Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Preprint . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: ZENODO
ZENODO
Preprint . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Preprint . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Computability Is Not Uniform: Axis-Specific Frictions in Corporate Sustainability Disclosure Infrastructure

Authors: Kokubu, Hiroyuki;

Computability Is Not Uniform: Axis-Specific Frictions in Corporate Sustainability Disclosure Infrastructure

Abstract

Data Note 003 — A Computational Substrate Audit of GHG Disclosure across 89 Japanese Prime Market Firms This data note examines whether corporate sustainability disclosure provides a computable substrate for downstream analysis. Using 89 Japanese Prime Market firms, the study constructs a Computability Support Score (CSS) over three verified primary axes: machine readability, unit normalization, and API accessibility. The central finding is diagnostic rather than dismissive. Corporate disclosure is not uniformly non-computable; instead, computability support is unevenly distributed across infrastructure axes. Machine readability and unit normalization are substantially stronger than an initial machine-only classification suggested, with pass rates of 92.1% and 88.8%, respectively. By contrast, API accessibility emerges as the primary bottleneck, with a pass rate of 47.2%. Manual verification of voluntary PDF disclosures corrected 35 false-zero classifications in the unit-normalization axis, demonstrating that a structured-filing-only audit can overstate substrate failure if it ignores evidence available in voluntary reporting artifacts. The resulting three-axis Primary CSS has a conservative lower-bound mean of 0.760 and a median of 0.667, indicating that the median firm passes two of three verified axes while failing on API accessibility. Audit trail is retained only as a secondary lower-confidence diagnostic axis, and time-series retrievability is treated as exploratory rather than quantitative due to mixed evidence classes. The note argues that CSS should be read as a diagnostic instrument that localizes where computational substrate integrity breaks, not as a blanket verdict that disclosure is unusable.

Related Organizations
Keywords

sustainability reporting, ESG disclosure, API accessibility, Japanese listed firms, data infrastructure, computational audit, GHG disclosure, machine readability

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Green