Article citation information:
Savchenko, L.,
Ovdiienko, O., Boichenko, M., Mostenska, T. Assessment of
the relationship between corporate social responsibility environmental goals implementation
and financial and operational indicators of airlines. Scientific Journal of Silesian
University of Technology. Series Transport. 2023, 119, 235-256. ISSN: 0209-3324. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20858/sjsutst.2023.119.14.
Lidiia SAVCHENKO[1], Oksana OVDIIENKO[2], Mykola BOICHENKO[3], Tetiana MOSTENSKA[4]
ASSESSMENT OF THE
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS
IMPLEMENTATION AND FINANCIAL AND OPERATIONAL INDICATORS OF AIRLINES
Summary. The main idea
of the article is assessing the feasibility of introducing Corporate Social
Responsibility (CSR) for airlines. Moreover, the authors think that the
environmental aspect in CSR is the most important, which predetermined the
focus on this CSR component in the article. The article provides several
examples of airlines that actively use CSR to improve their image, attract new,
and increase the loyalty of existing customers. Environment indicators of the
flight operations group on the performance indicators were established.
Keywords: Corporate
Social Responsibility (CSR), environmental indicators, financial and
operational results, correlation, airline
1. INTRODUCTION
The concept
of CSR has been actively developing as a practical activity of companies and a
direction for research since the middle of the 20th century. This is a period
when the consumer is playing a more active role in the market of goods and
services, and goods’ producers of and service providers are rebuilding
the pattern of relationships with their customers. Thus, the commercial
companies have started to voluntarily take responsibility for several social
aspects [1]. The consumers have become more and more conscious of their rights
and power to influence the behavior of the commercial companies [2]. Further
development of the theory and practice of corporate social responsibility by
companies has gone through the strengthening of control by environmental
activists and social control, as well as globalization processes that have
strengthened the presence of corporations in different parts of the world.
The most
important and most used definition is set by the European Commission, which
defines Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) as the voluntary combination of
corporate, social and environmental concerns in the business processes and the
interaction of these with stakeholders [3]. CSR is essential for businesses
because “it is in business’s self-interest to have a healthy
climate in the environment” [4]. In such a way, the interrelatedness of
business, society, and the environment becomes the crux of CSR.
The priority
of economic, environmental and social development in harmony and balance is
currently supported by the basic postulates of the concept of sustainable
development, which is recognized by the UN member states (193 countries) as the
direction of development of all mankind. It’s a world’s shared plan
to end extreme poverty, reduce inequality, and protect the planet by 2030 [5].
Accordingly, international conventions and programs are being adopted to
implement the goals of sustainable development, which impose obligations on
countries in general and on market participants directly. The regulatory
framework for environmental issues is particularly actively discussed and
developed in the context of the priority and urgency of issues related to the
challenges of global climate change.
The
pioneering thinker and formulator of CSR theory for business is Peter Drucker.
According to his theory, companies have three primary tasks: to increase the
financial performance of the company, to increase the efficiency of the
employees, and manage social and environmental responsibilities [6]. The
aviation industry is no exception. Many airlines are trying to be more socially
and environmentally friendly. In fact, such an additional direction in the
management of airlines today is more of a necessity than a luxury. The only
question is how CSR indicators and financial and operational indicators of
airline influence each other.
Thus, the
main purpose of the article is to assess the interdependence of the
environmental parameters of the CSR policy and the financial and operational
performance of the airline.
The second section of the article, Literature Review, consists of an
analysis of existing studies on the application of CSR by airlines, in
particular, an analysis of the CSR policy of several airlines in the field of
the environment. The third section, Methodology and results, examines the
relationship between an airline's environmental performance and its financial
and operating results. The main mathematical tool is correlation analysis,
which made it possible to track correlations between independent variables, which
made it possible to reduce the amount of these variables. As a result,
numerical results of the relationship between the environmental and financial
and operational indicators of the airline were obtained, which make it possible
to judge the strength of such a relationship and its direction. Taking into
account the obtained results, some important conclusions are made that can be
used to form an effective and strategically beneficial CSR policy for the
airline. The last, fifth section of the article, named Summary, contains a
concise content of the main results of the article and aspects of their
practical application.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Publications concerning CSR of
airlines
Several
studies show that there is an interest in evaluating the feasibility of using
CSR tools in the aviation industry. For example, Phillips [7] evaluates the
ethical and social aspects of CSR. He emphasizes that in order to introduce CSR
into the work of an airline, it is necessary to pay considerable attention to education
in the field of ethics and sociology. Another work [8] was aimed at providing
an overview of CSR activities in the aviation industry, and examining how CSR
activities influence the corporate image. Having studied a large amount of
literature and theories of CSR, the authors came to the conclusion that
investment in CSR is an investment in long-term success.
With the
growing focus on corporate social responsibility practices, airlines are
beginning to wonder if the introduction of CSR will change corporate financial
performance in a good side. According to So [9], the financial performance of
an airline is mainly measured by the following metrics: Return on Assets (ROA),
Return on Equity (ROE), and Cost per Available Seat Kilometer (CASK).
A study of
Kuo et al. [10] tracked the environmental, social and governance (ESG) and
short-term financial performance of 30 airlines worldwide over five years using
data from the Thomson Reuters Eikon ESG database. A multilevel quadratic growth
model was used to investigate the impact of airline disclosure of ESG
performance metrics. The results showed that at the initial stages of the
introduction of ESG practices, airlines show a tendency to reduce the return on
assets. However, it starts to increase after the introduction and
implementation period.
Empirical studies have suggested that airlines which practices CSR enjoy
better profitability. According to Moon et al. [11], the practice of CSR on the
employment dimension significantly increased ROA, especially in Delta and
American Airlines. CSR initiatives on multiple dimensions enhance an
airline’s financial performance through enhancing credibility with
customers, community performance and employee relations [11, 12]. To
illustrate, Alaska Airlines’ Charity Miles Program provides air transport
for charities and communities in need in the US and is well received by the
public and employees [13]. From this example, it is plausible that consequent
enhancements from CSR helped the airline attract more customers and increase
employee productivity, which in turn increase revenue and ultimately strengthen
the airline’s financial performance.
2.2. Publications concerning environmental aspects
of CSR in the aviation industry
The European Environment and
Aviation Agencies report showed increasing European air traffic has surpassed
technological and operational improvements over the past 25 years, leading to
increased environmental pressures and intensification until 2035 [14]. The work
of Kharazishvili et al. [15] assessed the relationship between sustainable
development of transport systems and the safety of air transport; authors stated
that the environmental aspect is one of the main components of sustainable
development of air transport. The harmful impact of global air transport on the
environment is evaluated also in [16]. It is established that the most harmful
influence for the ecosystem is done by the air transport during performance of
logistics processes and operations at the airport. Thus,
it is the environmental aspect in CSR that is the most important, which
predetermined the focus on this CSR component.
In just
over a century, commercial aviation has become the fastest, safest, and most
far-reaching mode of transportation in the world. The global growth of demand
for air travel is continuing. It is imperative that airlines address the
significant impact of their operations on the environment. Airlines are cognizant of their
environmental footprints and are taking proactive measures to enhance corporate
sustainability. One such measure is disclosing historical track records along
with current initiatives that make the operations “greener”. CSR
encourages airlines to go beyond mere self-interest or regulatory compliance in
leading the way to meeting increasingly ambitious greenhouse gas (GHG)
reduction targets [17]. Cathay Pacific replaced its Boeing 747s with new Airbus
A350s as a part of its CSR strategy to increase carbon efficiency in 2016. By
the end of 2016, not only has the airline’s carbon efficiency increased
by 4 g/Available-tonne-kilometer, but also Available seat km by 2.4% [18].
As the public gradually realizes the
importance of sustainable development, customers consider CSR. As such, CSR
initiatives could increase passenger patronage. In most cases, CSR is
beneficial for an airline’s performance, financially and operationally,
regardless of its business model [9].
The Internet search for airlines
using environmental principles of corporate social responsibility in their
practice, allowed us to analyze several positive examples.
1. The Lufthansa Group has
been reporting regularly on its commitment to sustainability since 1995, and
its reports have been continuously improved in line with internationally
recognized reporting standards such as the GRI Standards 2016. Lufthansa's
corporate activities have been closely linked to the ten principles of the UN
Global Compact since 2002, and since 2015 also to the Sustainable Development
Goals of the United Nations. To minimize the environmental impact of flying,
the airline has upgraded its fleet, as the new aircraft are significantly more
fuel efficient. Thus, the company expanded its commitment to Sustainable
Aviation Fuel. Lufthansa has set itself ambitious climate protection
targets: to halve C02 emissions compared to 2019 and achieve a
neutral CO2 balance by 2050. Since 2006, Lufthansa Group has
disclosed its CO2 emissions in detail in accordance with GHG
protocol [19].
2. British Airways is known
for being part of the first group of airlines (IAG) to set a strategic goal of
going carbon-neutral by 2050. The company has invested heavily in new
state-of-the-art aircraft, which are 40% more efficient than older aircraft,
thus drastically reducing emissions. What is more, British Airways has
partnered with other companies to develop cleaner aviation fuels, as well as
zero-pollution hydrogen-powered aircraft and carbon capture technologies.
Moreover, from January 2020, British
Airways has been carbon offsetting on all flights within the UK, making all
flights within the UK carbon-neutral.
The company partnered with
non-profit organisation Pure Leapfrog to calculate and offset carbon
emissions, making their flying carbon-neutral.
On the waste issue, British
Airways is continuing its engagement with Velocys with plans to
build the first commercial plant in Europe capable of converting household
waste into jet fuel by 2025. Such a project significantly reduces the volume of
waste buried in landfills and reduces carbon dioxide emissions by up to 100%
compared to fossil fuels. They also partner with LanzaJet, which is
contracted to sell them green jet fuel from the end of 2022. Over the next 20
years, British Airways parent company IAG plans to invest about $400
million to develop environmentally friendly aviation fuel. However, in April
2021, they became the first airline group in Europe to announce that by 2030,
10% of all flights operated will be run on green fuel.
To be a Zero emissions airline, British
Airways supports the development of hydrogen as an alternative fuel source.
They have invested in ZeroAvia – a leading innovator in
decarbonising commercial aviation, which completed the world’s first
hydrogen-electric fuel cell powered flight of a commercial-grade aircraft in
September 2020 [20].
3. Air China has established
a company-level environmental and environmental protection leading group, and
formed a closed-loop energy saving and environmental protection management
system that covers all departments and reaches all levels. Air China has
set up a coordinating working group for the Company's environmental
development, implemented the Implementation Rules for the Management of Special
Funds for Energy Conservation and Eco-environmental Protection and
Implementation Rules for the Supervision over Energy Conservation, Emission
Reduction, and Eco-environmental Protection. In 2020, Air China was
recognized as the exemplary team in the civil aviation industry in winning the
Blue-Sky Protection Campaign [21].
Air China sorted the material issues
according to two dimensions, “importance to the Company’s
sustainable development” and “importance to stakeholders”,
and generated a matrix of own material issues of social responsibility (Fig.
1).
Fig. 1. Air
China’s social responsibility materiality matrix (blue - corporate
governance, red - environment, employees’ rights and interests, purple -
social services) [21]
Among factors of importance of Air
China, 3 environmental aspects can be observed, namely 11 - Prevention and
control of pollution, 22 - Sustainable use of resources and 27 - Response to
climate change (Figure 1). The last two environmental indicators are among the
highest priority indicators.
4. Dassault Aviation, a major
player in the aerospace industry, continues to protect its employees and
preserve the environment in terms of corporate social responsibility, based on
five core pillars, first of that is concerning environmental aspects, namely:
-
reinforce the low
carbon Company plan consistent with climatic challenges;
-
integrate
eco-design in the research of innovative technical solutions;
-
reduce the
environmental footprint according to the principles of circular economy [22].
In such a way, the three pillars of
sustainable procurement combine economic, social and environmental aspects
(Fig. 2).
Fig. 2. Sustainable procurement
pillars [23]
As an active member of the
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Committee on Environmental
Protection, Dassault Aviation also supports CORSIA (Carbon Offsetting and
Reduction Scheme for International Aviation). It actively promotes the use of
Sustainable Alternative Fuel (SAF) to replace conventional kerosene. The Falcon
range is already sustainable fuel compatible. Their Falcon Service Advisory
document sets out best practices for reducing the environmental footprint of
Dassault Aviation’s aircraft. The development of flight path optimization
technology also offers quick solutions for reducing carbon emissions [22].
5. Xiamen Airlines reported
78 energy saving and emission reduction projects and programs:
- APU reduction;
- aircraft drag and weight
reduction;
- aircraft/engine performance
maintenance;
- air route straightening;
- intelligent flight planning and
- in-flight fuel savings.
The airline has invested money and
effort in the creation of "green" aircraft cabins, which involved the
abandonment of paper and plastic components with environmentally friendly and
various types of completely biodegradable materials. In addition, Xiamen Airlines
used its resources by holding themed events to encourage as many people as
possible to lead a healthy lifestyle. In 2020, Xiamen Airlines created a
Sustainability Committee within its structure, which was part of the
Sustainable Development Plan [24]. The relevant Committee includes four
divisions that are responsible for 1) sustainable security, 2) low-carbon
operations, 3) sustainable travel and 4) overall growth (Fig. 3).
6. The pursuit of environmental
sustainability and a high level of corporate social responsibility form an
important basis for other big cargo airline, Qatar Airways Cargo. It is
at the forefront of industry e-initiatives such as e-cargo. In the context of
environmental responsibility, the company intends to expand the use of electronic
air waybills (e-AWB) as part of efforts to reduce paper printing and reduce
waste [25].
7. Air
Malta's corporate social responsibility is committed to carrying out all
their activities responsibly and in ways that make a positive difference to people’s
lives and the environment. Among other initiatives, an energy-efficient
business that strives to reduce its impact on the environment. To achieve this,
in recent years, the airline has moved towards a more fuel-efficient Airbus
fleet, and have introduced electrically powered vehicles at the airport, and
are moving rapidly towards ‘paper-less’ offices. Air Malta
works together with its partners - Airbus, the Association of European Airlines
and the International Air Transport Association - to reduce emissions and fuel
wastage [26].
Fig. 3. Xiamen
airlines’ sustainable committee [24]
Some airlines declare their
corporate social responsibility in their websites, however, declaratively,
without specifying the actions carried out within the framework of this
responsibility [27].
2.3. Objects of the article
The main objects that the authors
plan to reveal in this article are:
1) to investigate the importance and inevitability of the environmental
aspect of CSR in modern conditions;
2) to analyze the experience of the flagship movement with corporate
social responsibility in the aviation industry, to find connections between the
key parameters that characterize the company's corporate social responsibility,
and indicators of financial condition and operating activities;
3) provide recommendations based on research – how to build a
long-term strategy for air company development facing challenges of sustainable
goals.
3. METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS
3.1. Choice of flagship airline in the field of
CSR
The modern concept of CSR implies
compliance of the company's activities with the requirements and needs of its
stakeholders, both external and internal. Corporate Social Responsibility is
the way how to create value for all stakeholders of the company for the long
term. And accordingly takes into account the following areas: education sector,
environment, employees and donations [28].
One of the most urgent and widely
discussed type of humans’ environment impact is global climatic change,
which is closely linked to air pollution in general, and CO2
emissions into air in particular [29]. Air transport emissions account for more
than 2.5 to 3% of global pollution per year. However, the specific weight per 1
ton-kilometer is 560-867 g of CO2, which is ten times even higher
than road transport, which is recognized as the main transport polluter (almost
2/3 of transport emissions come from road vehicles) [30]. Therefore, the study
is focused on the environmental component of CSR for airlines, which is based
on three important principles of the UN Global Compact: 1) businesses should
support a precautionary approach to environmental challenges; 2) undertake
initiatives to promote greater environmental responsibility; and 3) encourage
the development and diffusion of environmentally friendly technologies.
UN Global Compact is a special
initiative of the UN Secretary General and the world's largest corporate
responsibility association, which encourages companies to build their
activities and strategies in accordance with the sustainable development goals
and on the basis of ten universal principles in human rights, labor,
environment and anti-corruption [31]. The organization has more than 12,000
commercial companies and 3,000 non-business organizations in 69 local networks
located in 163 countries. Joining this initiative requires annual reporting to
stakeholders in a transparent and public manner, which is fundamental for
companies committed to sustainability (Communication on Progress). Thus, these
type of reporting shows the level and changes in corporate social
responsibilities of the companies and could be used for analyze to the frames
of this paper.
Members of the UN Global Compact
seek to mobilize a global movement of sustainable companies and stakeholders.
To this end, the UN Global Compact helps companies:
- conduct business responsibly by aligning our
strategies and operations with the Ten Principles of Human Rights, Labor, the
Environment and Anti-Corruption;
- take strategic action to achieve overarching
social goals, like the UN Sustainable Development Goals, with a focus on
collaboration and innovation.
More than 10,000 business participants
and 5,000 non-business participants in the UN Global Compact are already
changing the world [32].
To conduct the study, the base of
participants of the UN Global Compact was analyzed in order to find aviation companies.
According to the "air" search criterion, 18 companies were selected,
among which, in addition to air carriers, there were also representatives of
the Media sector, Support Services, Chemicals and others (Table 1).
Tab.
1
Participants of UN Global Compact, whose profile connected to air
activity [32]
|
Company |
Sector* |
Country |
Joined on |
|
TL |
Thailand |
09.08.2021 |
|
|
E |
Colombia |
29.04.2021 |
|
|
M |
Belgium |
30.03.2021 |
|
|
IMM |
France |
18.12.2019 |
|
|
SS |
France |
18.12.2019 |
|
|
TL |
Canada |
26.07.2019 |
|
|
CM |
Japan |
22.01.2019 |
|
|
TL |
Central African Republic |
04.10.2017 |
|
|
TL |
New
Zealand |
01.09.2015 |
|
|
C |
France |
10.09.2014 |
|
|
IE |
Kenya |
26.04.2013 |
|
|
SS |
Kenya |
29.01.2013 |
|
|
TL |
Denmark |
14.09.2010 |
|
|
NA |
Denmark |
17.07.2008 |
|
|
TL |
Korea,
Republic of (South) |
16.07.2007 |
|
|
IT |
Netherlands |
04.05.2006 |
|
|
TL |
France |
03.06.2003 |
* Travel & Leisure - TL, Electricity - E,
Media - M, Industrial Metals & Mining - IMM, Support Services - SS,
Construction & Materials - CM, Chemicals - C, Industrial Engineering - IE,
Not Applicable - NA, Industrial Transportation - IT
Unfortunately, in this large number
at the moment there are only 5 airlines in the world that have assumed
corporate social responsibility obligations and have passed the United Nations
verification procedure (Table 2).
Tab.
2
Current list of airlines involved in UN Global Compact [32]
|
Company |
Sector* |
Country |
Joined on |
|
Air Canada |
TL |
Canada |
26.07.2019 |
|
Air New Zealand Limited |
TL |
New Zealand |
01.09.2015 |
|
Air Greenland |
TL |
Denmark |
14.09.2010 |
|
Korean Air |
TL |
Korea, Republic of (South) |
16.07.2007 |
|
Air France - KLM |
TL |
France |
03.06.2003 |
Actual air carriers from the list
are only Air Canada,
Via Air,
Air New
Zealand Limited, Air Greenland,
Korean Air
and Air France
KLM. The French company Air France KLM
was selected for further study because it was the first in the industry to join
the agreement (2003-06-03), it’s a world-famous company, one of the
leaders in the French aviation market. Air France KLM declared in theirs
most recent Communication on Progress environment as an addressed principle and
global goal (together with human rights, labor and anti-corruption). Therefore,
their practical experience of taking into account the environmental factor of
corporate social responsibility can serve as an example and an action plan for
other major airlines.
3.2. Environmental indicators of Air France KLM’s
CSR policy
The last officially published Air
France’s KLM Communication on Progress is for the year 2020 [33]. It
includes 28 different environmental indicators related to both the flight
operation and the ground operation (Table 3).
Tab.
3
Air France’s
KLM environmental
indicators [33]
|
Parameters |
Units |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
2019 |
2020 |
|
Carbon emissions flight operations |
||||||||||
|
GHG emissions from Conventional aviation fuel |
ktons |
28.21 |
27.58 |
27.58 |
27.57 |
27.34 |
27.51 |
27.57 |
28.23 |
14.0 |
|
CO2 savings from sustainable aviation fuel |
ktons |
N/A |
0.5 |
|||||||
|
GHG emissions from ground operations |
tons |
85.68 |
88.88 |
78.84 |
76.81 |
63.26 |
64.46 |
62.3 |
60.7 |
49.0 |
|
GHG emissions from electricity |
ktons |
46.2 |
7.6 |
6.8 |
||||||
|
Upstream emissions from fuel production |
ktons CO2 |
N/A |
N/A |
5.239 |
5.685 |
5.917 |
3.034 |
|||
|
Total carbon emissions |
ktons CO2 |
33.37 |
34.20 |
17.09 |
||||||
|
Mandatory carbon offsets |
ktons CO2 credits |
3.106 |
3.253 |
111 |
||||||
|
Voluntary carbon offsets |
ktons CO2 credits |
24 |
623 |
|||||||
|
Customers’ carbon offsets |
ktons CO2 credits |
98 |
51 |
|||||||
|
Flight Operations |
||||||||||
|
Consumption
of conventional aviation fuel |
ktons |
8.95 |
8.956 |
8.755 |
8.752 |
8.681 |
8.733 |
8.753 |
8.961 |
4.43 |
|
Consumption
of sustainable aviation fuel |
ktons |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.9 |
0.2 |
|
Specific CO2 footprint for passenger transport |
g, CO2/pax km |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
79 |
102 |
|
Specific CO2 footprint for cargo transport |
g, CO2/100kg cargo
km |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44.5 |
57 |
|
NOx
low altitude (<3,000 ft) |
ktons |
9.2 |
9.5 |
9.9 |
10.2 |
9.8 |
9.8 |
9.3 |
9.5 |
4.8 |
|
SO2
low altitude (<3,000 ft) |
ktons |
0.7 |
0.8 |
0.89 |
0.88 |
0.93 |
0.9 |
0.88 |
0.8 |
0.3 |
|
Global noise
energy indicator |
10-12 kJ |
1.69 |
1.62 |
1.54 |
1.70 |
1.65 |
1.64 |
1.68 |
1.69 |
0.82 |
|
Ground Operations |
||||||||||
|
Electricity
total consumption |
MWh |
392.223 |
383.6 |
374.1 |
366.2 |
297.8 |
284.8 |
278.7 |
267.6 |
236.6 |
|
of which
renewable |
MWh |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
102.4 |
92.9 |
|
Other
energies total consumption |
MWh |
513.6 |
534.4 |
451.6 |
446.3 |
376.0 |
375.3 |
358.3 |
350.9 |
285.4 |
|
Fuels |
MWh |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
159.7 |
123.6 |
|
Natural gas |
MWh |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
111.1 |
95.79 |
|
Steam / other
heating / cooling |
MWh |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80.14 |
66.04 |
|
of which
renewable |
MWh |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24.84 |
16.10 |
|
Water
consumption |
m³ |
812 |
825 |
792.8 |
806.0 |
546.6 |
549.9 |
542.6 |
481.6 |
464.5 |
|
Non-carbon
emissions, NOx |
ktons |
0.773 |
0.675 |
0.638 |
0.622 |
0.511 |
0.523 |
0.495 |
0.445 |
0.322 |
|
Non-hazardous
industrial waste, total quantity |
tons |
57.06 |
54.966 |
57.895 |
55.259 |
19.896 |
21.529 |
23.221 |
20.456 |
13.482 |
|
Non-hazardous
industrial waste, percentage recycled |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38 |
39 |
|
Hazardous
industrial waste, total quantity |
tons |
7.009 |
7.073 |
5.808 |
6.291 |
6.445 |
5.699 |
5.427 |
4.305 |
3.811 |
|
Hazardous
industrial waste, percentage recycled |
% |
58 |
61 |
51 |
58 |
69 |
64 |
71 |
54 |
58 |
But a certain part of the indicators
began to be recorded and reported only during the last 2-3 years, which makes
it impossible to collect reliable statistical information on them. For
instance, CO2 efficiency per pass-km which shows specific CO2
footprint for passenger transportation has increased in 2020 compared to 2019
by almost 30%, but the Air France KLM target till 2030 is 50% reduction
compared to 2005. It looks like efforts connecting to CO2 footprint
for passengers are inefficient. According to Universal Registration Document
2020 (Air France KLM Communication on Progress report for 2020), the
year 2020 had influenced significantly on the results of company activity, as a
consequence of closed borders, additional health and quarantine measures,
changing the traditional routes. The results on mentioned indicator are worse
in 2020, but Air France KLM still oriented on their obligations in
long-term plans and desired indicators on environmental impact [34]. At the same time, were reported significant
outcome in reduction of the percentage change in absolute CO2
emissions from the ground operations between 2019 and 2020 (on 17%),
upstream emissions from fuel production (on 49%). According to provided
statistics, the company implemented stable and effective corporate social
responsibility and focused on long-term development, its activities meet modern
conditions and ensure readiness for future challenges. Accordingly, it is
necessary to conduct further research on changes in these factors and their
impact on the level of corporate social responsibility, when there will be a
representative statistical base of airlines.
Introducing the principles of
sustainable development in passenger air transport is the task of Air
France KLM 's CSR programs. Aviation accounts for about 2.5% of all
CO₂ emissions, so Air France KLM is
aware of the responsibility and need to reduce emissions, so it is constantly
looking for environmentally friendly solutions for its work. Due to that company is going to realize carbon neutrality by 2050 likened to 2019,
moreover they are planning to reduce CO2 emissions per passenger
kilometer by 5,6% compared to 2005, also to diminish noise by 39% likened to
the year 2000 and to produce non-recycled waste in the volumes, that 56% lower
than in 2011. To do this, the company began to partially refuel its aircraft
with bio aviation fuel, serve food on board in packaging made from recycled
materials, use less electricity and fuel. Also, Air France KLM and Delft Institute of Technology are
jointly creating the aircraft of the future - Flying-V. It will consume 20% less
fuel than the Airbus A350, while accommodating about 314 people in the cabin.
In September 2020, the Flying-V model made its first flight [35 To achieve the goals and ambitions mentioned,
the main directions of the companies' activity were identified, which will lead
to the planned indicators. Among them participation in development and research
with the aim to renewing the fleet, further implementation and popularization
of sustainable aviation fuel usage, changes in everyday operation procedures,
compliance with requirements and goals of global climate
agreements, offsetting programs (both for clients and for the company by
itself) and involvement into different environmental programs.
It can be observed that as a
consequence of the Covid-19 pandemic, specific CO2 emissions of Air
France KLM per 1 passenger-kilometer increased from 79 (2019) to 101 (2020)
grams, which is accompanied by a linear increase in fuel costs per 1 pass-km
from 0.032 to 0.042 (Fig. 4).
An analysis of traffic and CO2 emissions of Air France KLM
from 2005 to 2020 reveals a clear trend towards the decarbonization of air
transport. Over the last 15 years, the number of flights has increased by 20%,
while emissions, on the contrary, have decreased by 2-3%. Unfortunately, the
pandemic has made its own adjustments, and traffic in 2020 has fallen by 70%
compared to 2019. In
2020, emissions decreased by about 60%, that is, the ratio
"traffic-emissions" has ceased to show positive environmental
dynamics (Fig. 5).
In order to research the practical experience of the flagship in
Corporate Social Responsibility in Air France KLM, we studied the
relationship and interaction of environmental indicators and financial and
operational performance factors by building multiple correlations. As a result,
we chose data, officially published in Communication on Progress reports in
frames of participant obligations in the United Nations Global Compact (Tab.
4), which represents all sectors and has full data information from 2012 to
2020 (depended on variables, Y):
|
|
|
|
Fig. 4. Air France KLM linear increase
in fuel costs per 1 passenger-kilometer because of Covid-19 [35] |
Fig. 5. An analysis of traffic and CO2
emissions Air France KLM from 2005 to 2020 [35] |
-
GHG emissions from the combustion of aviation fuel. This
indicator is deemed as the total volume of kerosene used in the company during
flight operations. For calculation used the emission factor of
3.15 kg CO2 per kg kerosene according to the EU Emission
Trading System recommendations or of 3.16 kg CO2 per kg
kerosene corresponding to ICAO practice (Y1, ktons CO2);
-
GHG emissions, generated from the ground operations
(testing bench, runway vehicles, etc.). It includes emissions from the various
origins and is calculated according to national standards or energy supplier
official documentation (Y2, tons CO2);
-
consumption of raw
materials, particularly conventional aviation fuel: the real amount of it, used
to perform every flight. It includes also the fuel consumed by the auxiliary
power unit usage (Y3, ktons);
-
non‑carbon emissions - NOx low altitude: low-altitude emissions
(below 3,000 feet), which depends on the time and characteristics of landing
and taking-off time and on engine data, provided by ICAO. But for evaluating
taxing time is used different from ICAO’s methodology, it is more
accurate as considers the real taxing time (Y4, ktons);
-
non‑carbon emissions – SO2 low altitude: reflects the
amount of sulfur in fuel. The estimation algorithm based on Amsterdam and Paris
platforms and comprises total fuel volumes used by KLM per year (Y5, ktons);
-
noise impact
– global noise energy indicator: aircraft noise pollution around airports
is often the most important limiting factor for airport development. This
marker evaluates on the rules, provided by the Direction Générale
d’Aviation Civile or French Civil Aviation Authority (Y6, 1012
kJ)
-
consumption
– electricity: the total quantity of electricity used (Y7,
MWh);
-
consumption
– other energies: kerosene, diesel, gasoline and natural gas
(calculations are performed according to the gas quality indicators, identified
in France) steam/other heating/cooling (for climate comfort) (Y8,
MWh);
-
consumption
– water consumption: only for actions, made on the ground, it
doesn’t include any water, needed for flights on board (Y9, ktons);
-
non‑carbon emissions – NOx: connected to engine testing
processes. Cover also emissions from the runway equipment and ground vehicles
and estimated on European standards (European Directive 97/68/EC), according to
which emission norms depend on the power of engine (Y10, ktons);
-
waste – non‑hazardous industrial waste: includes catering waste, data are provided
by the specialized company, who is responsible for such type of waste
management (Y11, tons);
-
waste –
hazardous industrial waste: can take the form of a solid, liquid or compressed
gas, data for reporting is provided by specialized companies, responsible for
waste management. If there is no given data by the service supplier, used the
information from the specification slip (Y12, tons);
-
percentage of
recovered hazardous industrial waste: ratio between the waste
recycled/recovered and the total amount (Y13, %).
Tab.
4
Air France KLM statistical information on
environment indicators, 2012-2020
|
Environment indicators |
Units |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
2019 |
2020 |
|
GHG emissions from
conventional aviation fuel, Y1 |
ktons CO2 |
28.210 |
27.576 |
27.57 |
27.56 |
27.34 |
27.50 |
27.57 |
28.22 |
13.99 |
|
GHG emissions from ground
operations, Y2 |
tons CO2 |
85.68 |
88.885 |
78.84 |
76.80 |
63.25 |
64.45 |
62.3 |
60.7 |
49 |
|
Consumption of conventional aviation fuel, Y3 |
ktons |
8.95 |
8.956 |
8.755 |
8.752 |
8.681 |
8.733 |
8.753 |
8.961 |
4.43 |
|
NOx low altitude emissions
(<3,000 ft), Y4 |
ktons |
9.2 |
9.5 |
9.9 |
10.2 |
9.8 |
9.8 |
9.3 |
9.5 |
4.8 |
|
SO2 low altitude emissions
(<3,000 ft), Y5 |
ktons |
0.7 |
0.8 |
0.89 |
0.88 |
0.93 |
0.9 |
0.88 |
0.8 |
0.3 |
|
Global noise energy indicator, Y6 |
1012
kJ |
1.69 |
1.62 |
1.54 |
1.7 |
1.65 |
1.64 |
1.68 |
1.69 |
0.82 |
|
Total electricity consumption, Y7 |
MWh |
392.2 |
383.6 |
374.1 |
366.2 |
297.8 |
284.8 |
278.7 |
267.6 |
236.6 |
|
Other energies consumption, Y8 |
MWh |
513.6 |
534.4 |
451.6 |
446.3 |
376.0 |
375.3 |
358.3 |
350.9 |
285.4 |
|
Water consumption, Y9 |
m³ |
812 |
825 |
792.8 |
806.0 |
546.6 |
549.9 |
542.6 |
481.6 |
464.5 |
|
Non-carbon emissions, Y10 |
ktons |
0. 773 |
0.675 |
0.638 |
0.622 |
0.511 |
0.523 |
0.495 |
0.445 |
0.322 |
|
Non-hazardous industrial waste, Y11 |
tons |
57.06 |
54.966 |
57.89 |
55.25 |
19.89 |
21.52 |
23.22 |
20.45 |
13.48 |
|
Hazardous industrial waste, Y12 |
tons |
7.009 |
7.073 |
5.808 |
6.291 |
6.445 |
5.699 |
5.427 |
4.305 |
3.811 |
|
Percentage recycled, Y13 |
% |
58 |
61 |
51 |
58 |
69 |
64 |
71 |
54 |
58 |
The next step of the study was checking the hypothesis of interconnection between selected environment
indicators with main of company’s activities indicators to explore the
relationship between different areas of consideration of the environmental
component in aviation enterprises’ corporate social responsibility.
Independent
variables for analyze show the company's financial and operating performance
results (Tab. 5) that are common to financial statements in different countries
(independent variables, X):
-
total revenues (X1,
€m);
-
operating result
(X2, €m);
-
net income for the
period (X3, €m);
-
number of
passengers (X4, thousands);
-
load factor for
passenger network (X5, %);
-
total passenger
revenues (X6, €m);
-
cargo flow (X7,
thousands);
-
load factor for
cargo (X8, %);
-
total cargo revenues
(X9, €m).
Tab. 5
Air
France KLM
statistical information on financial/operating results, 2012-2020
|
Parameters |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
2019 |
2020 |
|
Total revenues (€m), X1 |
25.4 |
25.5 |
24.9 |
25.7 |
24.8 |
22.5 |
22.9 |
23.3 |
9.2 |
|
Operating result (€m), X2 |
-336 |
130 |
-129 |
780 |
1.04 |
1.19 |
994 |
749 |
-3.72 |
|
Net income for the period (€m), X3 |
-1.22 |
-1.82 |
-189 |
127 |
792 |
-275 |
411 |
293 |
-7.083 |
|
Passengers flow |
75.6 |
77.4 |
77.5 |
79.0 |
80.2 |
83.9 |
85.6 |
87.6 |
28.9 |
|
Load factor (passenger, %), X5 |
83.2 |
83.8 |
84.7 |
85.1 |
85.4 |
86.8 |
87.4 |
87.9 |
58.8 |
|
Total passenger revenues (€m), X6 |
20.0 |
20.1 |
19.6 |
20.5 |
19.7 |
20.4 |
20.7 |
21.1 |
6.6 |
|
Cargo flow (thous. tons), X7 |
1.46 |
1.38 |
1.30 |
1.21 |
1.13 |
1.14 |
1.14 |
1.11 |
0.88 |
|
Load factor (cargo, %), X8 |
64.5 |
63.2 |
63.1 |
60.4 |
59.3 |
59.9 |
60.% |
58.0 |
67.5 |
|
Total Cargo revenues (€m), X9 |
3.06 |
2.82 |
2.68 |
2.43 |
2.07 |
2.09 |
2.29 |
2.15 |
2.568 |
Using the method of building
multiple correlations, the impact of each indicator from the Tab. 4 (dependent
variables) were analyzed in their interaction on each environment indicator
from the Tab. 5 (independent variables). Results were analyzed on each environment
factor as it shown in the Tab. 6 for GHG emissions from conventional aviation
fuel (Y1). The correlation coefficients were calculated and ranged
according to strength of their (dark green color shows the strongest positive
correlation between variables and dark red color shows the strongest negative
correlation between variables).
Depending on the value of the
correlation coefficient (r), all interdependencies between dependent variables
and independent variables were divided into the following groups: strong
positive correlation (strong (+), r ³ +0.7), moderate positive
correlation (moderate (+), +0.4 < r < +0.7), weak positive correlation
(weak (+), 0 £ r £ +0.4), strong negative correlation
(strong (-), r ³ -0.7), moderate negative
correlation (moderate (-), -0.4 < r < -0.7), weak negative correlation
(weak (-), 0 £ r £ -0.4). Depended on variables such
as number of passengers (x4), load factor for passenger network (x5)
and total passenger revenues (X6) are interdependent with r ³ 0.98. That is why we choose for the next steps
of the analysis one of them, namely the number of passengers (X4).
The Tab. 7 represents the results of the multiple correlation analysis.
Tab.
6
The correlation coefficients between parameters (X1-X9)
and GHG emissions from
conventional aviation fuel (Y1) (dark green - the strong positive
correlation, dark red - strong negative correlation between variables)
|
X1 |
X2 |
X3 |
X4 |
X5 |
X6 |
X7 |
X8 |
X9 |
Y1 |
|
|
X1 |
1 |
0.114 |
0.152 |
0.901 |
0.923 |
0.954 |
0.780 |
-0.596 |
0.040 |
0.971 |
|
X2 |
0.114 |
1 |
0.382 |
0.343 |
0.309 |
0.278 |
-0.296 |
-0.562 |
-0.470 |
0.196 |
|
X3 |
0.152 |
0.382 |
1 |
0.213 |
0.198 |
0.161 |
-0.225 |
-0.464 |
-0.458 |
0.144 |
|
X4 |
0.901 |
0.343 |
0.213 |
1 |
0.998 |
0.987 |
0.526 |
-0.829 |
-0.292 |
0.973 |
|
X5 |
0.923 |
0.309 |
0.198 |
0.998 |
1 |
0.992 |
0.559 |
-0.808 |
-0.260 |
0.982 |
|
X6 |
0.954 |
0.278 |
0.161 |
0.987 |
0.992 |
1 |
0.642 |
-0.754 |
-0.158 |
0.995 |
|
X7 |
0.780 |
-0.296 |
-0.225 |
0.526 |
0.559 |
0.642 |
1 |
0.002 |
0.630 |
0.698 |
|
X8 |
-0.596 |
-0.562 |
-0.464 |
-0.829 |
-0.808 |
-0.754 |
0.002 |
1 |
0.743 |
-0.705 |
|
X9 |
0.040 |
-0.470 |
-0.458 |
-0.292 |
-0.260 |
-0.158 |
0.630 |
0.743 |
1 |
-0.092 |
|
Y1 |
0.971 |
0.196 |
0.144 |
0.973 |
0.982 |
0.995 |
0.698 |
-0.705 |
-0.092 |
1 |
Tab.
7
Multiple correlation analysis results
|
|
X1 |
X2 |
X3 |
X4 |
X7 |
X8 |
X9 |
|
Y1 |
Strong (+) |
Weak (+) |
Weak (+) |
Strong (+) |
Strong (+) |
Strong (-) |
Weak (-) |
|
Y2 |
Strong (+) |
Weak (-) |
Weak (-) |
Moderate (+) |
Strong (+) |
Weak (+) |
Moderate (+) |
|
Y3 |
Strong (+) |
Weak (+) |
Weak (+) |
Strong (+) |
Strong (+) |
Moderate (-) |
Weak (-) |
|
Y4 |
Strong (+) |
Weak (+) |
Weak (+) |
Strong (+) |
Moderate (+) |
Strong (-) |
Weak (-) |
|
Y5 |
Strong (+) |
Weak (+) |
Weak (+) |
Strong (+) |
Moderate (+) |
Strong (-) |
Weak (-) |
|
Y6 |
Strong (+) |
Weak (+) |
Weak (+) |
Strong (+) |
Moderate (+) |
Strong (-) |
Weak (-) |
|
Y7 |
Moderate (+) |
Weak (-) |
Weak (-) |
Weak (+) |
Strong (+) |
Weak (+) |
Moderate (+) |
|
Y8 |
Strong (+) |
Weak (-) |
Weak (-) |
Weak (+) |
Strong (+) |
Weak (+) |
Moderate (+) |
|
Y9 |
Moderate (+) |
Weak (-) |
Weak (-) |
Weak (+) |
Strong (+) |
Weak (+) |
Strong (+) |
|
Y10 |
Strong (+) |
Weak (-) |
Weak (-) |
Moderate (+) |
Strong (+) |
Weak (+) |
Moderate (+) |
|
Y11 |
Moderate (+) |
Weak (-) |
Weak (-) |
Weak (+) |
Strong (+) |
Weak (+) |
Strong (+) |
|
Y12 |
Strong (+) |
Weak (-) |
Weak (+) |
Moderate (+) |
Strong (+) |
Weak (-) |
Moderate (+) |
|
Y13 |
Weak (+) |
Weak (+) |
Moderate (+) |
Weak (+) |
Weak (-) |
Weak (-) |
Moderate (-) |
3.4. Results
Based on the
results of the constructed multiple regression, we can form the first important
conclusion, that indicators of environmental factors of the air carrier does
not depend on net profit and operating result. Therefore, we can question the
idea that corporate social responsibility is available only to high-income
companies. That is, airlines should not expect a significant increase in
profits to begin the process of implementing the environmental component of
corporate social responsibility.
The second
important conclusion is that the environment indicators of the flight
operations group (Y1 – Y6) depend more on the
number of transported passengers, and the indicators of the ground operations
group (Y7 – Y12) depend on the transported cargo.
The detailed analysis of all relations of these factors is provided below.
Another
factor connected with GHG-emissions is ground operations (Y2). It
has a strong direct relation to total revenues (X1) and cargo flow
(X7). So, to decrease the CO2 emissions in this sector,
the carrier should pay attention to ground cargo handling, optimize it in order
to minimize the quantity of operations and distance to transport as well as
usage of the green fuel and renewables.
Consumption
of raw materials (conventional aviation fuel) (Y3) directly related
to total revenues (X1), passengers flow (X4) and cargo
flow (X7). Therefore, the only way to improve this
indicator is to use other types of fuels, safer for the environment.
Other
environment indicators connected to the flight operations (NOx low
altitude (Y4), SO2 low altitude (Y5) and
global noise energy indicator (Y6) have direct relation to total
revenues (X1) and number of transported passengers (X4).
But it also has an inverse correlation to the load freight factor (X8),
that means freight optimization freight and effective utilization of aircraft
capacity has shown positive influence on decreasing of the non-carbon emissions
and noise impact.
Electricity
consumption (Y7) is the first analyzed indicator in ground operation
sectors. It shows the strong positive correlation only with the cargo flow (X7).
That’s why to improve this indicator, it is important to switch to
renewable sources.
The
consumption of other types of energy (Y8), the amount of non-carbon
emissions (NOx namely) (Y9), total water consumption (Y10),
the amount of hazardous (Y11) and non-hazardous industrial
waste (Y12) directly related to total revenues (X1),
number of transported tons of cargo (X7) and total cargo
revenues (X9). Hence, it is important to optimize the cargo handling
processes in the airport.
The last
analyzed environment indicator, the percentage of recovered hazardous
industrial waste, has not shown any strong direct or inverse correlation with
studied independent variables, so further investigation of it is impractical.
Since the
transportation of passengers and cargo is the basic operation of airlines, it
is illogical and impractical to reduce their amount to reduce emissions, for
instance. But there are other actions that will indirectly but effectively
affect the improvement of environmental performance without operating
restrictions, including:
-
carbon offsetting
programs for customers with further targeted use of funds received for tree
planting, investment in aeronautical research to find new technological and
design solutions in aviation to make it more sustainable;
-
fleet
modernization, which gives the opportunity to reduce strongly the influence on
the environment due to principally new or modernized technical and technological
decisions;
-
using sustainable
aviation fuel and renewable energies not only inside the company but in the
whole supply chain;
-
efficient but not
always obvious operational measures, such as aircraft weight reduction to use
less fuel during the flight (Air France KLM, for example, are
diminishing the weight of the aircraft by reducing seats’ mass, changing
on board equipment to lighter one, replacement of paper documents with
electronic ones, designed to reduce the weight of the required staff on board);
-
optimization of
route and flight path (including maximization of load factor, especially for
cargo, as it showed strong negative correlation to environment indicators) and
a reduction in aircraft waiting times, speed adjustments and optimized
trajectories, artificial intelligence tools and others.
By using these tools, which are part of
CSR, it is possible to influence the direct positive dependence of
environmental impact and the total revenue (together with passenger and cargo
turnover) of the airline. Such experience is also known as decoupling, i.e.
growing profitability without corresponding increases in environmental
pressure. One more worldwide known airline, Lufthansa, shows efficiency
increase together with gradually increased parameter ton-kilometer (Fig. 6).
According
to officially published reports [19], performance indicators of
Lufthansa Group have been
growing gradually since 1991 till 2019, for instant the quantity of ton-kilometers were 450% in 2019 compared to
1991. But what is important, at the same time, the total quantity of used fuel
for the same period of time has increased only by 230%. The results of
operation activity have risen twice as quickly as the volumes of consumed fuel.
It is a clear example of efficiency.
Air France KLM follows the same path of decoupling, successfully
planning and implementing such CSR tools as contributing to aeronautical research and
fleet modernization as a result, participating in research into renewable
energies, proactive offsetting and others. Therefore, we emphasize the
importance and topicality of research and analysis of various variants to
reduce environmental impact. And this is extremely important to understand and
study further, as zero carbon emissions by 2050 are universally recognized and
mandatory, including for airlines.
Fig. 6. Decoupling of Lufthansa’s transport performance and fuel consumption [19]
4. SUMMARY
Corporate Social Responsibility
(CSR) in modern conditions is becoming an important element in the management
of commercial enterprises in the perspective of their strategic development. It
is the answer how to create a long-term value for all stakeholders of the
company; how commercial enterprises should form their own development
strategies to meet the Sustainable Development Goals, and thus meet the real needs
of their consumers in an environmentally safe, socially just and economically
secure future for themselves and their children. Environmental security,
which is currently the focus of all countries' efforts by agreeing on joint
actions to reduce the negative impact on the environment, is thus one of the
priority components of CSR. An analysis of the aviation companies’
activities that claim to have CSR, has shown that they all take into account
the impact on the environment, and to be more precisely, measures to neutralize
the negative impact on it with a simultaneous positive impact on profitability.
That is why it was analyzed whether there is a relationship between the
company's environmental indicators and its financial and operational results.
It was also investigated that the environment indicators of the flight
operations group (GHG emissions from conventional aviation fuel and
from ground operations, consumption of conventional aviation fuel, NOx
low altitude emissions, SO2 low altitude emissions, global noise
energy indicator) have depended more on the performance indicators, connected
to the number of transported passengers, and the indicators of the ground
operations group (total electricity and other energies’ consumption,
water consumption, non-carbon emissions, non-hazardous and hazardous industrial
waste) depend on the performance indicators, connected to the transported
cargo. These relationships are very important for deciding on the most
effective and appropriate measures to reduce the negative impact on the
environment from the operation of the air carrier.
Making up a long-term strategy for
the development of the airline is impossible without considering the current
challenges facing humanity and which the entire international community is
working to overcome, including reducing the negative impact on the environment.
Since the level of such impact is directly related to the growth of
airlines’ operating activities (number of transported passengers and
cargo), it is recommended to use such a tool as decoupling, i.e., to reduce the
negative impact on the environment while increasing the quantity (passenger and
cargo turnover). It is possible to achieve this by using measures to improve
the performance of companies’ activities in the long run. Investing in
research to develop new technological and design solutions for future fleet
modernization and sustainable aviation fuel usage, offsetting programs, both
for the company and for service end consumers, energy-efficient technologies
and renewable solutions to reduce the total amount of energy and resources
consumed by airlines and others.
References
2. Mureşan Laura, Cristian-Romeo,
Poţincu, Mihai Duguleana. 2010. “Ecological
Responsibility, Component of the Corporate Social Responsibility”. Proceedings
of the International Conference on Risk management, assessment and mitigation.
Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267934654.
3. Commission
of the European Communities. “Green paper. Promoting a European framework
for Corporate Social Responsibility”. Available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/committees/deve/20020122/com(2001)366_en.pdf.
4. Castka
Pavel, Christopher J. Bamber, David J. Bamber, John M. Sharp. 2004.
“Integrating corporate social responsibility (CSR) into ISO management
systems–in search of a feasible CSR management system framework”. The TQM Magazine 16(3): 216-224. ISSN: 0954-478X. Available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/09544780410532954/full/html.
5. United
Nations Foundation. “Sustainable development goals”.
Available at: https://unfoundation.org/what-we-do/issues/sustainable-development-goals.
6. Drucker
Peter F. 1954. The practice of management. New York: Harper Business.
ISBN: 978-0750685047.
7. Phillips
Edwin D. 2006. “Corporate social responsibility in aviation”. Journal
of Air Transportation 11(1):
65-87. ISSN: 2380-9450. Available at: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20060046466/downloads/20060046466.pdf.
8. Serhan
Carole, Palmera Abboud, Rebecca Shahoud. 2018. “Corporate Social
Responsibility Practices in the Aviation Industry”. International
Journal of Research in Business Studies and Management 5(9): 1-14. ISSN
2394-5923. Available at: http://www.ijrbsm.org/papers/v5-i9/1.pdf.
9. So
Derek. 2020. “How Corporate Social Responsibility Helps Airlines Fly
Higher”. Available at: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-corporate-social-responsibility-helps-airlines-fly-derek-so.
10. Tsai-Chi
Kuo, Hsiao-Min Chen, Hsien-Mi Meng. 2021. “Do
corporate social responsibility practices improve financial performance? A case
study of airline companies”. Journal of Cleaner Production 310:
127380. ISSN: 1879-1786. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127380.
11. Joonho
Moon, Won Seok Lee, Insin Kim. 2016. “Effect of Corporate Social
Responsibility on Airlines”. International Journal of Transport
Economics 43(1-2): 105-122.
ISSN: 0391-8440. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306011300.
12. Asatryan
Roman, Olga Březinová. 2014. “Corporate Social Responsibility
and Financial. Performance in the Airline Industry in Central and Eastern
Europe”. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae
Mendelianae Brunensis 62(4):
633-639. ISSN: 2464-8310. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.11118/actaun201462040633.
13. Knigge Halley.
2017. “Alaska’s new Elite Leave protects your status during
parental leave”. Available at: https://blog.alaskaair.com/alaska-airlines/guest-experience/elite-leave.
14. Aviation
environment federation. 2016. “First EU-wide report on aviation’s
environmental impacts shows growing challenges”. Available at: http://www.aef.org.uk/2016/02/03/first-eu-wide-report-on-aviations-environmental-impacts-shows-growing-challenges.
15. Kharazishvili Yurii, Bugayko Dmytro, Lyashenko
Vyacheslav, Sokolovskiy Volod, Baranov Volod. 2021. “Strategizing for
sustainable development of transport systems in the safety dimension”. IOP
Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science: 012025. ISSN: 1755-1315. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/915/1/012025.
16. Sokolova
Olena, Grigorak Mariya, Ivannikova Viktoriya. 2021. “Green Sector of the
Air Transport of Ukraine Sustainable Development”. Proceedings of the
12th International Conference TRANSBALTICA: Transportation Science and
Technology: 448-455. ISBN: 978-3-030-94774-3.
Available at: https://www.springerprofessional.de/en/green-sector-of-the-air-transport-of-ukraine-sustainable-develop/20064332.
17. Fitzgerald
Peter Paul, René David-Cooper. 2018. “Corporate Social
Responsibility in the Aviation Industry”. In: Sustainable Development,
International Aviation, and Treaty Implementation, edited by Armand
L.C. de Mestral, P. Paul Fitzgerald, Md. Tanveer Ahmad: 312-343. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316594216.016.
18. Cathay
Pacific Airways Limited. “Annual Report”. 2016. Available at: https://www.cathaypacific.com/content/dam/cx/about-us/investor-relations/interim-annual-reports/en/CX16_Final_en.pdf.
19. Lufthansa.
“Fact sheet Sustainability”. 2020. Available at:
https://www.lufthansagroup.com/media/downloads/en/responsibility/LH-Factsheet-Sustainability-2020.pdf.
20. British
Airways. “Protecting our natural environment”. 2020.
Available at: https://www.britishairways.com/en-ua/information/about-ba/ba-better-world/planet.
21. Air
China Limited. “Corporate Social Responsibility Report”. 2020.
Available at: http://www.airchina.com.cn/en/images/en/investor_relations/csr/2021/08/04/4040BDF92DE089711855033578E42947.pdf.
22. Dassault
Aviation. “Corporate social responsibility”. 2021.
Available at:
https://www.dassault-aviation.com/en/group/about-us/corporate-social-responsibility.
23. Savchenko
Lidiia, Bugayko Dmytro, Smerichevska Svitlana. 2021. “Environmental and
social responsibility in supply chains”. In: Economics, management and
administration in the coordinates of sustainable development: scientific
monogr., edited by Smerichevskyi Sergiy, Kosova Tetyana: 596-615. Riga, Latvia,
Izdevniecība “Baltija Publishing”. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30525/978-9934-26-157-2-32.
ISBN: 978-9934-26-157-2.
24. Xiamen
Airlines. “Social Responsibility Report”. 2020. Available at: https://www.xiamenair.com/brandnew_CN/upload/files/2021/7/9c63d394411f493d.pdf.
25. Qatar
Airways. “Corporate Social Responsibility”. 2021.
Available at: https://www.qrcargo.com/csr.
26. Air
Malta. “Corporate Social Responsibility”. 2021. Available at: https://airmalta.com/en/about/corporate-social-responsibility.
27. Namibia
Airports Company. “Corporate Social Responsibility”. 2022.
Available at:
https://www.airports.com.na/about-us/corporate-social-responsibility/81.
28. Lindiawati.
2019. “The implementation of corporate social responsibility in Indonesian
banking industry”. Journal of
Business, Economics and Finance 8: 93-100. ISSN: 2146-7943. DOI: http://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2019.1040.
29. Institute
for advanced sustainability studies. 2022. “Air pollution and climate
change”. Available at: https://www.iass-potsdam.de/en/output/dossiers/air-pollution-and-climate-change.
30. Oksana
Ovdiienko, Mariia Hryhorak, Volodymyr Marchuk, Dmytro Bugayko. 2021. “An
assessment of the aviation industry’s impact on air pollution from its
emissions: worldwide and the Ukraine”. Environmental & Socio-economic Studies 9(2): 1-10.
ISSN: 2354-0079. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/environ-2021-0006.
31. United
Nations Global Compact. 2022. “The Ten Principles of the UN Global
Compact”. Available at: https://www.unglobalcompact.org/what-is-gc/mission/principles.
32. United
Nations Global Compact. 2022. “Our Participants”.
Available at: https://www.unglobalcompact.org/what-is-gc/participants.
33. Air
France-KLM. 2020. “Sustainable Development report”.
Available at: https://www.airfranceklm.com/en/air-france-klm-2020-sustainable-development-report.
34. Air
France KLM Group. CSR strategy. 2022. Available at: https://corporate.airfrance.com/en/csr-strategy.
35. Air France-KLM Group. “Universal
registration document 2020 including the annual financial report”. 2021.
Available at: https://ungc-production.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/attachments/cop_2021/497961/original/afk_urd_2020_29042021.pdf.
Received 10.12.2022;
accepted in revised form 29.03.2023
Scientific Journal of Silesian University of Technology. Series Transport is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 International License
[1] Department of Logistics, National Aviation University,
1, Liubomyr Guzar ave., Kyiv, 03058, Ukraine. Email: lidia_savchenko@ukr.net.
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3581-6942
[2] Department of Logistics, National Aviation University,
1, Liubomyr Guzar ave., Kyiv, 03058, Ukraine. Email: ovdoks@gmail.com. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2770-4895
[3] Department of Logistics, Dnipro University of
Technology, 19, Dmytra Yavornytskoho ave., Dnipro, 49005, Ukraine. Email: boynv@i.ua.
ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9874-3085
[4] Faculty of Transport, Management and Logistics,
National Aviation University, 1, Liubomyr Guzar ave., Kyiv, 03058, Ukraine.
Email: tmosten@ukr.net. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2112-4745