X Corporate

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Brandi Wendelberger

unread,
Aug 4, 2024, 2:19:07 PM8/4/24
to biovelege
TheGHG Protocol Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard provides requirements and guidance for companies and other organizations preparing a GHG emissions inventory. It was designed with the following objectives in mind:

The module builds on the experience and knowledge of over 350 leading experts drawn from businesses, NGOs, governments and accounting associations. It has been road-tested by over 30 companies in nine countries.


This standard is written primarily from the perspective of a business developing a GHG inventory. However, it applies equally to other types of organizations with operations that give rise to GHG emissions, e.g., NGOs, government agencies, and universities. It should not be used to quantify the reductions associated with GHG mitigation projects for use as offsets or credits; the GHG Protocol for Project Accounting provides requirements and guidance for this purpose. Policy makers and architects of GHG programs can also use relevant parts of this standard as a basis for their own accounting and reporting requirements.


The GHG Protocol Corporate Standard has been designed to be program or policy neutral. However, it is compatible with most existing GHG programs and their own accounting and reporting requirements. It is important to distinguish between the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard from other GHG programs. This standard focuses only on the accounting and reporting of emissions, but does not require emissions information to be reported to WRI or WBCSD. In addition, while this standard is designed to develop a verifiable inventory, it does not provide a standard for how the verification process should be conducted.


To complement the standard and guidance provided here, a number of cross-sector and sector-specific calculation tools are available. These tools provide step-by-step guidance and electronic worksheets to help users calculate GHG emissions from specific sources or industries.


In 2016, 92% of Fortune 500 companies responding to the CDP used GHG Protocol directly or indirectly through a program based on GHG Protocol. It provides the accounting platform for virtually every corporate GHG reporting program in the world.


Cold-water laundry detergents, fuel-saving tires, energy-efficient ball bearings, emissions-saving data centers. Corporations are increasingly claiming that their goods and services reduce emissions. But there is a big problem: These avoided emissions claims are often unverifiable or inaccurate.


Corporate Accountability spends more than 90 percent of all contributions directly on programs, while less than 10 percent provide essential support services, resulting in the highest marks from rating agencies.


In the decades since, we have won victories that save lives and change them for the better by shifting power away from corporations and back to people. We amplify the voices of communities from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania to Lagos, Nigeria. And we make sure our voices reverberate in the ears of decision-makers from the halls of the U.N. to corporate boardrooms. We are building a world where we all can thrive, and the need for this work is greater than ever.


Airbus Corporate Helicopter (ACH) offers unique expertises to design the private and corporate helicopter that suits your lifestyle. From luxury outfitting to ultimate comfort and innovations, we ensure an end-to-end exclusive ownership experience.


Registered corporations have legal personality recognized by local authorities and their shares are owned by shareholders[3][4] whose liability is generally limited to their investment. One of the attractive early advantages business corporations offered to their investors, compared to earlier business entities like sole proprietorships and joint partnerships, was limited liability. Limited liability separates control of a company from ownership and means that a passive shareholder in a corporation will not be personally liable either for contractually agreed obligations of the corporation, or for torts (involuntary harms) committed by the corporation against a third party (acts done by the controllers of the corporation).


Where local law distinguishes corporations by their ability to issue stock, corporations allowed to do so are referred to as stock corporations; one type of investment in the corporation is through stock, and owners of stock are referred to as stockholders or shareholders. Corporations not allowed to issue stock are referred to as non-stock corporations; i.e. those who are considered the owners of a non-stock corporation are persons (or other entities) who have obtained membership in the corporation and are referred to as a member of the corporation. Corporations chartered in regions where they are distinguished by whether they are allowed to be for-profit are referred to as for-profit and not-for-profit corporations, respectively.


Shareholders do not typically actively manage a corporation; shareholders instead elect or appoint a board of directors to control the corporation in a fiduciary capacity. In most circumstances, a shareholder may also serve as a director or officer of a corporation. Countries with co-determination employ the practice of workers of an enterprise having the right to vote for representatives on the board of directors in a company.


Early entities which carried on business and were the subjects of legal rights included the collegium of ancient Rome and the sreni of the Maurya Empire in ancient India.[10] In medieval Europe, churches became incorporated, as did local governments, such as the City of London Corporation. The point was that the incorporation would survive longer than the lives of any particular member, existing in perpetuity. The alleged oldest commercial corporation in the world, the Stora Kopparberg mining community in Falun, Sweden, obtained a charter from King Magnus Eriksson in 1347.


In medieval times, traders would do business through common law constructs, such as partnerships. Whenever people acted together with a view to profit, the law deemed that a partnership arose. Early guilds and livery companies were also often involved in the regulation of competition between traders.


Dutch and English chartered companies, such as the Dutch East India Company (VOC) and the Hudson's Bay Company, were created to lead the colonial ventures of European nations in the 17th century. Acting under a charter sanctioned by the Dutch government, the Dutch East India Company defeated Portuguese forces and established itself in the Moluccan Islands in order to profit from the European demand for spices. Investors in the VOC were issued paper certificates as proof of share ownership, and were able to trade their shares on the original Amsterdam Stock Exchange. Shareholders were also explicitly granted limited liability in the company's royal charter.[11]


In England, the government created corporations under a royal charter or an Act of Parliament with the grant of a monopoly over a specified territory. The best-known example, established in 1600, was the East India Company of London. Queen Elizabeth I granted it the exclusive right to trade with all countries to the east of the Cape of Good Hope. Some corporations at this time would act on the government's behalf, bringing in revenue from its exploits abroad. Subsequently, the company became increasingly integrated with English and later British military and colonial policy, just as most corporations were essentially dependent on the Royal Navy's ability to control trade routes.


A similar chartered company, the South Sea Company, was established in 1711 to trade in the Spanish South American colonies, but met with less success. The South Sea Company's monopoly rights were supposedly backed by the Treaty of Utrecht, signed in 1713 as a settlement following the War of the Spanish Succession, which gave Great Britain an asiento to trade in the region for thirty years. In fact, the Spanish remained hostile and let only one ship a year enter. Unaware of the problems, investors in Britain, enticed by extravagant promises of profit from company promoters bought thousands of shares. By 1717, the South Sea Company was so wealthy (still having done no real business) that it assumed the public debt of the British government. This accelerated the inflation of the share price further, as did the Bubble Act 1720, which (possibly with the motive of protecting the South Sea Company from competition) prohibited the establishment of any companies without a royal charter. The share price rose so rapidly that people began buying shares merely in order to sell them at a higher price, which in turn led to higher share prices. This was the first speculative bubble the country had seen, but by the end of 1720, the bubble had "burst", and the share price sank from 1,000 to under 100. As bankruptcies and recriminations ricocheted through government and high society, the mood against corporations and errant directors was bitter.


a collection of many individuals united into one body, under a special denomination, having perpetual succession under an artificial form, and vested, by the policy of the law, with the capacity of acting, in several respects, as an individual, particularly of taking and granting property, of contracting obligations, and of suing and being sued, of enjoying privileges and immunities in common, and of exercising a variety of political rights, more or less extensive, according to the design of its institution, or the powers conferred upon it, either at the time of its creation or at any subsequent period of its existence.


Due to the late 18th century abandonment of mercantilist economic theory and the rise of classical liberalism and laissez-faire economic theory due to a revolution in economics led by Adam Smith and other economists, corporations transitioned from being government or guild affiliated entities to being public and private economic entities free of governmental directions.[15] Smith wrote in his 1776 work The Wealth of Nations that mass corporate activity could not match private entrepreneurship, because people in charge of others' money would not exercise as much care as they would with their own.[16]

3a8082e126
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages