SustainabilityAccounting &The MultiCapital Scorecard
Workshop Conducted atUVM’s SI-MBA ProgramBurlington, VT
by Mark W. McElroy, PhDCenter for Sustainable OrganizationsMarch 20, 2019 (Updated March 24, 2019)
Agenda
• Part 1: Sustainability Accounting 1:30–2:20
– Break 2:20-2:30
• Part 2: Materiality Determination 2:30-3:20
– Break 3:20-3:30
• Part 3: MultiCapital Scorecard 3:30-4:20
– Q&A 4:20-4:30
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
Part 1: Sustainability Accounting
1
The Triple Bottom Line
• Coined by John Elkington in 1994– Social– Economic– Environmental
• Also “capitalized” by Elkington– Social: social capital– Economic: economic capital– Environmental: natural capital
• What is capital?– A stock of anything that yields a valuable flow of goods or
services … well-being (Daly, Costanza, Porritt and others)
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
2
Vital Capitals and the TBL
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
3
This is the reference model we currentlyrely on for the MultiCapital Scorecard
Susty Accounting vs. Impact Valuation
• Distinction between Sustainability Accounting (SA) and Impact Valuation (IV)– SA addresses sustainability performance relative to
thresholds and allocations – non-incrementalist– IV does not: focus is on value creation and
valuation – incrementalist
• A content validity test for SA– If it is possible to perform or “score” well according to
the principles or dictates of a particular SA doctrine and yet still be putting the sufficiency of vital (capital) resources or the well-being of people who rely on them at risk, then the SA doctrine fails on its face and should be rightly rejected!
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
4
e.g., the <IR> Framework
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
5
The <IR> Framework “focuses on the ability of an organization tocreate value in the short, medium and long term …” (<IR> Framework)
The GRI, by contrast …
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
6
• Explicitly calls for use of Sustainability Context principle in reporting (since ‘02):
“… the aim is to present the organization’s performance inrelation to broader concepts of sustainability. This involvesexamining its performance in the context of the limits and
demands placed on economic, environmental or socialresources, at the sectoral, local, regional, or global level.”
In practice, most GRI reports have tended to excludecontext and are not SA in scope or function at all
GRI 101: Foundation
Context-Based Sustainability (CBS)
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
7
• A general approach for complying with the Sustainability Context principle ..– But which does a better job of not just taking
background circumstances into account, but which also …
• Does so in a way that is explicitly capital- and TBL-based, and which …
• Makes it possible to identify organization-specificstandards of performance against which impacts on capitals can be assessed
• Features use of context-based metrics!
Context-Based Metrics (CBMs)
General Specification for CBMs
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
S = A/N
Sustainability performance (S) can be quantitativelyexpressed as the quotient of actual impacts (A)
on vital capitals over normative impacts (N)
8
Part 2: Materiality Determination
9
Materiality & Stakeholders in CBS
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
10
• A thing is material if:– It consists of a direct impact on a vital capital of
importance to a person’s well-being, and– It corresponds to a non-discretionary duty or
obligation owed to a person to have (or not have) such an impact, either because:
• It’s already happening• A relationship calls for it (roles, contracts, etc.)
• Such persons, in turn, are stakeholders:– Anyone to whom a duty or obligation is owed to
manage one’s impacts on vital capitals in ways that can affect their well-being
Material Areas of Impact
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
11
• Once identified as material, sustainability standards of performance must be defined (e.g., Greenhouse Gas Emissions):
Climate (GHGs in tCO2e) 2015 2016 2017 2018
Susty Norms Baseline Year
0 0 0
Trajectory Targets 22,500 20,000 17,500
Actual Impacts 25,000 23,000 20,000 21,000
Next: Let’s Create 3 Hypothetical AOIs
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
12
Social Area of Impact 2015 2016 2017 2018
Susty Norms Baseline YearTrajectory Targets
Actual ImpactsEconomic Area of Impact 2015 2016 2017 2018
Susty Norms Baseline YearTrajectory Targets
Actual ImpactsEnvironmentalArea of Impact 2015 2016 2017 2018
Susty Norms Baseline YearTrajectory Targets
Actual Impacts
Assumptions for Purposes of Workshop
• Lets assume we’re talking about an agricultural food producer – a farm setting
• You are the managers of the business and are attempting to specify material areas of impact (AOIs) for inclusion in the company’s MultiCapital Scorecard
• 3 such AOIs have already been identified (Safe Food, Owners’ Equity and Climate Impacts); now you are attempting to specify 3 more for purposes of our workshop
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
13
A Social AOI (not Safe Food; already ID’d)
Social Area of Impact 2015 2016 2017 2018
Susty Norms Baseline YearTrajectory Targets
Actual Impacts
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
AOI Name: __________________
Materiality?
• Stakeholder ID: ___________________________• Non-discretionary D/O: ____________________
14
Let’s choose an
example for each
of the 3 bottom lines
and then fill in an
AOI table for each as
shown on this slide
An Economic AOI (not Return on Equity; already ID’d)
Economic Area of Impact 2015 2016 2017 2018
Susty Norms Baseline YearTrajectory Targets
Actual Impacts
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
AOI Name: __________________
Materiality?• Stakeholder ID: ___________________________• Non-discretionary D/O: ____________________
15
Let’s choose anexample for each
of the 3 bottom linesand then fill in an
AOI table for each asshown on this slide
An Environmental AOI (not Climate/GHGs; already ID’d)
EnvironmentalArea of Impact 2015 2016 2017 2018
Susty Norms Baseline YearTrajectory Targets
Actual Impacts
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
AOI Name: __________________
Materiality?• Stakeholder ID: ___________________________• Non-discretionary D/O: ____________________
16
Let’s choose anexample for each
of the 3 bottom linesand then fill in an
AOI table for each asshown on this slide
Module 3: MultiCapital Scorecard
17
Scoring Progression Performance (1/3)
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
18
Social Area of Impact 2015 2016 2017 2018
Susty Norms Baseline YearTrajectory Targets
Actual ImpactsProgression Scores N/A
Now let’s addProgression Performance
scores to each tablewhere shown, usingthe scoring schema
provided below
Scoring Progression Performance (2/3)
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
19
Economic Area of Impact 2015 2016 2017 2018
Susty Norms Baseline YearTrajectory Targets
Actual ImpactsProgression Scores N/A
Now let’s addProgression Performance
scores to each tablewhere shown, usingthe scoring schema
provided below
Scoring Progression Performance (3/3)
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
20
EnvironmentalArea of Impact 2015 2016 2017 2018
Susty Norms Baseline YearTrajectory Targets
Actual ImpactsProgression Scores N/A
Now let’s addProgression Performance
scores to each tablewhere shown, usingthe scoring schema
provided below
Your MultiCapital Scorecard
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
21
Next we need tofill in the 3 blank
rows of the company’sScorecard with the
AOIs you developed(adding them to the
other 3 already there),and then analyze the
scores that follow
Results
22
- The 3 AOIs You Developed
23
Scoring Progression Performance (1/3)
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
24
Social AOI: Workplace Safety (# injury days lost) 2015 2016 2017 2018
Sustainability Norms Baseline Year
0 0 0
Trajectory Targets 12 5 N/A*
Actual Impacts 15 10 5 0
Progression Scores N/A 2 2 3
*Trajectory Targets discontinuedWhen they match the SustyNorm for the year. Thus, a +2 score is not possible in 2018; all other references to Trajectory Targets (TTs) in the scoring schema should be understood as being applicable only If such TTs actually exist for a given year.
Scoring Progression Performance (2/3)
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
25
Economic AOI: Livable Wage ($/hour) 2015 2016 2017 2018
Sustainability Norms Baseline Year
20 20 20
Trajectory Targets 14 17 N/A*
Actual Impacts 12 13 14 20
Progression Scores N/A 1 1 3
*Trajectory Targets discontinuedwhen they match the SustyNorm for the year. Thus, a +2 score is not possible in 2018; all other references to Trajectory Targets (TTs) in the scoring schema should be understood as being applicable only If such TTs actually exist for a given year.
Scoring Progression Performance (3/3)
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
26
Environmental AOI: Water Quality (in nutrient ppm) 2015 2016 2017 2018
Sustainability Norms Baseline Year
500 500 500
Trajectory Targets 1000 750 N/A*
Actual Impacts 1200 1100 1000 800
Progression Scores N/A 1 1 1
*Trajectory Targets discontinuedwhen they match the SustyNorm for the year. Thus, a +2 score is not possible in 2018; all other references to Trajectory Targets (TTs) in the scoring schema should be understood as being applicable only If such TTs actually exist for a given year.
ppm = parts per million
- The 3 AOIs Earlier Developed in Advance of the Workshop
27
Scoring Progression Performance (1/3)
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
28
Social AOI: Food Safety (# illness events) 2015 2016 2017 2018
Sustainability Norms Baseline Year
0 0 0
Trajectory Targets 7 5 3
Actual Impacts 10 8 4 2
Progression Scores N/A 1 2 2
Scoring Progression Performance (2/3)
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
29
Economic AOI: Return on Equity (%/year) 2015 2016 2017 2018
Sustainability Norms Baseline Year
7 7 7
Trajectory Targets 5 6 N/A*
Actual Impacts 4 5 5 6
Progression Scores N/A 2 0 1
*Trajectory Targets discontinuedwhen they match the SustyNorm for the year. Thus, a +2 score is not possible in 2018; all other references to Trajectory Targets (TTs) in the scoring schema should be understood as being applicable only If such TTs actually exist for a given year.
Scoring Progression Performance (3/3)
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
30
Environmental AOI: Climate System (tCO2e) 2015 2016 2017 2018
Sustainability Norms Baseline Year
0 0 0
Trajectory Targets 22,500 20,000 17,500
Actual Impacts 25,000 23,000 20,000 21,000
Progression Scores N/A 1 2 -1
ppm = parts per million
Your Final MultiCapital Scorecard!
Copyright © 2019 Center for Sustainable Organizations
31
Note: Weights shown in column B are on a scale of 1-5 and are all the same in this case for the sake of simplicity.