Figure 1
Example of an SGX annual report from Yongnam Holdings Ltd.
Source: Yongnam Holdings Limited.
Figure 2
Locally linear embedding on SGX report. China Star Food Group Ltd. and Yongnam Holdings Ltd. are food processing and steel manufacturing companies, respectively. Source code: https://github.com/QuantLet/Financial-Report-Analysis-BERT-W2V-GLOVE/blob/master/LLE_wordEmbeddings.ipynb.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure 3
SGX Companies’ sector distribution.
Source: Author s contribution.
Table 2
Identity narrative.
| Year | Number of reports | Identity narrative | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sustainable | GHG | Carbon | Climate change | ||
| 2010 | 365 | 33 | 3 | 6 | 1 |
| 2011 | 366 | 35 | 2 | 5 | 0 |
| 2012 | 368 | 46 | 2 | 8 | 0 |
| 2013 | 368 | 59 | 2 | 8 | 0 |
| 2014 | 365 | 40 | 2 | 9 | 0 |
| 2015 | 366 | 55 | 2 | 8 | 0 |
| 2016 | 365 | 64 | 2 | 12 | 0 |
| 2017 | 367 | 65 | 0 | 8 | 0 |
| 2018 | 364 | 57 | 0 | 9 | 0 |
| Total | 3,294 | 454 | 15 | 73 | 1 |
Note: GHG = greenhouse gas.
Source: Author s contribution.
Table 3
Strategic narrative.
| Year | Number of reports | Strategic narrative | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sustainable | GHG | Carbon | Climate change | ||
| 2010 | 365 | 191 | 3 | 33 | 7 |
| 2011 | 366 | 211 | 4 | 28 | 4 |
| 2012 | 368 | 226 | 2 | 28 | 2 |
| 2013 | 368 | 263 | 1 | 11 | 1 |
| 2014 | 365 | 256 | 3 | 9 | 0 |
| 2015 | 366 | 297 | 1 | 10 | 7 |
| 2016 | 365 | 318 | 4 | 14 | 2 |
| 2017 | 367 | 446 | 0 | 18 | 7 |
| 2018 | 364 | 456 | 0 | 26 | 7 |
| Total | 3,294 | 2,664 | 18 | 177 | 37 |
Note: GHG = greenhouse gas.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure 4
LDA plate notation. The subscript is dropped in the diagram.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure 5
Limited presence of sustainability-related topics. Note that the x-axis is represented in percentage (%).
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A1
Hellinger distance distribution of Company Overview corpora.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A2
Hellinger distance distribution of Leader’s Words corpora.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A3
Coherence scores for Company Overview corpus.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A4
Coherence scores for Leader’s Words corpus.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A5
Evolutions of number of optimal topics on Company Overview and Leader’s Words corpora.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A6
2010–2011 Company Overview corpus’s top topics.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A7
2011–2012 Company Overview corpus’s top topics.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A8
2012–2013 Company Overview corpus’s top topics.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A9
2013–2014 Company Overview corpus’s top topics.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A10
2014–2015 Company Overview corpus’s top topics.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A11
2015–2016 Company Overview corpus’s top topics.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A12
2016–2017 Company Overview corpus’s top topics.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A13
2017–2018 Company Overview corpus’s top topics.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A14
2010–2011 Leader’s Words corpus’s top topics.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A15
2011–2012 Leader’s Words corpus’s top topics.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A16
2012–2013 Leader’s Words corpus’s top topics.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A17
2013–2014 Leader’s Words corpus’s top topics.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A18
2014–2015 Leader’s Words corpus’s top topics.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A19
2015–2016 Leader’s Words corpus’s top topics.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A20
2016–2017 Leader’s Words corpus’s top topics.
Source: Author s contribution.
Figure A21
2017–2018 Leader’s Words corpus’s top topics.
Source: Author s contribution.