PTDoes reporting more mean doing better?
Six sustainability reports from a large Brazilian meat company, from 2018 to 2023. The reports became more complete. Social practices did not always follow. And what moves the company most is the law, not society. Explained in 10 screens.
A report is a thermometer, not the medicine
Of the three parts of sustainability (environmental, economic and social), the social one is the most neglected. It is about the company's impact on people: workers, communities, customers, suppliers. In the meat industry, the risks are well known:
- worker health and safety
- working conditions
- child labor
- Indigenous rights
- land grabbing
Many companies describe what they do in a sustainability report that follows the international GRI standard. The social part of the standard (GRI 400) lists the topics a company should report. But a more precise thermometer does not bring down the fever: reporting well is not the same as doing well. The dissertation measures the two separately.
Brazil is a key player in the world meat market: in 2017–2021 it had 29% of world chicken exports, 14% of beef exports and 6% of pork exports.
Tap a topic. Dashed: topics the company studied did not consider relevant and left out of its reports. Topics GRI 412 and 419 were dropped from the standard and are not part of the analysis. Sources: sections 1, 3.2 and 4.2 of the dissertation.
Six reports read line by line
Of the six meat and derivatives companies on the Brazilian stock exchange, the author chose the one with the longest and most consistent reports and the best positions in B3's Corporate Sustainability Index (ISE). To protect the company, the dissertation calls it MeatCo.
- How complete? Each of the 14 topics got a score per year: 1 (not reported), 3 (partly reported) or 5 (reported everything the standard asks for).
- Did practice improve? Each requirement was compared year by year and classified: improvement, no change, decline or variation.
- Who shows up? Each group mentioned was counted as affected by the company or as affecting the company.
Excerpts from the company's reports, with the score given by the author. Sources: Tables 2 and 6 and section 4.3.13.
The report became more complete: from 38 to 50 points
Adding up the scores of the 14 topics, the maximum would be 70. The company went from 38 points in 2018 to 50 in 2023. Five topics improved, six stayed "partly reported" throughout and three went up and down. Tap a block:
Show as a table
Height and color: score 1, 3 or 5. Dashed rows: topics left out of the reports. Totals recomputed from the scores in Table 6; the table's "Sum" row shows 39 in 2018 and 48 in 2022. Source: Table 6.
Reporting better is not doing better. Place your bet
These are the five topics in which the report became more complete. In each one, did practice improve too? Bet and flip the card.
The reverse also happens: occupational health and safety and supplier social assessment stayed "partly reported" throughout, yet practice improved. Completeness and performance are different things. Sources: Tables 6 and 7, sections 4.3.4 to 4.3.13.
Advances and setbacks live side by side
On balance there were more advances than setbacks, but many topics stood still. Pick an indicator:
Those the company affects are not those who move it
The reports mention many groups, the stakeholders. When they talk about who is affected by the company, mostly workers, suppliers and customers appear. When they talk about who affects the company, government dominates, followed by management itself and the bodies that set rules and standards. Society appears 34 times as affected and only once as someone who weighs on decisions.
Mentions in the social topics of the 2018–2023 reports. Approximate values, read from the charts in the dissertation (Figures 15 and 16 do not give the numbers). Tap a group to read more.
The company is still on the first step: following the rules
Since government, regulators and management carry the most weight, the author concludes that the company acts reactively: it looks after social sustainability mainly to meet what is required. In a three-stage model (Miller and Serafeim, 2014), this is the compliance stage. The topics that advanced most, such as occupational health and safety, are precisely the ones most driven by laws and standards.
And this was the company with the longest and most consistent reports in the sector. For the author, this suggests the whole sector needs more proactive efforts, something studies of other companies should confirm.
Reading a report with fresh eyes
The main lesson applies to any company: measuring only whether the report is complete can hide setbacks. You need to look at what actually changed for people.
For companies
- Go beyond reporting: track whether social indicators improve.
- Be consistent year after year, without topics that vanish and return.
- Listen to society and communities, not only to those who inspect.
- Report the sector's sensitive topics, such as Indigenous rights.
For standard setters
- More precise GRI guidance, to compare years and companies.
- Percentages instead of raw numbers (e.g. return after parental leave).
- Prevent changes in the standards from breaking the time series.
For government
- Laws and standards were what drove the advances most.
- Policies focused on social indicators can improve company practices.
- External auditing makes reports more trustworthy.
For investors, consumers and researchers
- A complete report is not a seal of good social performance.
- Be wary of topics that show up only in the good years.
- The dissertation's method separates completeness from performance and can be applied to other companies.
What this research does not say
- Only what the company wrote. The analysis uses only the company's own reports, with no interviews or other sources to confirm them. · according to the author
- One company, six years. There is no comparison with other companies in the sector; a longer period would show longer-term changes. · according to the author
- Only the groups mentioned. Those who do not appear in the reports may be affected or influential and were left out of the count. · according to the author
- More reports are not always more problems. The number of discrimination cases may also grow with more awareness or more employees. · according to the author
- The ISE may reflect size and profit. Ranking well in the index does not guarantee greater social investment. · according to the author
Credits
ALBINO, Anny Victória Lacera Auerswald. Social sustainability reporting in a Brazilian meat and derivative company: a study of MeatCo (2018-2023). Master's dissertation (Business Administration) — Mackenzie Presbyterian University, São Paulo, 2024. Advisor: Prof. Dr. Almir Martins Vieira.
Case study with documentary analysis (thematic analysis and descriptive statistics) of the 2018–2023 GRI reports. This version simplifies the work for a general audience; the details of each GRI requirement and the full discussions are in the original text.