DEVELOPMENT OF A SUSTAINABILITY STRATEGY FOR A ROAD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY IN LATVIA
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17770/etr2025vol1.8668Keywords:
CSRD, ESRS, sustainability, strategy, competitiveness, environmental impact, constructionAbstract
The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) entered into force on 5 January 2023. This new directive updates the rules on the social and environmental information that companies must report. Companies covered by the CSRD will be required to report in accordance with the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). The unclear direction of the industry's development, unstable and unpredictable funding, limited innovation capacity due to regulatory enactments and various customer-created regulations are significant limitations for future plans. All these challenges, supplemented by the principle of the lowest price, complicate and make it difficult to develop new sustainable development strategies. While the selection criterion is the lowest price, large-scale sustainable innovations can put the company in an uncompetitive market position. Road construction companies need to develop a sustainability strategy that both complies with the new regulatory framework, and is in line with the market reality of the industry, and minimizes future risks that may arise from specifying sustainability goals and principles. A sustainability strategy for the road construction company has been developed. This strategy aims to enhance the company's competitiveness by reducing production costs and minimizing environmental impact. It ensures compliance with future sustainability requirements and mitigates risks associated with the loss of competitiveness. The strategy also incorporates the development of management skills necessary for the successful and efficient implementation of strategic directions and for the further development or adjustment of the sustainability strategy in response to policy changes.
References
E. D. G. Fraser, A. J. Dougill, W. E. Mabee, M. Reed, and P. McAlpine, “Bottom up and top down: Analysis of participatory processes for sustainability indicator identification as a pathway to community empowerment and sustainable environmental management,” J. Environ. Manage., vol. 78, no. 2, pp. 114–127, 2006, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.04.009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.04.009
A. De Pascale, R. Arbolino, K. Szopik-Depczyńska, M. Limosani, and G. Ioppolo, “A systematic review for measuring circular economy: The 61 indicators,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 281, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124942. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124942
S. Harris, M. Martin, and D. Diener, “Circularity for circularity’s sake? Scoping review of assessment methods for environmental performance in the circular economy.,” Sustain. Prod. Consum., vol. 26, pp. 172–186, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.spc.2020.09.018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.09.018
F. Berg, J. Kölbel, and R. Rigobon, “Aggregate Confusion: The Divergence of ESG Ratings,” SSRN Electron. J., 2019, doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3438533. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3438533
D. M. Christensen, G. Serafeim, and A. Sikochi, “Why is Corporate Virtue in the Eye of The Beholder? The Case of ESG Ratings,” Account. Rev., vol. 97, no. 1, pp. 147–175, 2022, doi: 10.2308/TAR-2019-0506. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2308/TAR-2019-0506
A. Agapova, T. King, and M. Ranta, “Navigating transparency: The interplay of ESG disclosure and voluntary earnings guidance,” Int. Rev. Financ. Anal., vol. 97, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.irfa.2024.103813. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2024.103813
M. D. Kimbrough, X. Wang, S. Wei, and J. Zhang, “Does Voluntary ESG Reporting Resolve Disagreement among ESG Rating Agencies?,” Eur. Account. Rev., vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 15–47, 2024, doi: 10.1080/09638180.2022.2088588. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2022.2088588
G. Serafeim and A. Yoon, “Stock price reactions to ESG news: the role of ESG ratings and disagreement,” Rev. Account. Stud., vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 1500–1530, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11142-022-09675-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-022-09675-3
L. van der Werf, G. Colletis, S. Negny, and et L. Montastruc, “Toward a generic method to help develop circular economy indicators,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 494, p. 144678, Feb. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2025.144678. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2025.144678
M. Haasnoot, J. H. Kwakkel, W. E. Walker, and J. ter Maat, “Dynamic adaptive policy pathways: A method for crafting robust decisions for a deeply uncertain world,” Glob. Environ. Chang., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 485–498, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.12.006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.12.006
M. Porter and M. Kramer, “Creating Shared Value: How to Reinvent Capitalism- and Unleash a Wave of Innovation and Growth,” Harv. Bus. Rev., pp. 49–58, 2011.
G. Contini, M. Peruzzini, S. Bulgarelli, and G. Bosi, “Developing key performance indicators for monitoring sustainability in the ceramic industry: The role of digitalization and industry 4.0 technologies,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 414, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137664. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137664
European Commission, “Commission staff working document impact assessment Accompanying the document Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2013/34/EU, Directive 2004/109/EC, Directive 2006/43/EC and Regulation (EU) No 537/2014.” [Online]. Available: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52021SC0150
Central Statistical Bureau, “Construction output at current prices by economic activity.” [Online]. Available: https://data.stat.gov.lv/pxweb/lv/OSP_PUB/START__NOZ__BU__BUP/BUP020c/table/tableViewLayout1/
Central Statistical Bureau, “Profit or loss after taxes and net turnover of merchants by kind of activity (NACE Rev.2), (million euro) 2006 - 2023,” 2025, [Online]. Available: https://data.stat.gov.lv/pxweb/en/OSP_PUB/START__ENT__UA__UFF/UFF030
B. B. Frey, “Coefficient of Concordance,” in The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design, 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, California 91320: SAGE Publications, Inc., 2022. doi: 10.4135/9781071812082.n89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071812082.n89
R. R. R. M. Rooshdi, M. Z. A. Majid, S. R. Sahamir, and N. A. A. Ismail, “Relative importance index of sustainable design and construction activities criteria for green highway,” Chem. Eng. Trans., vol. 63, pp. 151–156, 2018, doi: 10.3303/CET1863026.
H. A. B. Abu, A. R. Arman, N. Y. Mohamad, and A. K. Nurkhuraishah, “Factors determining growth of companies: A study on construction companies in Malaysia,” African J. Bus. Manag., vol. 5, no. 22, pp. 8753–8762, 2011, doi: 10.5897/ajbm10.1142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5897/AJBM10.1142
S. Kim and Z. (Frank) Li, “Understanding the Impact of ESG Practices in Corporate Finance,” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 7, p. 3746, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.3390/su13073746. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13073746
S. J. Brams, P. H. Edelman, and P. C. Fishburn, “FAIR DIVISION OF INDIVISIBLE ITEMS,” Theory Decis., vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 147–180, Sep. 2003, doi: 10.1023/B:THEO.0000024421.85722.0a. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:THEO.0000024421.85722.0a
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Eduards Veide, Vladimirs Šatrevičs, Irina Voronova, Rita Greitane
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
