Programa del congreso

This study examines the impact of formal and relational governance mechanisms on the performance of agrifood cooperatives, focusing on financial-economic results and member satisfaction as key performance indicators. The theoretical framework integrates insights from cooperative governance and performance and social capital literature, emphasizing the balance between economic and socio-emotional goals. The study tested six hypotheses concerning the effects of property and control rights redesigns and social capital modifications on performance using a dataset of 117 Spanish agrifood cooperatives. Results indicate that modifications in property rights, i.e., hybridization, positively influence financial-economic results and have no significant impact on member satisfaction. Secondly, innovations in control rights, i.e., hiring a professional CEO or the presence of professionals in the BoD, do not affect performance. However, financial-economic results improve when simultaneously a professional occupies the CEO position and professionals are included in the BoD, again without affecting members’ satisfaction. Thirdly, changes in relational governance, i.e., a higher social capital stock, significantly enhance financial-economic performance and members’ satisfaction. Thus, results suggest that moving away from the classical cooperative model and professionalizing cooperative management enhances financial-economic performance but requires complementary strategies to increase member satisfaction. Fostering social capital is crucial for ensuring long-term cooperative success.

The aim of this study is to analyze how previous literature has measured performance and efficiency in nonprofit organizations (NPOs). To pursue it we performed a Systematic Literature Review that led to 159 articles tackling these issues. Our results suggest that, even though performance and efficiency are closely related concepts, they do not represent the same. Rather, performance is a wider concept, and efficiency is one of its dimensions. Regarding efficiency, its measurement is contested between the use of ratios and frontier analyses. Even though there is a trend towards the use of frontier analyses given their better fit with the definition of efficiency, ratios also provide important information for stakeholders and allow for comparability through industries. In relation with performance, we find that this concept is multidimensional. We have identified four main dimensions: efficiency, generation of revenues, financial health and the output generated by the NPO.

This study sheds some light on the state of the art of NPO performance and efficiency measures that could enlighten future research in the lookout for an aggregate measure of performance or for ways to adapt the used measures to the different industries included in the nonprofit sector.

This study examines the effect of managerial bias in sustainability assurance engagements on firm idiosyncratic risk, focusing on carbon-intensive sectors facing heightened scrutiny due to growing climate-related concerns and regulatory shifts. Drawing on legitimacy, stakeholder, agency, and impression management theories, the research examines how managerial bias—reflected in the completeness, reliability, balance, and tone of assurance reports—affects accountability and firm-specific unsystematic risk. Using 1,465 assurance reports from European listed firms (2018–2022), the study employs Natural Language Processing algorithms to measure scope restrictions and tone as proxies for managerial bias and applies panel data techniques for hypothesis testing. The findings suggest that a narrow scope and optimistic tone—as indicators of managerial bias— in assurance reports significantly increase idiosyncratic risk. This effect is amplified by firms' stock sensitivity to climate transition risks and greenhouse gas emissions intensity. Moreover, the relationship varies across different country-level regulatory settings. The study establishes a novel link between managerial bias and firm idiosyncratic risk, demonstrating how bias in assurance reports undermines their effectiveness in supporting portfolio risk management. It underscores the importance of accountability for investors and highlights the need for regulators to advance towards a standardized assurance framework aligned with the CSRD (2022/2464).

• Purpose: This study aims to explore the relationship between SDG-aligned practices and ESG risks, emphasizing the role of risk management in mitigating these risks.

• Theoretical framework: We integrate stakeholder theory, institutional theory, and the resource-based view to understand the motivations behind SDG adoption and its potential impact on ESG risks.

• Methodology: The study uses a dataset of firms across various industries and regions, analyzing the effects of SDG alignment on ESG risk exposure. The research employs both qualitative and quantitative methods to assess the interaction between SDG practices and risk management strategies, examining sectoral and national variations in the dynamics of these relationships.

• Results/implications: The results show that while SDG adoption initially increases ESG risks due to the complexity involved in integrating sustainability, effective risk management significantly mitigates these risks. The research contributes to the theoretical understanding of SDG integration and provides a practical framework for firms to balance sustainability goals with robust risk management strategies for long-term success.