臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

When reading the two words ´bottom line`, most business people think of the traditional accounting policy at the bottom of a company´s income statement, where the truth will out; profit or loss. But back in the mid-1990s, John Elkington developed a new accounting framework with these two words and called it The Triple Bottom Line (TBL). It was created for a new measurement approach that encompasses three dimensions of work ethics: the environmental, the social and the financial. The triple bottom line framework is also known as the three P’s: Planet, People, and Profit. The purpose of this study is to find out if implementing TBL approaches such as environmental and social objectives could have an influence on the ´bottom line` for companies within the athletic footwear industry from a financial perspective. The companies that serve for this study will be the top performer within the athletic footwear industry related to their market share. Older studies have shown quite impressive variances between the different companies in this specific industry. Not all companies are presenting great result or an upwards trend in their profitability while implementing TBL approaches. The company Nike is the only athletic footwear brand that shows a continuous rise in its profit dimension while focusing on the social and environmental impact on the same time. This study shows that successfully applying TBL approaches while increasing the companies’ profits at the same time is easier said than done.

When reading the two words ´bottom line`, most business people think of the traditional accounting policy at the bottom of a company´s income statement, where the truth will out; profit or loss. But back in the mid-1990s, John Elkington developed a new accounting framework with these two words and called it The Triple Bottom Line (TBL). It was created for a new measurement approach that encompasses three dimensions of work ethics: the environmental, the social and the financial. The triple bottom line framework is also known as the three P’s: Planet, People, and Profit. The purpose of this study is to find out if implementing TBL approaches such as environmental and social objectives could have an influence on the ´bottom line` for companies within the athletic footwear industry from a financial perspective. The companies that serve for this study will be the top performer within the athletic footwear industry related to their market share. Older studies have shown quite impressive variances between the different companies in this specific industry. Not all companies are presenting great result or an upwards trend in their profitability while implementing TBL approaches. The company Nike is the only athletic footwear brand that shows a continuous rise in its profit dimension while focusing on the social and environmental impact on the same time. This study shows that successfully applying TBL approaches while increasing the companies’ profits at the same time is easier said than done.

I. Chapter: Introduction .................................................................................. 1
I.1. Background ...................................................................................................................... 1
I.2. Research Goals and Objectives ........................................................................................ 3
I.3. Contribution ..................................................................................................................... 4
I.4. Presentation of Text ......................................................................................................... 5
II. Chapter: Literature Review ......................................................................... 7
II.1. Corporate Social Responsibility ....................................................................................... 7
II.2. Triple Bottom Line ........................................................................................................... 9
II.3. Athletic Footwear Industry ............................................................................................ 11
III. Chapter: Methodology ................................................................................ 14
III.1. General Design of Experiment ....................................................................................... 14
III.2. Research Design ............................................................................................................. 17
III.3. Trend Analysis ............................................................................................................... 19
IV. Chapter: Results of the Research .............................................................. 23
IV.1. Financial Performance ................................................................................................... 23
IV.1.1. Net Income ............................................................................................................. 23
IV.1.2. Gross Margin ........................................................................................................ 25
IV.1.3. Inventory Turnover ................................................................................................ 26
IV.1.4. Basic Earnings per Share ...................................................................................... 27
IV.1.5. Return on Equity .................................................................................................... 28
IV.1.6. Return on Assets .................................................................................................... 29
IV.2. Social Performance ........................................................................................................ 31
IV.3. Environmental Performance ........................................................................................... 32
IV.4. The Triple Bottom Line Trends ..................................................................................... 33
IV.4.1. Nike ........................................................................................................................ 34
IV.4.2. Adidas .................................................................................................................... 35
IV.4.3. Puma ...................................................................................................................... 36
IV.4.4. Asics ....................................................................................................................... 39
IV.5. Main Findings ................................................................................................................ 40
V. Chapter: Conclusion ................................................................................... 42
V.1. Discussion ...................................................................................................................... 42
V.2. Limitation ....................................................................................................................... 43
References .................................................................................................... 45
Appendix ...................................................................................................... 49

(1) Abnett, K. (2016). Just Fix It: How Nike Learned to Embrace Sustain ability. [online] The Business of Fashion. Available at: https://www.busines soffashion.com/articles/people/just-fix-it-hannah-jones-nike [Accessed 12 Mar. 2017].
(2) About.puma.com. (2017). PUMA® – Financial Reports. [online] Available at: http://about.puma.com/en/investor-relations/financial-reports [Accessed 11 Mar. 2017].
(3) Adidas-group.com. (2017). Financial Reports. [online] Available at: http://www.adidas-group.com/en/investors/financial-reports/ [Accessed 11 Mar. 2017]. (4) Ceres.org. (2013). Footwear & Apparel — Ceres. [online] Available at: https://www.ceres.org/roadmap-assessment/sector-analyses/footwear-apparel [Accessed 5 Mar. 2017].
(5) Chiu, J. (2015). The Influences of the Triple Bottom Line within the Athletic Footwear Industry. [online] Available at: http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1128&context=matesp [Accessed 12 Mar. 2017].
(6) Corp.asics.com. (2017). ASICS Corporate. [online] Available at: http://corp.asics.com/en/investor_relations/library/annual-reports [Accessed 11 Mar. 2017]. (7) Corporate Knights. (2016). 2015 Global 100 results | Corporate Knights. [online] Available at: http://www.corporateknights.com/reports/global-100/2015-global-100-results-14218559/ [Accessed 5 Mar. 2017]. (8) Dalal-Clayton, D. (2013). Sustainability appraisal. 1st ed.
(9) Elkington, John (1994). Towards the Sustainable Corporation: Win-Win-Win Business Strategies for Sustainable Development. California
(10) Ellison, S. and Mullin, W. (2014). Diversity, Social Goods Provision, and Performance in the Firm. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 23(2), pp.465-481.
(11) Foran, Barney & Lenzen, Manfred & Dey, Christopher Bilek, Marcela, 2005. “Integrating sustainable chain management with triple bottom line accounting,” Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol.52(2) (12) Gminsights.com. (2017). Athletic Footwear Market Size, Share | Industry Report, 2023. [online] Available at: https://www.gminsights.com/industry-analysis/athletic-footwear-market [Accessed 4 Mar. 2017]. (13) Grandviewresearch.com. (2017). Athletic Footwear Market Size And Trends | Industry Report, 2016-2024. [online] Available at: http://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/athletic-footwear-market [Accessed 4 Mar. 2017]. (14) Greatist. (2015). The 14 Athletic Wear Companies That Are Actually Good for the World. [online] Available at: http://greatist.com/fitness/athletic-wear-companies-social-good [Accessed 5 Mar. 2017].
(15) Investor.underarmour.com. (2017). Under Armour, Inc. - Annual Report & Proxy. [online] Available at: http://investor.underarmour.com/annuals.cfm [Accessed 11 Mar. 2017].
(16) Investors.nike.com. (2017). NIKE, Inc. - Investor Relations - Investors - News, Events and Reports. [online] Available at: http://investors.nike.com/investors/news-events-and-reports/?toggle=earnings [Accessed 11 Mar. 2017].
(17) Lukatsch, S. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in der supply chain in China: Eine Analyse zwischen Theorie und Praxis der Computerunternehmen Dell, Hewlett Packard und Acer. 1st ed. Diplomica Verlag.
(18) Marx Gomez, J., Sonnenschein, M., Vogel, U., Winter, A., Rapp, B. and Giesen, N. (2013). Advances and New Trends in Environmental and Energy Informatics. 1st ed.
(19) Morgan, A. and Barden, M. (2015). A beautiful constraint. 1st ed. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (20) Mullerat, R. (2010). International corporate social responsibility. 1st ed. Austin: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. (21) Nasdaq.com. (2017). The Nasdaq Dozen: Earnings Per Share (EPS). [online] Available at: http://www.nasdaq.com/investing/dozen/earnings-per-share.aspx#ixzz4Z1r3eh6Q [Accessed 5 Mar. 2017]. (22) Opendorse. (2017). Top 100 Highest-Paid Athlete Endorsers of 2015 | opendorse. [online] Available at: http://opendorse.com/blog/highest-paid-athlete-endorsers/ [Accessed 4 Mar. 2017].
(23) Richard, H. and Watts, P. (2000). Corporate social responsibility. 1st ed. Geneva: WBSCD. (24) Richards, J. (2015). Sustainability in Athletic Wear: Who has Ethical Running Shoes?. [online] Save Money with FatWallet. Available at: https://www.fatwallet.com/blog/sustainability-in-athletic-wear-who-has-ethical-running-shoes [Accessed 5 Mar. 2017]. (25) Saaty, T. and Saaty, T. (2006). Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with the analytic hierarchy process. 1st ed. Pittsburgh, Pa.: RWS Publications.
(26) Saaty, Thomas L. (2008) "Decision Making with the Analytic Hierarchy Process." International Journal of Services Sciences 1.1 (2008): 83.Web.
(27) Saaty, Thomas L. (2008): "Relative Measurement and Its Generalization in Decision Making Why Pairwise Comparisons Are Central in Mathematics for the Measurement of Intangible Factors The Analytic Hierarchy/Network Process." 102(2), pp.251-318.
(28) Savitz, A. and Weber, K. (2013). Triple Bottom Line, The: How Today's Best-Run Companies Are Achieving Economic, Social and Environmental Success - and How You Can Too. 1st ed. Wiley. (29) Statista, (2015). Global athletic footwear market share (Nike, Adidas, etc.) 2015 | Statistic. [online] Statista. Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/246501/athletic-apparel-companies-ranked-by-global-market-share-in-footwear-sales/ [Accessed 5 Mar. 2017]. (30) Sustainablebrands.com. (2017). Fashion Transparency Index - April 2016 | Sustainable Brands. [online] Available at: http://www.sustainable brands.com/digital_learning/research_report/supply_chain/fashion_transparency_index_-_april_2016 [Accessed 5 Mar. 2017]. (31) sustainablebrands.com. (2016). Sustainable Cotton Ranking: Assessing Company Performance (2016) | Sustainable Brands. [online] Available at: http://www.sustainablebrands.com/digital_learning/research _report/supply_chain/sustainable_cotton_ranking_assessing_company_performan [Accessed 5 Mar. 2017]. (32) sustainablebrands.com. (2017). The 2015 Sustainability Leaders: A GlobeScan/SustainAbility Survey | Sustainable Brands. [online] Available at: http://www.sustainablebrands.com/digital_learning/research_report /stake holder_trends_insights/2015_sustainability_leaders [Accessed 5 Mar. 2017].
(33) Vieira, M. and Ho, P. (2007). Case studies in food safety and environmental health. 1st ed. New York: Springer.