPMG, PwC and others (Makarenko
and Plastun 2017).
4. The cause and effect of not recognizing the company externalities.
(impact company ini mksdnya)
5. The important of measuring the externalities which company causes towards society
and environmental and the important of externalities measurement on company report
for stakeholders and shareholders.
Sustainability is a concept that has gained increased attention among social

and economic actors in recent years, particularly within the business world. Following

the release of Our Common Future, also known as the Brundtland Report and

published by The World Commission on Environment and Development in 1987, the

concept of sustainable development gained worldwide prominence (Panda 2020).

According to the report, sustainable development is defined as meeting today’s needs

without creating a threat for the needs of future generations (Çalişkan 2014).

Organizations are now under increased pressure to meet the diverse needs and

expectations of different stakeholders and justify their license to operate and earn

profit (Orazalin and Mahmood 2019). Non-financial reporting, such as social value

report and true value report now a key process in all organizations (Cantele, Tsalis,

and Nikolaou 2018) allows public accounting for economic, environmental and social

impacts, thereby contributing towards sustainable development (GRI 2018). However,

sustainable finance is a relatively new concept that is fast becoming important as

financial investments are increasingly required to prove sustainability credentials.

According to the World Business Council for Sustainable Development

(WBCSD), non-financial report tend to directly reflect a company's ability and

readiness to fulfill shareholders' long-term wishes. On the other hand, sustainability

reports can also help build a reputation as a tool that contributes to increasing brand

value, market share, and long-term consumer loyalty as well as helping to build

shareholder interest with a long-term vision and help demonstrate how to increase

corporate value associated with social and environmental issues.

 Companies that consider sustainable development will be able to increase

company’s performance because of the support they get from internal and external

stakeholders, such as consumers, employees, investors, regulators, suppliers and other

groups. The value of the company is also related at the stock price. Theoretically, the

company value can be said to be good if high share price (Kaur and Lodhia 2016).

The company's ability to communicate social and environmental activities and

performance effectively in a sustainability report is considered important for long-

term success, survival and organizational growth (Torre et al. 2020). In addition, a

sustainability report is evidence of an instrument that can be used by an organization,

both government and companies, in dialogue with citizens or stakeholders as an effort

to implement sustainable development education. Therefore, the preparation of a

sustainability report currently occupies an equally important position as disclosure of

information as disclosed in financial reports (Oncioiu et al. 2020).

The disclosure of the social value and true value report also can increase

the performance of the company as seen from the stock price and company profits as

a result of investors investing in the company. The performance of the company is

guaranteed to grow in a sustainable manner if the company pays attention to

economic, social and environmental dimensions because sustainability is a balance

between economic, environmental and community interests.

6. Measuring tools impact and why is it important?
Social Value:
Having ‘social value’ involves a strategic process of positively impacting
societies and is achievable by all organisations regardless of their finances, scale or
business focus. Social value moves beyond our current understanding of Corporate
Social Responsibility which is often justified by the business case, and seen as an
‘add-on’ to the business.
Social value sits at the heart of an organisation and is the socially impactful product of
the company’s culture, ethos and strategy. It is simply good business practice. Social
value is the relative importance that people place on the changes they experience in
their lives. Some, but not all of this value is captured in market prices. It is important
to consider and measure this social value from the perspective of those affected by an
organization’s work. ‘Social value’ is more of an umbrella term and can be described
as ‘social impact’, ‘social responsibility’, or simply ‘sustainability’, depending on the
sector. Regardless of the name, it is about delivering change from all organisations,
not just corporate businesses.
Reporting on social value is an important part of this process. There is a
monetary dimension to social impact reporting, and while this is vital, there are richer
outcomes that showcase the wider impact of your organization. Robust data insights
are needed to inform future social investments.
Examples of social value might be the value we experience from increasing
our confidence, or from living next to a community park. These things are important
to us, but are not commonly expressed or measured in the same way that financial
value is.

True Value:
In business, it is often said that you can’t manage what you don’t measure.
This is just as true when it comes to how your business affects society. Companies are
under increasing pressure to show they make a positive contribution to society as well
as generating profits for shareholders. Focusing on the financials alone is no longer
enough. In many sectors and markets today, an organization’s positive impact on
society can make the difference between winning or losing a contract. So measuring
and managing those impacts is simply good business sense. In recent years,
methodologies to measure an organization’s impacts – both positive and negative –
have become much more sophisticated. A growing trend is to express all economic,
social and environmental impacts in a common financial metric; doing this can inspire
productive conversations in the boardroom and management meetings, and help to
change thinking and action within organizations. The KPMG True Value
methodology has been at the forefront of this movement since its launch in 2014.
Since then, dozens of organizations around the world have used KPMG True Value to
measure their impacts on society and apply that learning to their business (KPMG
2015a).
7. Social value and True Value
(in general, and how it works)
(appears above, page 3-6)
8. Social value international
(in general and how it works)
Social Value International is the global network focused on social impact and
social value. Our members share a common goal: to change the way society accounts
for value. All too often key decisions about resources and policies are made using a
limited economic concept of value, which fails to consider important effects on
people and the environment. As the gap between rich and poor increases and the
effects of climate change become more apparent, our work has never been more
urgent. Social Value International works with our members to embed core principles
for social value measurement and analysis, to refine and share practice, and to build a
powerful movement of like-minded people to influence policy. This pioneering
community contains members from 45 countries, drawn from a huge range of
different sectors and disciplines. Our goal at Social Value International is to support,
connect, and represent our members through training, knowledge-sharing and
networking. Social Value International is much more than a professional network.
Together, we are building a movement for change.
1. Involve stakeholders
Inform what gets measured and how this is measured and valued in an account of
social value by involving stakeholders. Stakeholders are those people or
organisations that experience change as a result of the activity and they will be
best placed to describe the change. This principle means that stakeholders need to
be identified and then involved in consultation throughout the analysis, in order
that the value and the way that it is measured, is informed by those affected by, or
who affect, the activity.
2. Understand what changes
Articulate how change is created and evaluate this through evidence gathered,
recognising positive and negative changes as well as those that are intended and
unintended. Value is created for or by different stakeholders as a result of different
types of change; changes that the stakeholders intend and do not intend, as well as
changes that are positive and negative. This principle requires a theory of how
these different changes are created, which is informed by stakeholders and
supported by evidence. These changes are the outcomes of the activity, made
possible by the contributions of stakeholders. It is these outcomes that should be
measured in order to provide evidence that the change has taken place.
3. Value the outcomes that matter
Making decisions about allocating resources between different options needs to
recognise the values of stakeholders. Value refers to the relative importance of
different outcomes. It is informed by stakeholders’ preferences. There are various
ways of achieving this. One method is to use financial proxies which as well as
revealing preferences, also means that the value can be compared with the cost of
the activity. This can be an effective means of communicating value in order to
influence decisions.
4. Only include what is material
Determine what information and evidence must be included in the accounts to
give a true and fair picture, such that stakeholders can draw reasonable
conclusions about impact.
One of the most important decisions to make is which outcomes to include and
exclude from an account. This decision should recognise that there will be many
outcomes, and a reporting organisation cannot manage and account for all of
them. The basic judgement to make is whether a stakeholder would make a
different decision about the activity if a particular piece of information were
excluded. An assurance process is important in order to give those using the
account comfort that material issues have been included.
5. Do not over-claim
Only claim the value that activities are responsible for creating. This principle
requires reference to baselines, trends and benchmarks to help assess the extent to
which a change is caused by the activity, as opposed to other factors. Reporting on
and managing the outcomes that have been determined with the affected
stakeholders will enable other people or organisations to better understand how
they can contribute to creating value, avoiding negative outcomes and
encouraging a system or collective approach to achieving outcomes.
6. Be transparent
Demonstrate the basis on which the analysis may be considered accurate and
honest, and show that it will be reported to and discussed with stakeholders. This
principle requires that each decision is explained and documented in relation to:
stakeholders, outcomes, indicators and benchmarks; the sources and methods of
information collection; the different scenarios considered; and the communication
of the results to stakeholders. This will include an account of how those
 responsible for the activity will change the activity as a result of the analysis. The
analysis will be more credible when the reasons for the decisions are transparent.
7. Verify the result
Ensure appropriate independent assurance. Any account of value involves
judgment and some subjectivity. Therefore, an appropriate independent assurance
is required to help stakeholders assess whether or not the decisions made by those
responsible for the account were reasonable (Social Value International 2015).
9. Company that uses social value international
(dimulai dari company profilenya dulu, what they produce, trs what they impact smp
butuh tools)
Social Value:
Think Impact is a leading Australian social impact and sustainability advisory
firm. Think Impact is a dynamic learning organisation that comprises highly
experienced impact management, evaluation, sustainability and reporting specialists.
Our team are committed to evidence-based practise and utilising approaches that
support our clients to improve their future readiness and develop solutions that
address our most complex problems. Their purpose is to enable organisations to
manage for better impact, and committed to a new prosperity, using their work to
redefine and move towards a world that accounts for the wellbeing of people and the
environment.
Think Impact work with all sectors providing consultancy services across
strategy, impact management, impact-led design, impact evaluation and capacity
building. Their deep knowledge and experiences drive us to develop innovative,
elegant solutions to impact measurement and management, collaboratively with their
clients to support them to engage with the voices of their client’s stakeholder, fully
account for the value they create and have a systemic influence to create long term
value that benefits all.
One of projects Think Impact had handled was Women’s Property Initiatives.
Women’s Property Initiatives (WPI) provides new beginnings for women facing
homelessness that start with affordable, long-term homes. This work is based on the
belief that every human being has the right to a safe and secure home and that women
face the greatest disadvantage in their ability to afford one.
Think Impact were engaged to measure the Social Return on Investment
(SROI) to enable WPI to understand the value and impact their housing created for
tenants. The evaluation include 66 homes occupied by women and their families over
a 12-month period between 2014-2015.The evaluation required extensive stakeholder
engagement, identification of suitable indicators that quantified social impact and
monetisation of the social outcomes. The report entitled Visible Changes was
externally assured by Social Value International (SVI).
10. Hasil dari company yg pake social value apa?
Social Value:
 For every $1 invested in WPI, $11.07 of social value is created.
 The outcomes were valued at $15,502,647 with input costs of $1,399,870 for the 12
month period between 2014-2015.
 Tenants experience 63% ($9.83M) of the total social value. Most of the value is
created from improved emotional wellbeing, improved personal safety and increased
independence and positive lifestyle choices.
 Children experience 18% ($2.72M) of the total social value. Most of the value is
created through improvements in personal wellbeing, relationships and family life.
 The Victorian Government experiences 12%($1.79M) of the social value through
avoided justice, public housing and health costs.
 This study was awarded the Excellence in Social Impact Measurement Award at the
Social Impact Measurement Network (SIMNA) national conference in May 2017.
11. Company that uses true value
In the year 2000, Safaricom began its journey with a view to Transform Lives.
Safaricom is one of a small group of about 400 companies across Africa whose annual
revenues are more than $1 billion. Many of these companies are pan-African in their
operations and are active in increasingly diverse sectors.
They invest a unique way of doing business through our Purpose; to
‘Transform Lives’. We seek to create opportunities for Kenyans to be a part of our
growth story by empowering them with the right tools for economic growth. The
“Simu ya Jamii” innovation allowed Kenyans to earn money from operating small,
mobile pay phones.
They achieve our Transforming Lives vision through a number of channels, but the
origin of our most impactful transformation stories is the base station. They now have
over 4,000 towers connecting Kenyans from Turbo to Turkana with each one of these
base stations having its own unique story to tell.
This base station was put up in the heart of the Great Rift Valley, in the town
of Kapedo, which is deep in what is called the valley of death. For years, the resident
communities had been engaged in daily inter-tribal clashes. After months of
deliberation and negotiation, we were finally able to put up a base station in the area.
We discovered that the base station created more than just access to a mobile phone
signal. It became a source of power for the first time for the community. It also
provided a lifeline to help the community alert security agencies when threatened. It
became the link that enables residents to get access to healthcare services, which can
be delivered through mobile solutions. It created opportunities for children to access
education, just like other children located anywhere else in Kenya. One base station
can Transform Lives.
Through they partnerships with various groups, we are delivering more than
just voice or data to communities across Kenya. M-TIBA was developed out of
strategic partnership between CarePay, PharmAccess Foundation and Safaricom. It
leverages our respective strengths to deliver healthcare solutions to over 100,000
Kenyans through 60 health care providers all for less than KSHs.300.
They have also partnered with the Government numerous times to extend
more services to the Kenyan citizen by digitising primary schools, connecting health
centres, streamlining payments to farmers and much more. By working with Eneza
Education, we are enabling over 1 million children to access interactive educational
material through the very simplest of mobile phones. Children from Class Four all the
way to Form 4 can chat live with a teacher through either USSD or SMS, an online
web app, an offline desktop app, or an Android app.
In the camps of Kakuma and Daadab, M-PESA is restoring dignity to
thousands of refugees. Through a partnership with the World Food Programme, we
are leveraging M-PESA to help more refugees access food, through a product known
as Chakula Chap Chap. M-PESA has enabled us to digitize food delivery for over
100,000 households. It has removed the opportunity for corruption by eliminating
middle-men, and reduced the cost of distributing relief aid, creating employment and
business opportunities for people in refugee camps. This initiative had shown them
that our business can help bridge critical gaps for our society.
One of the biggest challenges facing of their business today is how to create
sustainable growth and at the same time leave no Kenyan behind in our growth story.
This is why they adopted nine out of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
to help guide their company into the next phase of its growth.
On the other hand, the SDGs are humanity’s shared vision of the actions that
we need to take to create growth for everyone to benefit, and thus form a social
contract between the world’s leaders and our people. Safaricom was the first Kenyan
company to integrate sustainability deep into the core of our every business decision.
They are using the SDGs to transform and boost the success of our business and
enhance our Transforming Lives agenda.
They have delivered solutions such as the Safaricom App and Hakikisha,
which gives our customers more control over how they use our network. They became
the first operator in the world to introduce real time refunds for call drops. Since
launch of the Safaricom Guarantee service in May 2016, the number of recorded
uncompleted calls on the network registered at less than 0.14% of total calls. More
importantly, this activity has given us an unprecedented view of our customers that
helps us to ensure that our services remain relevant and optimised for this market.
They also introduced My Data Manager, which is now being used by over 3
million subscribers to manage their data consumption. Customers are now paying
16% less for data, which allows every shilling to go further. This is part of the reason
why they are proud to have maintained our number one Net Promoter Score position,
ahead of their nearest competitor by 13 points. They also diversified the Bonga
proposition to allow subscribers to use points for more than just network services.
 They have made a conscious choice to grow with their partners, who are using
our mobile platform to deliver unique services that meet the needs of Kenyans. They
have co-created first-of-their-kind solutions alongside partners like Craft Silicon to
produce the taxi hailing app, Little; as well as partnering with M-Survey to roll out a
customer feedback solution.
Through Spark Fund, we have invested in growing companies such as Lynk
and Sendy to build the profile of new industries based on mobile and e-commerce.
These engagements have allowed them to diversify our income to meet the needs of
more customers, and have led to a shift in our revenues that we expect will
characterise the company for years to come.
They have started delivering the network of the future through 4G, which is
now available in over 30 counties in Kenya. We rolled out 635 sites, which means
they are now approaching 1,000 4G stations. Their investment in a second generation
M-PESA network allows them to process over 21,000 M-PESA transactions every
minute, and provide access to two mobile-based loans every second (Safaricom
2020).
12. Hasil dari company yg pake true value apa?
Source: (Safaricom 2016)
13. How True Value and Social Value inter methodology can help stakeholder on its
decision making on gaining benefit to the company and its interest.
Social Value:
Adopting the Principles will sometimes be challenging as they are designed to
make invisible value visible. Value is often invisible because it relates to outcomes
experienced by people who have little or no power in decision-making. Applying the
Principles will help organisations become more accountable for what happens as a
result of their work, and means being accountable for more than whether the
organisation has achieved its objectives.
The Principles of Social Value:
 Involve stakeholders – Inform what gets measured and how this is measured
and valued in an account of social value by involving stakeholders.
 Understand what changes – Articulate how change is created and evaluate this
through evidence gathered, recognising positive and negative changes as well
as those that are intended and unintended.
 Value the things that matter – Making decisions about allocating resources
between different options needs to recognise the values of stakeholders. Value
refers to the relative importance of different outcomes. It is informed by
stakeholders’ preferences.
 Only include what is material – Determine what information and evidence
must be included in the accounts to give a true and fair picture, such that
stakeholders can draw reasonable conclusions about impact.
 Do not over-claim – Only claim the value that activities are responsible for
creating.
 Be transparent – Demonstrate the basis on which the analysis may be
considered accurate and honest, and show that it will be reported to and
discussed with stakeholders.
 Verify the result – Ensure appropriate independent assurance.

True Value:
When it comes to selecting which projects and activities to progress, KPMG True
Value helps corporate decision-makers to look further than financial return-on-
investment. By providing data-driven insight into impacts on people and the environment,
KPMG True Value helps business leaders factor these considerations into investment
decisions, alongside conventional financial data. This can help companies reduce risks
and enhance drivers of growth.
14. True value and social value international difference and similarities
(ini ½ halaman gapapa)
15. Does True Value and social value inter methodology can be applied in any kind of
business sectors and levels?
True Value and Social Value is a flexible methodology that can be applied to any
company in any sector. Analysts will conduct a thorough analysis of the company's
most important economic, social, and environmental effects, both positive and
negative. The evaluation is completely scalable: it can be used to evaluate a particular
product or service, a company's worldwide activities, or the whole supply chain,
including vendors and downstream product use. Then, analysts assign a financial
importance to the company's content impacts after they've identified them.
 REFERENCES
Bhatt, Babita and Tessa Hebb. 2013. “A Social Metrics Primer.”
Çalişkan, Arzu Özsözgün. 2014. “How Accounting and Accountants May Contribute in
Sustainability?” Social Responsibility Journal 10(2):246–67.
Cantele, Silvia, Thomas A. Tsalis, and Ioannis E. Nikolaou. 2018. “A New Framework for
Assessing the Sustainability Reporting Disclosure of Water Utilities.” Sustainability
(Switzerland) 10(2):1–12.
CDP. 2015. “New Report Shows Just 100 Companies Are Source of over 70% of Emissions.”
Coulson, Andrea B. 2016. “KPMG ’ s True Value Methodology : A Critique of Economic
Reasoning on the Value Companies Create and Reduce for Society.”
Council, Bristol City. 2021. “Bristol City Council Social Value Policy.” (February).
GRI. 2018. “Home.”
International, Social Value. 2017. “What Is Social Value.”
Kaur, Amanpreet and Sumit Lodhia. 2016. “Influences on Stakeholder Engagement in
Sustainability Accounting and Reporting: A Study of Australian Local Councils.”
Developments in Corporate Governance and Responsibility 10:105–29.
KPMG. 2015a. “INTRODUCING KPMG TRUE VALUE.” 1–8.
KPMG. 2015b. “Valuing Your Impacts on Society.”
Makarenko, Inna and Alex Plastun. 2017. “The Role of Accounting in Sustainable
Development.” Accounting and Financial Control 1(2):4–12.
Oncioiu, Ionica, Anca Gabriela Petrescu, Florentina Raluca Bîlcan, Marius Petrescu, Delia
Mioara Popescu, and Elena Anghel. 2020. “Corporate Sustainability Reporting and
Financial Performance.” Sustainability (Switzerland) 12(10):1–13.
Orazalin, Nurlan and Monowar Mahmood. 2019. “Determinants of GRI-Based Sustainability
Reporting: Evidence from an Emerging Economy.” Journal of Accounting in Emerging
Economies 10(1):140–64.
Panda, Asish Kumar. 2020. “Firm Size & Sustainable Performance.” 8(6):943–58.
Safaricom. 2016. “True Value Report.” (October).
Safaricom. 2020. “Our Story.”
Safaricom and KPMG. 2015. “Safaricom Limited The Approach Quantifying the Value
Safaricom The Results.”
Social Value International. 2015. “The Seven Principles of Social Value The Seven
Principles of Social Value.”
SSIR. 2015. “Measuring Social Value.”
Torre, Mario La, Fabiomassimo Mango, Arturo Cafaro, and Sabrina Leo. 2020. “Does the
ESG Index Affect Stock Return? Evidence from the Eurostoxx50.” Sustainability
(Switzerland) 12(16).
Wellspring. 2021. “Realising and Rebuilding Resilience.” (April).