Global warming and ecological accidents are well-known threatens, the manhood has been facing with every day. Although the manhood had started producing such an situation a long time ago, ... it is usual to plot modern social accounting from the 1970s. Social accounting (which, until fairly recently, was generally assumed to embrace environmental accounting) attracted considerable and widespread attention during the early to mid-1970s.^[1], furthermore, the roots of corporate sustainability reporting in its current form date to 1989, when the Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economics released the Valdez Principles a 10point code of conduct that included a commitment to reporting on outcomes of implementation. Environmental reporting, the precursor to sustainability reporting, began in earnest in the early 1990s as part of the search for tools for enhanced accountability.^[2] There are interesting overviews of environmental and social accounting developments in Gray, R.'s valuable contributions and leading thoughts. ³

Environmental and sustainable development reports not only serve a communicative role, they are also symbolic and serve as a key device in the marketplace for green images and environmental legitimacy. ...The very act of providing environmental and sustainable development reports has the potential to change behaviour. The process of reporting and contributing to a broader discourse should serve to change management strategies and information systems and in turn lead to changes in management philosophy and practices (Dierkes & Antal, 1985). Similarly, the act of providing such reports makes them a social expectation; a social

expectation that an expedient might not have engaged in during the early 1990s but must engage in now.^[3]

Environmentally driven innovation creates shareholder value by lowering costs, improving the process of service delivery, finding new markets, enhancing the overall competetiveness, leading to new products meeting customers needs.^[4] Cost and revenues related to resources use and waste generation are important data for potential investors, as well as the assessments of future competitive advantages. A report by the Rose Foundation for Communities and the Environment states that inadequate disclosure of environmental liabilities hampers the ability of investors to assess future earnings growth and shareholder value (Goodman, Kron, and Little, 2002, p. 14).^[5] Graham, A. and Maher, J. has proved how external environmental liabilities estimates influence a firm'sbond ratings (over and above the one provided by environmental accruals in financial statements) and bond yields, following previously discovered relations between external environmental cost estimates and equity firm value (Barth and McNichols, 1994; Blacconiere and Northcut, 1997; Campbell et al., 1998).^[6]

The World Resource Institute's studies applied a methodology of evaluation of how environmentally related uncertainties could be translated in financial terms. WRI work showed that individual companies have different risk and exposure levels to environmental changes and that none of 29 explored companies had included data on environmental issues in their financial/annual reports, while 6 of them have provided only qualitative information.^[7]

Environmental accounting has found its way to financial reports through environmental cost accounting techniques development, through the networks (EMAN-Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network) and accounting bodies that have developed guidance on environmental accounting.^[8] But, disclosures under financial reporting haven't meet the goal to assess the sustainability performance, so some voluntary frameworks for sustainable disclosure became necessary. Despite of improvements, there would always be some sustainability data that cannot be transformed into financial outputs. Some companies prepare separate documents that enable cross-referencing, and some try to prepare a single annual report including financial and sustainability disclosures. According to GRI survey (2003) on 112 organizations, 60% of them believed combined reporting (linked and/or crossreferenced) could be performed. The challenge for market institutions (such as stock exchanges and standards bodies) is to develop a structure for business reporting that enables existing financial reporting systems to work in a synergistic manner with other disclosures - some of which may be in the form of financial figures and others that will not.^[9]

Undoubtedly, environmental reporting has been gradually spreading to wider extents,but there is still substantial number of companies that don't recognize benefits as prevailing over costs of environmental reporting. So, there's a number of studies trying to link some companies' features with their environmental disclosures as well as with their real environmental performances to better understand environmental reporting practices. Some of the studies confirmed relation between environmental performance and disclosures (Freedman, Jaggi and Stagliano, 2004; Patten, 2002; Hughes, Anderson and Golden, 2001; Bewley and Li, 2000; Al-Tuwaijri et al., 2004; Stanny, 1998; Cormier and Magnan, 1997; Li, Richardson and Thornton, 1997), while the others found no relation (Walden and Stagliano, 2004; Freedman and Stagliano, 1995; Freedman and Wasley, 1990; Wiseman, 1982; Ingram and Frazier, 1980). Also, some studies found environmental disclosures positively related to company's size (Walden and Stagliano, 2004; Warsame, Neu and Simmons, 2002; Alnajjar, 2000; Neu, Warsame and Pe-dwell, 1998), regulatory influence (Barth, McNichols and

Wilson, 1997; Stanny, 1998), and public policy pressure (Patten, 2000; Bewley and Li, 2000; Walden and Schwartz, 1997).^[10] Alciatore and Dee's (2006)research performed on the sample of US oil and gas companies confirmed positive significant relation between environmental disclosures and size as well as leverage. It has also showed that different firms had different levels of legitimacy to maintain which was tested during the explored period 1989-1998, confirming O'Donovan (2002) results. Karim, K.E., Lacina, M.J. and Rutledge, R.W. (2006) have found negative relation between environmental disclosures in footnotes and foreign concentration as well as earnings volatility and they have also found the influence of industry type (less disclosures in electronics versus chemical and petroleum industry), based on previous researches which explored the relation between environmental disclosures and amount of ownership by large institutional stockholders (Diamond and Verrecchia, 1991; Kim and Verrechia, 1994; Choi, 1999; Healy, Hutton and Palepu, 1999; Cormier and Magnan, 2003), foreign concentration (Li et all, 1997), profitability (Lang and Lundholm, 1993; Bowman and Haire, 1975; Preston, 1978;Neu, Warsame and Pedwell, 1998; Cormier and Magnan, 1999; Richardson and Welker, 2001; Diamond, 1985; King, Pownall and Waymire, 1990; Cowen, Ferreri and Parker, 1987; Patten, 1991; Cormier and Gordon, 2001), earnings volatility (Yhim, Karim and Rutledge, 2003), leverage (Buhr and Ray, 1991; Cormier and Magnan, 1999), future debting (Healy and Palepu, 2001; Reinstein, Ellis and Wierda, 1998), size (Choi, 1999; Cormier and Magnan, 1999; Alnajjar, 2000; Bewley and Li, 2000; Cormier, Gordon and Magnan, 2004), and industry type (Li et al., 1997, Bewley and Li, 2000).^[11]

Some authors point out that environmental disclosures in financial reports are still considered to be mostly voluntary, fragmentary and ad hoc.^[12] Also, disclosures are more often presented in the footnotes than in the body of financial reports.So, in order to improve such a situation, Swanson, G.A. (2006) offers an interesting discussion on possibilities of systems sciences ideas implementation in the

Note the above text is a case study and i need to write the conclusion for it so can you pleas help me.