Conference Agenda

Introduction- Sustainability reporting has attracted increasing attention in recent years becoming a burning issue of the last decade. Seen as a possible solution to make firms accountable and more responsible for their impacts on the environment and society in repose to the urgency imposed by climate change and its rapidly developing negative effects, it is however become a “mainstream” concept, usually misused and consequently disregarded in its utility and potential when brought into discussion. One of the main concern regarding this instrument to enhance transparency is the role played by the major stakeholders in providing their comments and views during the development of sustainability frameworks and standards for the reporting. As we are all aware, the activities of firms mainly damage the environment -which has no own proper voice- and people - who usually have no means to let institutions hear their voices. Despite the long history of public consultation in the European Union, it is hard to reconcile the “have your say” policy with the equal treatment among stakeholders to ensure them equal means to raise their voices.

Purpose – This paper aims at analysing the role of public consultation in the adoption of those EU directives on non-financial reporting (NFRD) before and sustainability reporting (CSRD and its ESRS) now. More precisely, it aims at identifying the categories of stakeholders who interacted the most with the available instruments of public consultation and to assess whether the principle of political equality has been respected or not. The study then shifts its perspective going from the EU level to the national level to analyse the public consultation procedures, methods, and tools adopted by some Member States in the transposition of the previously mentioned directives. Based on the findings, the paper pursues also the identification of a potential impact of such public consultations on the governance of firms subject to these directives.

Methodology – The paper uses first of all content analysis to understand the use of public consultation – in its various forms – with regard to various types of sustainable policies. Secondly, it focuses on the tools and methodologies of public consultation used for the adoption of the NFRD, of the CSRD, and of the standards for the latter (the ESRS). Thirdly, the paper scrutinizes, from a comparative perspective, the use of public consultation in the national transpositions of the NFRD and the CSRD in three member states: Germany, Italy and Spain. To conclude, a final evaluation in the light of the principle of political equality is done.

Originality – Despite the numerous publications on the topic of public consultation, also in the sustainability field, this paper stands out for its originality due to the fact that there is no literature on the use of public consultation with regard to sustainability reporting policies at a EU level. The paper goes even further by analysing on a national level the use of public consultation trying to identify strengths and weaknesses between the two levels – European and national - and, parallelly, the assurance of equal treatment among stakeholders.

Gender bonds have emerged as a novel financial tool designed to advance gender equality and empower women. Recognizing the economic and social benefits of gender equality, these bonds offer a strategic way to leverage financial markets for social progress. Accessible to a diverse range of investors, including public and private sectors, domestic stakeholders, and international investors, gender bonds support initiatives that enhance women’s roles in the economy. Their primary aim is to channel investments into women-founded businesses and companies that prioritize gender equality in their practices. By directing funds to these enterprises, gender bonds address systemic disparities in access to financial resources and economic opportunities, fostering the growth of women-led businesses and encouraging companies to adopt inclusive practices. This paper provides an overview of gender bonds, detailing their characteristics and assessing their potential impact on reducing gender disparities. Through selected case studies and a qualitative approach, the study examines the global context of gender bonds, identifying best practices and offering practical recommendations for their effective implementation. By analyzing diverse examples from various regions, the paper seeks to uncover factors that contribute to the success of gender bonds in different economic and cultural settings. The study is organized around a framework focused on three key themes: the challenges and opportunities of investing in gender bonds, the importance of transparency and accountability, and the dynamics of market demand. Understanding these aspects helps identify barriers to widespread adoption and the potential benefits that gender bonds can deliver. Transparency is essential for building investor confidence and ensuring effective use of funds to promote gender equality. Market demand insights reveal investor interest levels and the potential for expanding gender bond initiatives. From a practical perspective, the paper draws on insights from existing gender bond issuances and market trends to provide lessons for policymakers, investors, and issuers. Moreover, by highlighting successful examples and identifying areas for improvement, the aim of the paper is to enhance the understanding of gender bonds as a tool for promoting sustainable development and inclusivity.

This study combines scholarship on administrative burden, digital government, and inclusion, putting forward the following key research questions: Does digital government hold its promise and reduce administrative burden for citizens? If so, do citizens with vulnerabilities emerging from their sex, race, age, state of health, and socio-economic conditions benefit from digital government to a similar extent as others?

Previous research on these matters is still sparse. Peters (2023) calls for a broader research agenda on digital administrative burden. Larsson (2021) shows how low-income citizens are disproportionally excluded from an automated benefit-granting procedure and must apply manually instead. These pieces suggest that digital government may create new inequalities to the further disadvantage of vulnerable people, who are supposed to be more at risk of being excluded from digital services than non-vulnerable citizens, thus carrying higher administrative burden.

This study builds on the 2021 wave of the Life Events Survey, designed for representativeness of the German population. The experiences of 2,878 respondents are analyzed for the impact of digitalization on the perceived administrative costs in 3,946 encounters with state agencies.

Preliminary results show that using digital services is related to significantly lower administrative burden across different socio-demographic groups. Once vulnerable citizens use digital government, they benefit from it similarly to more advantaged people, with the important exception of low-income and low-education citizens (who benefit significantly less from digitalization). The results also provide evidence that some vulnerable groups are significantly less likely to use digital government, raising the question of how they can be empowered to use digital services.

Improving social equity has long been one of the primary goals of public procurement programs. Examples include set aside programs, sustainable purchasing initiatives, and policies to promote fair wages among contractors. Across the world, public procurement programs allocate billions of dollars to small, disadvantaged businesses annually, and serve as a way for disadvantaged firms and people to access government resources and programs. Yet, despite increasing attention to issues of social equity in other parts of public administration, there has been little academic research centered on procurement equity programs. Using theories of public value, we make the case that procurement is one of the most important ways that governments advance social equity. We summarize current trends in government programs and spending, highlighting the interplay between equity and efficiency as leading values for public programs. We summarize some of the primary lessons learned from decades of procurement equity programs, offering insights into potential opportunities and risks is other areas of public management. Then, we review the current legal landscape and academic literature to identify areas where additional scholarship is needed, offering potential research questions, and data and methodological approaches to consider. In particular, we suggest that more work is needed to understand the performance and impact of these programs on government agencies, disadvantaged firms, and communities of people who have been excluded from systems of power.