Other versions:

(Verbatim name)

ID

(Catalog Number)

ORG

DES

Invalid DOI was provided, please try again

XML
PDF
 
 
Bluesky
Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Mendeley
Reddit
Notify a colleague
  • ContentsContents
  • Article InfoArticle Info
  • CiteCite
  • MetricsMetrics
  • CommentComment
  • RelatedRelated
  • FigsFigs
  • TabsTabs
  • RefsRefs
  • CitedCited
  • Article title
  • Abstract
  • Keywords
  • Relevance to practice
  • 1. Introduction
  • 2. Literature review
    • 2.1. Voluntary sustainability reporting: drivers and limitations
    • 2.2. The shift toward mandatory sustainability reporting
    • 2.3. Mandatory reporting and disclosure quality
    • 2.4. Emerging risks and the limits of current frameworks
    • 2.5. Research gap and contribution
  • 3. Institutional context: the Netherlands
    • 3.1. Sustainability reporting legislation in the Netherlands
      • NFRD
      • CSRD
      • Omnibus
      • Current reporting landscape
    • 3.2. Dutch legislation and PFAS
      • Additional EU legislation
  • 4. Empirical results
    • 4.1. Research sample and research methodology
    • 4.2. PFAS disclosure and its depth
    • 4.3. Qualitative characteristics of PFAS disclosure
  • 5. Additional analysis
  • 6. Discussion and conclusion
    • Recommendations for regulators
  • References
  • Appendix 1
  • Appendix 2
  • Appendix 3
  • Appendix 4
Subscribe to email alerts for current Article's categories
Powered by