This paper explores the extent to which corporations currently increase the voluntary disclosures in triple bottom line (TBL) reports. Although research already has provided substantial contributions as to why and how firms apply TBL reporting, there remains limited understanding of the motivations for and against making voluntary disclosures. Drawing from literature in environmental management and accounting as well as international auditing, this work focuses on guidance, boundarysetting and external assurance for TBL reports. An inductive case study approach is applied to investigate the credibility of TBL reporting by contrasting the competing predictions from legitimacy theory and voluntary disclosure theory on voluntary disclosures. A set of firm and industry specific factors are identified that are expected to determine a firm’s level and extent of reporting. The sample comprises nine US and EU red biotechnology corporations which aligned their TBL reporting to the GRI reporting standards in at least part of their TBL reports that were published between 2000 and 2009. An initial attempt is made to systematically investigate the credibility of TBL reporting to develop the model of voluntary disclosures. The empirical findings of this case study suggest that current guidance, boundary-setting and assurance for TBL reports are not sufficient to increase the credibility, comparability and reliability of reporting. Voluntary disclosure theory can serve to provide economic motivations, while legitimacy theory is helpful to provide a legitimating motivation. The findings support the notion that the economics-based factors better explain the secrecy strategy of providing mainly soft disclosures. The increase of disclosure levels maybe is considered sufficient to respond to public pressure. This work concludes by suggesting some directions of research in the areas of boundary-setting and assurance that have academic and practical implications.

With the growing trend of globalization and rapid development of high technologies, emerging economies face more challenges in technology development because they are chasing a fast-moving frontier. They need to identify global technology trends and adapt to local needs and capabilities. Strategies for technology development differ among countries at different developmental stages. In this research, a technology policy choice framework is developed to link prospective high-tech areas, technology development strategies, and various innovative resources. The research approach is to develop a hierarchical decision model (HDM) and apply the analytic hierarchical process (AHP). Experts are invited from diverse sources to provide a balanced perspective representing different stakeholders. This research focuses on the fast developing Chinese biopharmaceutical industry as a case study. The results of this research have identified thirteen prospective biotech areas that China should invest more resources for development. These technology areas include: recombinant therapeutic proteins, recombinant vaccines, monoclonal antibody technology, cell and tissue engineering, gene therapy, antisense therapy, RNAi, nanobiotechnology, synthetic biology, bioinformatics, pharmacogenetics, gene sequencing, and biotechnology diagnostics. For most of these technology areas, the results have indicated an imitative innovation strategy should be taken as a better strategy under current technological conditions in China. The research has further found that high-tech small-to-medium companies and multinational corporations are major innovation contributors in the Chinese biopharmaceutical sector. The research outcomes can serve as guidelines in resource allocation and policy making for technology development. Based on the overall research findings, policy-makers can apply more specific policy instruments to support innovation activities. Appropriate policy measures may help the country to construct an innovative ecosystem that can serve as the driving force for future technology development.

University of Macau / Institute of Chinese Medical Sciences