Biodiversity reporting in the coal mining industry: an institutional theory perspective

Purpose This study is motivated by the progressive loss of biodiversity, the impact of coal mining on it, and the need for companies to report transparently on biodiversity. The study aims to investigate how the largest coal mining companies across major coal-producing regions (Australia, China, India, Indonesia, the EU, and the USA) account for biodiversity in their corporate reports and examines the institutional pressures associated with these reporting practices. Design/methodology/approach We adopt an exploratory qualitative design and perform a cross-regional analysis of 28 major coal mining companies from six regions. We apply content analysis to examine biodiversity reporting and employ institutional theory to evaluate the coercive, mimetic, and normative pressures associated with these practices. Findings Our findings indicate weak and fragmented biodiversity reporting, with a notable trend towards more comprehensive reporting in Indonesia and India. We identify a pattern of fragmented isomorphism, in which common reporting responses coexist with substantial regional variations associated with differences in institutional pressures across regional contexts. Practical implications We recommend mandatory reporting obligations aligned with recognised voluntary standards, including species- and context-specific indicators to support more substantive biodiversity impact disclosure. We further emphasise the importance of biodiversity expertise in reporting processes and strengthening biodiversity-related competencies in business education. For companies, industry-specific frameworks can support them in identifying context-specific biodiversity impacts and developing science-based, time-bound biodiversity targets. Originality/value The study contributes to biodiversity reporting and institutional theory by identifying fragmented isomorphism within a single high-impact industry, where differences in institutional pressures across regional contexts are associated with non-uniform reporting patterns.