During the rapid growing of the universe economic system, environmental sustainability, corporate societal duty and societal accounting go the nucleus factors for current organisation. Coca-Cola and Pepsi are both well-known America drink trade names in the universe. Coca-cola is the universe ‘s largest drink company which provides twinkle, athleticss drinks and nutrient in over 200 states and markets ( The Coca-Cola Company 2010. ). On the other manus, Pepsi is besides a universe leader in convenient bites, nutrients and drinks which is the major rival to Coca-Cola ( PepsiCo Inc 2010 ). As a planetary company, they invest in invention to accomplish sustainability and bring forth the sustainability study. For the sustainability of Coca-Cola, it is to do a positive difference in the universe ( The Coca-Cola Company 2010 ). Besides, “ Pepsi is public presentation with intent and puting in sustainable growing ” ( PepsiCo Inc 2010 ). The studies provide the companies approaches to societal and environment sustainability and societal accounting. Therefore, the ratings of the two companies ‘ sustainable studies are critical to all stakeholders and communities.
1.2 Aim of the study
The intent of this study is to develop an eco-audit study for Coca-Cola and Pepsi. The study is to measure the sustainable study of the two companies and compare the company approaches on societal accounting.
1.3 Scope of the study
The study will chiefly discourse the construct of societal accounting, comparing of Coca-Cola and Pepsi on societal accounting. It will construction the subjects into two parts. Each portion will detail discuss in the study.
1.4 Source of information
The beginning and information is chiefly come from Internet and external text editions. It will unite texts and journal articles.
2.0 DEFINE AND EXPLAIN THE CONCEPT OF “ SOCIAL Accounting ”
2.1 Definition of societal accounting
As the Ghosh ( n.d. ) define that, societal accounting means the development of a measuring system to supervise the internal or external concern activities on societal and environmental impacts to stakeholders with non-monetary units. Social accounting is concern of the organisation public presentation and engagement in the societal and environmental activities. It includes all the item activities engagement and part from organisation. Social accounting is same as the sustainability study to place and mensurate the societal part of the company, find the company strategies on the communities and societal segments provide relevant information of houses end, constabularies and public presentation to the societal ends ( Ghosh n.d. ).
The construct of societal accounting is developed by the societal, community and stakeholder which under the economic growing. It stimulates more intensive concern activities and productions which causes the environmental harm, such as H2O and air pollutions from the increasing mills. For the increasing concern of sustainability, organisation behaves in the societal and environmental issue is the important constituent after profitableness. The purpose of societal accounting is provide a opportunity for stakeholders to understand the ways or attitudes of the organisation work in sustainability. Therefore, many of the companies provide the sustainability study to gain the repute and carry through the corporate societal duty.
2.2 The rules of “ good ” societal histories and planetary criterions
To keep the quality of societal accounting, there are five footing rules to pattern. The five rules are completeness, comparison, ordinance, external confirmation and uninterrupted betterment. The first rule is completeness. To supply a study, it should cover all the countries of the organisation ‘s activities instead than the positive parts ( Crane & A ; Matten 2007 ). Company ever selects the favorable public presentation to affect in the study. The study merely covers the positive side will lose the world. It is common for company concealing the unfavorable information because it will cut down company repute and expose the failing. The 2nd rule is comparison. The appraisal of the study should be available to comparable, suited for the external confirmation and planetary criterion in a different periods and states ( Crane & A ; Matten 2007 ). Under the globalisation, the current organisation is non merely cover with one part and looking for the market enlargement to the universe.
Therefore, the planetary criterion study will be easier for different states to comparing and appraisal. The comparison study will be critical for the concern enlargement and look of sustainability construct. For the rule of ordinance, the study should conform to all the policies and Torahs which provided by authorities and company. It should avoid the inappropriate footings and illegal factors. Beside, the external confirmation is about the foreigners have the right to verify the world of the study publication ( Biz/ed n.d. ). Stakeholders have power to measure the study and increase the certainty. The concluding rule is uninterrupted betterment. Social accounting is besides a method to reflect the insufficient and lacking company public presentation which encourages the company betterment ( Crane & A ; Matten 2007 ). The uninterrupted betterment can keep the company in a high competitory degree.
Beside the rules, the acceptance of planetary criterions is doing more comparable to the study. The planetary criterions involve two facets which are scrutinizing and describing. As Crane & A ; Matten ( 2007, p.217 ) claim that, “ Auditing is about the planetary workplace criterion, SA 8000, which cover the on the job hours, favoritism and independent commissioned hearers ”. For SA 8000 is grounded on the rules of nucleus ILO conventions, UN Conventions, and an ISO-style direction system, it is applicable to all industrial sectors to mensurate their public presentation and responsibly in supply ironss ( Social Accountability International n.d. ). SA 8000 protects the labor and human right in workplace under the planetary making.
For coverage, the Global Reporting Initiative ( GRI ) of G3 Guideline is common adopted and accepted by the current company to their sustainability study. Harmonizing to Crane & A ; Matten ( 2007, p.217 ) explain that, “ GRI as a planetary coverage criterion, which create a common model for voluntary coverage on economic, societal and environmental public presentation ternary bottom line of sustainability ”. “ G3 Guidelines are model of GRI Sustainability Reporting and affect the rules to specify study in materiality, stakeholder inclusiveness, comparison and dependability ” ( Global Reporting Initiative n.d. ). It ensures the study content and quality in a standard degree. There are still some of the other planetary criterions for societal accounting. The rules and planetary criterions develop the societal accounting study in a professional and comparable degree.
3.0 CRITICAL EVALUATION THE SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENT REPORTS OF COCA-COLA AND PEPSI
3.1 Coca-Cola on societal accounting
Coca-Cola is the universe taking company in nutrient and drink industry. As the prima phase, there is a immense duty to set up a positive and active image in societal and environmental sustainability. “ Coca-Coal believes that puting in the economic, environmental and societal development can help the concern grow ” ( The Coca-Coal Company 2010 ). “ The value of Coca-Cola is to do a positive difference in the universe through redesign the populating manner to driving concern growing and making a sustainable universe ” ( The Coca-Coal Company 2010 ). The organisation value is concern on the personal wellness and green life. Meanwhile, Coca-Cola contains seven nucleus countries to concern sustainability which is more specialnesss than Pepsi. It includes “ Beverage Benefits, Active Healthy Living, Energy Management and Climate Protection, Community, Sustainable Packaging, Water Stewardship and workplace ” ( The Coca-Coal Company 2010 ). Each countries provide different extend of the sustainable actions.
The marks of sustainability from 2008 to 2009 are included in the study. However, Coca-cola merely mentions the achieved marks and public presentations, such as cut down the H2O and energy rate, and open the universe largest PET recycling works for recycling the bottles ( The Coca-Coal Company 2010 ). Furthermore, the big portion of the study is about the company ‘s future marks, inventions and programs in sustainability for the following four old ages. The actions taking in the sustainability are rather similar with Pepsi in such countries. For case, it provides the sugar free drinks and footmark decrease.
The company study commit to the rules of the United Nations Global Compact, against the Global Reporting Initiative ( GRI ) G3 guidelines and CEO Water Mandate ( The Coca-Coal Company 2010 ). Coca-Cola more participates in environmental and administration, committednesss and battle subdivisions which will supply the full GRI G3 Report in late twelvemonth ( The Coca-Coal Company 2010 ). To increase transparence of the study, company invites the Board of Directors and BECO Verification Statement as the members are non employees, to oversee the moralss and information certainty ( The Coca-Coal Company 2010 ). It ensures that the study is high degree of conformity to the criterions. Social accounting is portion of the concern ends and scheme in Coca-Cola.
3.2 Pepsi on societal accounting
“ Pepsi as a universe drink company, they promise to present sustainable growing by puting in a healthier hereafter for consumers, planet and communities ” ( PepsiCo Inc 2010 ). The continuity of sustainable growing and positive impact in the environment are the major value in Pepsi. Pepsi develop their duties and committednesss into homo, environmental and talent sustainability. Harmonizing to the PepsiCo Inc ( 2010 ), “ the human sustainability aims to promote people to populate healthier by turn toing diverse and complex planetary nutrition demands ”. For illustration, cut down the mean sugars sum and extinguish the direct sale of full-sugar soft drinks to school ( PepsiCo Inc 2010 ). However, Pepsi ever face the challenge in the high sugar and Calorie on their merchandises. To cover with this job, the intent of human sustainability is concentrate on the nutrition by following the planetary nutrition criterions and natural ingredients. Pepsi work hard to command the nutrition and do their merchandises healthier.
For the environmental sustainability, “ Pepsi continues to introduce and efficient usage of land, energy, H2O and packaging in operations for protecting the natural resources ” ( PepsiCo Inc 2010 ). Pepsi take action to minimise footmark, accomplishing positive H2O balance and traveling toward zero landfill within 10 old ages ( PepsiCo Inc 2010 ). The environmental sustainable ends are realistic and come-at-able for company. Pepsi receive the Environmental Excellence Award from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency leading and 2010 Global Water Awards with “ Environmental Contribution of the Year ” ( PepsiCo Inc 2010 ). Nevertheless, some environmental ends are besides involve in the Coca-Cola sustainable study, such as bundle re-design and cut down C footmark.
Talent sustainability is the last duty country screen in the study. “ Pepsi continues to stay the extremely skilled, diverse work force and supply a safe and healthy workplace ” ( PepsiCo Inc 2010 ). Workers are the plus for company to success. Pepsi spend a batch of resources in workers ‘ wellness and associate with different direction degrees to accomplish the sustainable growing. Pepsi uses G3 Guidelines of GRI without unwrap the full study. The subdivisions of Pepsi ‘s GRI study are non reference in the sustainable study and hard to make the comparing. The degree of the conformity to the criterions is unsure. Pepsi set up many ends and committednesss in homo, environmental and talent sustainability for the coming old ages. Pepsi will seek to run into the marks base on these three countries. The consequence can merely see in the hereafter.
3.3 Compare and Contrast of Coca-Cola and Pepsi on societal accounting
Coca-Cola and Pepsi are the rivals in the nutrient and drink industry. Both of them are bring forthing the sustainable study with similar content and criterion. However, Coca-Cola provide a more complete and comprehensive study than Pepsi. The value of Coca-Cola in sustainability is to put societal and environment for altering the people ‘s populating manner to make a sustainable hereafter and concern growing. They believe that alteration of the personal life manner and unrecorded positive are the best ways to set up a sustainable universe which include seven core countries in sustainable issues. In contrast, Pepsi purpose at topographic point the positive environmental impacts to accomplish the sustainable growing. Sustainable growing is concentrate on the homo, environmental and endowment. The value and country concern of the stakeholders are more general than Coca-Cola. For the mark scene, Coca-cola mentions the achieved marks from last old ages in the study. Although it merely picking the achieved marks and concealing the unattained marks, it still supply the information for stakeholders to cognize what the company successfully do in the sustainability. Besides, Pepsi merely affect the approaching ends and committednesss in the study.
It did non include any old marks. Stakeholders will be questionable to the success or failure of the last marks. Coca-cola is puting the study for four old ages which is appropriate for the rapid changing universe. For Pepsi, there is non including a concrete clip in the study and puting as a long term program. Sustainability plans and marks should be up-to-date and verify during a period of clip. On the other manus, both of Coca-Cola and Pepsi are utilizing the G3 Guidelines in GRI. Coca-Cola discloses their GRI study with the subdivisions or indexs in such countries. Unfortunately, Pepsi is non public their GRI study to do the comparing. In add-on, they besides listed in the Dow Jones Sustainability World Index and Sustainability North America Index. However, Coca-Cola besides commits to the UN Global Compact and CEO Water Mandate set of rule in human right and execution of H2O severally ( The Coca-Coal Company 2010 ). Compare to Pepsi, Coca-Cola have high degree of the conformity and transparence to the planetary criterions. Both Coca-Cola and Pepsi are implanting the environment sustainable into the built-in portion of the concern operation and mission.
4.0 Decision
After critical rating of Coca-Cola and Pepsi on societal accounting study, it can be concluded that:
Social accounting is a measuring system to supervise the company public presentation and engagement in societal and environment. The five good rules, SA8000 and GRI as the planetary criterions develop a professional and comparable societal accounting study.
Social accounting on Coca-Cola is better than Pepsi. The study of Coca-Cola is more complete, comprehensive and transparence comparison with Pepsi. Coca-Cola develops seven nucleus countries in sustainability which is more specific than Pepsi. The timeframe and marks are clearly mentioned in the study. It against the GRI, United Nations Global Compact and CEO Water Mandate as the planetary criterion and ask for the Board of Directors and BECO Verification Statement which provide the study in good rules of societal history and planetary criterions.
Pepsi on societal accounting is more general than Coca-Cola. The value of company is to accomplish the sustainable growing. Pepsi is deficient to concern in homo, environmental and talent sustainability. Besides, the old marks and GRI study are non disclosed in the study. The sustainable marks and actions are set as a long clip program without a concrete timeframe. Nevertheless, Pepsi besides against the GRI similar with Coca-Cola.
5.0 Recommendation
It is recommended that:
Coca-Cola and Pepsi can develop industry-specific understanding to work together in the sustainable issues. They can set up codifications of behavior or patterns to the peculiar countries. For illustration, industry-water or workplace understanding.
Coca-Cola can unwrap the on-going marks in the study for allowing the stakeholders know the marks advancement. Under the faster altering universe, it should regular reappraisal and modify the study on every twelvemonth. It can maintain the marks up-to-date.
Pepsi should increase concern countries and more specific. The study can affect the processing and achieved marks. In add-on, it should put a concrete timeframe to the study, such as two or five old ages. Pepsi should unwrap GRI study and invite external audits to verify the study for heightening the transparence.
