An evaluation of environmental, social, and governance reporting in the agricultural sector.

Stakeholders require transparency that companies are conducting business sustainably, which can be provided through non‐financial disclosures. Businesses that act on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) matters can attain a competitive advantage. ESG has become necessary in the agricultural sector as agribusinesses are considered high‐impact companies. The lack of uniformity in reporting guidelines leads to inconsistent and overloading of information. The objective of this paper is to conduct an evaluation and comparison of the current ESG reporting practices of listed agribusinesses in South Africa, Australia, and Chile. To support the quality and quantity of reporting, the concept of materiality is addressed by recognising what is material to be disclosed to stakeholders. The study evaluates how agribusinesses have incorporated the proposed material topics of the new GRI 13 sector standard into their current reporting practices. A qualitative content analysis was done to identify the presence or absence of the 34 proposed material topics in their reports. The findings indicate a distinct lack of harmonisation in the agri‐food sector disclosures. Topics hardly mentioned included the rights of indigenous people, living income, and climate adaptation. Low disclosures of the keywords Climate adaptation with 3.3% and Climate resilience with 7.0% on average, for all three countries, were reported. It is recommended that the newly proposed GRI 13 sector standard must be implemented as companies can seize this opportunity for increased transparency and gain a strategic advantage. Emphasis on the materiality concept is needed as it connects with the stakeholder theory to disclose only important information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]