Background (1) In the time of the 4th Industrial Revolution or Industry 4.0, a conglomerate of technical and social inventions, political contexts, socio-cultural circumstances, environmental policies, business models, and economic policies has emerged. Sustainability policy in theory and practice aims to deal with the effects of all these factors and to try to make decisions that ensure both social and economic development sustainably. The question is how to familiarize oneself with the current knowledge about the relationship between Industry 4.0 and sustainability?; (2) Methods: This research utilizes an automated content analysis method to analyses scientific journals, newspapers and magazines. The comparison of results of both research group shows that the scientific literature focuses more on changes in business models, production processes and technologies that enable sustainable development; (3) We found that the scientific literature focuses more on changes in business models, production processes and technologies that enable sustainable development. Newspapers and magazines articles write more about sustainable or green investment, sustainable standards and sustainable reporting. Newspapers and magazines articles write more about sustainable or green investment, sustainable standards and sustainable reporting. Newspapers, as well as some latest research journals, include articles of the COVID-19 outbreak and its effect on the economy and the environment. Indeed, the outbreak of the virus brings a new thought to the reorganization of the complex relationships between consumers, businesses and the state; (4) Conclusions: According to the comparison of the analyses of the results, it can is that the analyses of both types of literature, both scientific and professional, shows that there are common topics they write about, which are related to the field of clean production, emissions, renewable energy, climate change, sustainable investments and corporate sustainability. An urgent global issue that extends all over the world is the promotion of energy-saving technologies and reduction of carbon dioxide emissions.

The objective of this study was to identify the factors determining a company’s corporate governance related to climate change. We analyzed the effect of various sustainability corporate governance variables on the disclosure level of climate change governance. These variables included facts such as having a dedicated sustainability executive and board committee, the mediating effect of female representation on the board of directors, number of reporting years according to TCFD, membership in a sustainability index, MSCI ESG rating, the existence of a corporate climate transition plan, a mention of the UN Global Compact and GRI, company location, as well as company size and profitability. By adopting a multi-theoretical framework that included stakeholder theory as well the legitimacy and agency theory, the underlying research study used a sample of 100 of the largest global companies by market capitalization and their reporting for the year 2020. Based on 1,400 observations for fiscal year 2020 and using correlation analysis, univariate and linear multiple regressions, we find a positive association between having a climate transition plan in place, being a leader in sustainability according to MSCI ratings, and being a DJSI constituent and the propensity to disclose information on governance for climate change. In addition, we find a company with a dedicated sustainability executive show an increased tendency to be transparent on climate governance issues. Furthermore, having a company location in a developed country is significantly and positively associated with climate change governance. Surprisingly, gender diversity in the corporate board or having a sustainability board committee did not show any significant correlation between a higher climate change governance level. The same was true for companies being active in either the extractive or non-extractive sector. Companies referring to the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) or UN Global Compact also did not score higher in climate change governance. Neither did corporate profitability or size play a significant role. Our results are robust to variations and provide valuable insights for researchers, academics, executives, practitioners as well as regulators. As more and more companies are shifting towards a climate change reporting framework, it is of paramount importance that we are able to determine the contributing variables that lead to effective climate change corporate governance. Our results are inconsistent with stakeholder theory and are strongly suggesting that a diversified board and the existence of a sustainability committee that meets often/sufficiently may not necessarily lead to a higher level of transparency/quality regarding climate change. While more research is needed, knowing that a dedicated sustainability executive as well as having a climate plan in place can make a difference in climate change reporting, can be very beneficial to many corporate stakeholders. Given the current urgent climate change situation and the crucial role that corporation play in it, dedicated sustainability positions and committees need to be established. The findings could be useful for managers as well as governmental standards setter and regulators who are interested in improving corporate practices dealing with climate change. This study applies STATA software with various regression models to empirically test the relationship between CG and other variables and corporate climate change reporting.

While the importance of corporate governance has been broadly acknowledged in global financial markets and academic research, how to devise a practical evaluation system is relatively unexplored. This paper attempts to refine the Corporate Governance Evaluation System (CGES), constructed by the Taiwan Stock Exchange (TWSE) since 2014. The current CGES has several debatable issues in its complicated design (e.g., it comprises over 80 indicators in different types). To resolve those issues, this study invited ten senior domain experts (including several CEOs of financial holding companies) to retrieve 13 essential criteria from the CGES in four dimensions. And this study integrates several multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods (i.e., Decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL), modified VIKOR, DEMATEL-based analytical network process (DANP)) and the fuzzy evaluation technique to rank the exemplary companies. The obtained ranking is consistent with the one released from the CGES in 2017. This study conducted additional experiments to ensure the robustness of the findings. The newly devised model not only supports the ranking decisions but also provides a managerial guidance for companies to pursue systematic improvements. These findings enrich the understanding of corporate governance and contribute to gaining business sustainability for financial holding companies.