Search results

Avoided emissions refer to greenhouse gas emission reductions that are a result of using a product or are emission removals due to a decision or an action. Although there is no uniform standard for calculating avoided emissions, market actors have started referring to avoided emissions as “Scope 4” emissions. By default, making a claim about Scope 4 emissions gives an appearance that this Scope of emissions is a natural extension of the existing and accepted Scope-based emissions accounting framework. The purpose of this study is to explore the implications of this assumed legitimacy.

Via a desktop review and interviews, we analyse extant Scope 4 company reporting, associated accounting methodologies and the practical implications of Scope 4 claims.

Upon examination of Scope 4 emissions and their relationship with Scopes 1, 2 and 3 emissions, we highlight a dynamic and interdependent relationship between quantification, commensuration and standardization in emissions accounting. We find that extant Scope 4 assessments do not fit the established framework for Scope-based emissions accounting. In line with literature on the territorializing nature of accounting, we call for caution about Scope 4 claims that are a distraction from the critical work of reducing absolute emissions.

We examine the implications of assumed alignment and borrowed legitimacy of Scope 4 with Scope-based accounting because Scope 4 is not an actual Scope, but a claim to a Scope. This is as an act of accounting territorialization.

Businesses are increasingly vulnerable and exposed to physical climate change risks, which can cascade through local, national and international supply chains. Currently, few methodologies can capture how physical risks impact businesses via the supply chains, yet outside the business literature, methodologies such as sustainability assessments can assess cascading impacts.

Adopting a scoping review framework by Arksey and O'Malley (2005) and the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR), this paper reviews 27 articles that assess climate risk in supply chains.

The literature on supply chain risks of climate change using quantitative techniques is limited. Our review confirms that no research adopts sustainability assessment methods to assess climate risk at a business-level.

Alongside the need to quantify physical risks to businesses is the growing awareness that climate change impacts traverse global supply chains. We review the state of the literature on methodological approaches and identify the opportunities for researchers to use sustainability assessment methods to assess climate risk in the supply chains of an individual business.

This study aims to examine the transitions in hiring criteria by recruiting companies in top ten Quacquarelli Symonds ranked business schools in India during the pandemic.

Using an exploratory lens, an in-depth semistructured interview was conducted with 20 recruiting companies across industries and roles.

Content analysis suggests the changing preferences in hiring criteria and identifies six themes that have assumed importance during the pandemic period.

This study has implications for business school participants who need to change their preparation strategy during the placement season.

There is an opportunity for business schools to focus on these two soft skills, namely, self-management with self-discipline and oral and written communication across the platform. However, in the depth and diversity of soft skills training, there is often a shallow coverage of multiple skills. The rather focused approach to developing these two skills may go a long way in preparing work-delivery graduates who could hit the proverbial ground running as the first step into their careers.

This study contributes to hiring managers by suggesting the traits that may assume importance in the new normal where remote or hybrid working context is a necessity.