An exploratory study on the components and quality of combined assurance in an integrated or a sustainability reporting setting

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andre Prinsloo ◽  
Warren Maroun
Keyword(s):  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Quality Measure ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Corporate Reporting ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
External Sources ◽  
Sustainability Reports ◽  
Integrated Or

Purpose This research complements the corporate reporting literature by exploring the different types of assurance, which companies are using to bolster the credibility of their integrated and sustainability reports. A composite quality measure is proposed and this study aims to provide evidence on how combined assurance quality (CAQ) varies among firms. Design/methodology/approach Content analysis is used to identify “elements” of combined assurance disclosed in integrated and sustainability reports and company webpages. Results are presented in tabular format and supported by non-parametric tests to evaluate differences in CAQ among firms in more detail. Findings Combined assurance is framed as a function of the responsibility of the board of directors to ensure accurate, complete and reliable reporting and the characteristics of different internal and external sources of assurance. Overall, combined assurance models are being designed conservatively. They focus mainly on specific disclosures and are guided by a limited number of assurance methodologies or frameworks instead of taking a more pluralistic approach to verification of integrated and sustainability reports as a whole. Research limitations/implications The study is based on combined assurance practices by a sample of large listed companies in a single jurisdiction. An international comparison of combined assurance and the calibration of the proposed quality measure is deferred for future research. Practical implications Limitations in existing assurance practices are identified for the consideration of preparers and assurance providers. The quality schematic also offers practitioners, standard-setters and academics an easy-to-apply technique for examining the different elements of a company’s combined assurance model. Social implications A better understanding of the quality of combined assurance is essential for users’ to place reliance on integrated and sustainability reports and for informing change to existing assurance practices. Originality/value The study is the first to examine the operation and quality of combined assurance. The method used to gauge assurance quality provides a useful basis for a more detailed empirical study on the relevance of combined assurance.

scholarly journals Organisational and professional challenges amid the evolution of sustainability reporting: a theoretical framework and an agenda for future research

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Lai ◽  
Riccardo Stacchezzini
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Professional Capital ◽  
Research And Practice ◽  
Corporate Reporting ◽  
Professional Challenges ◽  
Reporting Practice

Purpose This paper aims to trace subsequent steps of the sustainability reporting evolution in terms of changes in the organisation fields and professional jurisdictions involved. As such, it highlights the (interrelated) organisational and professional challenges associated with the progressive incorporation of “sustainability” within corporate reporting. Design/methodology/approach The paper draws on Suddaby and Viale’s (2011) theorisation of how professionals reshape organisational fields to highlight how organisational spaces, actors, rules and professional capital evolve alongside the incorporation of sustainability within corporate reporting. Findings The paper shows organisational spaces, actors, rules and professional capital mobilised during the recent evolution of sustainability reporting, starting from a period in which there was no space for sustainability, to more recent periods in which sustainability gained increasing momentum beyond initial niches, and culminating in more integrated forms of sustainability reporting. Research limitations/implications Although the analysis is limited to empirical evidence collected by prior research and practice on sustainability reporting, the paper offers a view to imagine how the incorporation of sustainability within corporate reporting relies on and affects organisational fields and professional jurisdictions. Originality/value The paper offers a lens to interpret corporate and professional challenges associated with the more recent evolutions of sustainability reporting practice and standard setting. It also allows framing the papers accepted in the special issue on “new challenges in sustainability reporting” and concludes by suggesting an agenda for future research.

Materiality assessment: the case of Latin American listed companies

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yully Marcela Sepúlveda-Alzate ◽  
María Antonia García-Benau ◽  
Mauricio Gómez-Villegas
Keyword(s):  
Latin American ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
Construction Materials ◽  
Field Research ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Listed Companies ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Sustainability Reports

Purpose This paper aims to propose a measurement of the materiality of environmental, social and governance information (ESG) reported by listed companies belonging to sensitive industries in Colombia, Mexico, Brazil, Chile and Argentina. This analysis is carried out from the insights of stakeholder theory, legitimacy theory and institutional theory. The research questions addressed are: What type of information is considered as material by Latin American companies? Does this information respond to the environmental and social issues within the context of Latin American companies and the needs of their stakeholders? Design/methodology/approach A materiality index is developed from principal component analysis and factor analysis, which are multivariate analysis statistical techniques used in various fields to develop indices. The designed index examines materiality in the sustainability reports of 65 companies for 2017 and 67 companies for 2018. These firms belong to the energy, mining, chemical, construction, construction materials and public services industries in Colombia, Mexico, Chile, Argentina and Brazil. Findings The results show medium-high materiality indices, mostly in Chilean, Mexican and Colombian companies. In addition, issues such as water management, climate change and occupational health and safety are particularly interesting for companies. For the two years studied and from the perspective of material aspects for the company and its stakeholders, energy, mining and utilities (drinking water and sewage) sectors obtained the highest scores. This shows that the disclosure of ESG information is higher in industries related to the exploitation of natural resources that cause adverse effects on the environment such as extractive industries. Both the analysis presented in this paper and the materiality measurement developed, allow social responsibility managers to have a standard on the level of importance allotted to the different topics disclosed in sustainability reports. Additionally, this study provides a perspective of the material issues recognized by sensitive industries with great environmental impact. Similarly, an analysis of the issues considered material by stakeholders is provided. This allows such issues to be compared, identifying similarities and differences among the issues regarded as material by a company and its stakeholders. Practical implications The paper opens the debate is open as to whether the information disclosed response to the needs of stakeholders or whether, on the contrary, the materiality analysis is a process that emerges simply from the interests of the company. These demands for qualitative and field research to complement quantitative studies such as this one to research the stakeholders’ engagement processes in context. Social implications The paper’s purpose a challenge for future research is to strengthen the use of various methodologies that allow knowing the participation processes in the definition of materiality in the ESG information and the companies’ engagement with stakeholders. This stimulates research in the region, which is still in its infancy. Originality/value The international literature contains few studies related to the assessment of materiality for sustainability reporting. So this paper contributes proposes measurement of materiality for ESG information.

scholarly journals An empirical study of sustainability reporting assurance: current trends and new insights

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kholod Fahad Alsahali ◽  
Ricardo Malagueño
Keyword(s):  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Firm Level ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Global Trends ◽  
Current Trends ◽  
Consulting Firms ◽  
Sustainability Reports ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose This study aims to examine trends in the global assurance practices of sustainability reports, updating and broaden the extant literature and proving new insights that could guide future research. Design/methodology/approach The data were collected for 12,783 companies and exploratory descriptive analyses of sustainability reporting assurance practices were undertaken. Findings The study shows that assurance growth is lagging behind the growth in sustainability reporting. It reveals that assurer switching is a common practice amongst companies. There is an increasing trend towards the use of the International Standard for Assurance Engagements 3000 by non-accounting assurers. Additionally, in terms of assurance providers, the study finds that accounting firms are dominating the market, however, engineering firms are fast increasing their share of the sustainability assurance market, whilst consulting firms’ share is decreasing. However, the switch towards consulting firms is higher than the switch towards accounting firms in the last switch period. Practical implications Overall, the results of this study provide insights about companies’ assurance practices for regulators, assurance providers and companies interested in assuring their sustainability reports. Social implications This study is relevant for companies’ stakeholders, including investors, to enhance their understanding of companies’ current assurance practices. Originality/value Prior studies on the assurance practices of sustainability reports are limited in scope (concentrate on large companies) and depth (examine accounting vs non-accounting assures and consider the evolving patterns at the institutional rather than firm-level). This study presents developments and trajectories of assurance practices to inform researchers and practitioners on the global trends by bringing an updated and broader perspective on the topic.

Biodiversity reporting and organised hypocrisy

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 437-464 ◽  
Author(s):  
Warren Maroun ◽  
Kieran Usher ◽  
Hafsa Mansoor
Keyword(s):  
South African ◽  
Business Models ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Environmental Issues ◽  
Mission Statements ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Corporate Reporting ◽  
Proactive Approach ◽  
Integrated Or

PurposeThis study aims to examine biodiversity reporting by South African food producers and retailers. It not only draws attention to the disconnect between reporting on an important environmental issue and the sense of commitment to environmental responsibility, but also shows that over time, organisations are becoming more proactive about biodiversity reporting.Design/methodology/approachThe research uses a content analysis of sustainability and integrated reports and organised hypocrisy as a theoretical framework for analysing biodiversity-related disclosures.FindingsConsistent with an organised hypocrisy framework, the research finds that the several companies rely on corporate reporting to emphasise actions and internal management strategies that are already producing favourable results. In contrast, mission statements, firm policy commitments and forward-looking analysis are avoided. There is, however, evidence to suggest that the gaps between corporate reporting and action may be giving companies the time to reform their practices, align biodiversity disclosures with genuine corporate action and move towards truly integrated business models.Research limitations/implicationsPoor biodiversity reporting raises questions about the extent to which companies are managing serious environmental issues that can have a direct impact on their business models. Improvements in biodiversity reporting also suggest that corporate reporting is maturing and that some organisations are beginning to understand the need for managing their biodiversity impact.Originality/valueThe paper offers empirical evidence on how the disconnect between organisational rhetoric and action is used to manage stakeholder expectations and negate the need for environmental reforms. In this manner, organised hypocrisy is framed as a specific legitimisation strategy. The research also shows that organised hypocrisy is not absolute; despite the opportunity to engage in organised hypocrisy, some companies are taking a more proactive approach to biodiversity reporting. As a result, it may be appropriate to see organised hypocrisy as part of a transition to higher quality integrated or sustainability reporting.

Sustainability reports in Brazil through the lens of signaling, legitimacy and stakeholder theories

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hong Yuh Ching ◽  
Fábio Gerab
Keyword(s):  
Information Asymmetry ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Two Dimensions ◽  
Social Dimensions ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Environmental Dimension ◽  
Sustainability Reports ◽  
Corporate Social

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to extend the applicability of stakeholder, legitimacy and signaling theories by examining to what extent proactive corporate social responsibility disclosures are interrelated to attempt to gain and maintain legitimacy, to gain support of the stakeholders and to reduce information asymmetry. Design/methodology/approach To test the theoretical arguments, a longitudinal approach over a five-year period of 145 companies’ sustainability reports and statistical analysis was applied to investigate the evolution of their quality. Findings The results show a significant increase in the quality of sustainability reporting, and the experience gained while writing these reports can contribute to this. Based on signaling and legitimacy theories, this paper suggests that improvement in sustainability reporting quality acts as an important signal to gain legitimacy in case of information asymmetry during the legitimacy process. Th disclosure for economic and social dimensions is better than that of the environmental dimension, and the improvement in quality over time is the because of synergies and interlinkages more between these two dimensions of sustainability, and to a lesser extent because of the environmental dimension. Practical implications Firms should view investing in sustainability reporting disclosure as a strategy for obtaining business legitimacy. Originality/value The results of this paper are of interest for several reasons: extend and broaden the use of signaling in studying its use on sustainability reporting; the use of three theories is an appropriate framework for empirical analysis of sustainability reporting disclosure quality in Brazil; and add to the scarce evidence of sustainability reporting in Brazil.

Sustainability reporting or integrated reporting: Which one is valuable for investors?

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ika Permatasari ◽  
Ika Permatasari ◽  
I Made Narsa
Keyword(s):  
Value Relevance ◽  
Accounting Information ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Financial Information ◽  
Integrated Reporting ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Reporting Practices ◽  
Corporate Reporting ◽  
Sustainability Reports ◽  
International Integrated Reporting Council

Purpose This research is motivated by the development of dialogue and debate regarding company reporting in the form of sustainability reporting (SR) – which is separate from the annual report (AR) – or integrated reporting (IR). Research into SR and IR is still fascinating, and this study addresses the debate about them. This study aims to examine which of the two reports is more valuable for investors, and also examine whether IR has value relevance because the information in the IR could reinforce the importance of the accounting information. Design/methodology/approach As with previous studies, we adopted a valuation approach – the Ohlson model – to assess the value relevance of non-financial information (in the form of SR/IR) and financial information. As a preliminary study, we used non-financial information as a binary variable, i.e. a group of companies that issue sustainability reports and a group of companies that issue integrated reports. Therefore, they complement and interact with the financial statements’ information. This paper used panel data consisting of 931 firm-years of SR issuers and 922 firm-years of IR issuers in Europe and Africa in the period from 2005 to 2019. Findings The results showed that SR had a higher value relevance than IR. However, when the authors interact the corporate reporting form with the accounting information, IR had value relevance because the information contained in the IR could reinforce the importance of the accounting information. Practical implications This study will support regulators in various countries to monitor the reporting practices of companies in those countries. The results of this study provide evidence that sustainability reports get a higher response than integrated reports. However, when interacted with the accounting variables, information in the IR is considered to be more relevant than that found in the SR. Therefore, it is hoped that the results of this study will help the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) in reviewing IR practices around the world so that the implementation of IR practices can be realized in accordance with the mission that the IIRC wants to achieve. Originality/value Research into the value relevance of SR and IR has been carried out by several previous researchers separately, but to the best of the author’s knowledge, there are no studies comparing the value relevance of the two.

scholarly journals The influence of corporate governance structure on sustainability reporting in Malaysia

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amira Jamil ◽  
Nazli Anum Mohd Ghazali ◽  
Sherliza Puat Nelson
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Governance Structure ◽  
Resource Dependence Theory ◽  
Corporate Governance Structure ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Board Capital ◽  
The Board Of Directors

Purpose Following the introduction of the revised Malaysian Code on Corporate Governance in 2012 (MCCG 2012), this study aims to investigate the influence of corporate governance structure on the quality of sustainability reporting from the perspectives of agency theory and resource dependence theory. Design/methodology/approach Based on an analysis of 126 firms’ annual reports for the year ended 2010 and 2014, this study analyses sustainability reporting quality before the introduction of MCCG, 2012 (year ended 2010) and after (year ended 2014). Findings The findings of the study show that there was a significant increase in the quality of sustainability reporting from 2010 to 2014. Results from multiple regression analyses indicate that the number of sustainability-related training attended by the board of directors and the percentage of directors with sustainability-related experience have a significant impact on the quality of sustainability reporting. Practical implications Observations from the study provide useful insights into the importance of the appointment of directors with sustainability-related experience as part of the criteria for directors’ appointment. Moreover, the board of directors is encouraged to attend sustainability-related training to help firms improve sustainability practices and reporting. Social implications The increase in the quality of sustainability reporting indicates that companies are committed in ensuring that environmental degradation is put at the minimum level if not eliminated. It appears that companies are embracing the concept of sustainability reporting, and hence, contributing to improving and enhancing social well-being. Originality/value This study contributes to the discussion of both internal mechanisms (board independence and board capital) and external mechanisms (compliance to the code on corporate governance) of corporate governance structure on the quality of sustainability reporting. The findings can be used to identify necessary mechanisms that should be enhanced to strengthen the practice of sustainability reporting.

Assessing sustainability reports of US universities

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (7) ◽  
pp. 1158-1184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Remmer Sassen ◽  
Leyla Azizi
Keyword(s):  
Social Performance ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Social Dimension ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Political Incentives ◽  
The Social ◽  
Sustainability Reports ◽  
The University ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose The purpose of this study is to assess sustainability reports of US universities to provide findings on the relative importance of disclosure topics. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted content analysis by using a specific university-oriented catalogue of indicators to cover the specific sustainability-related aspects of this sector. Findings Sustainability reporting by universities is still in its early stages. The findings show a clear focus on the environmental dimension, whereas the university and the economic dimensions see lower levels of reporting. The social dimension is rarely addressed. Research limitations/implications Future research could use the results of this study as a basis for investigating stakeholder expectations towards universities’ sustainability reporting and developing university-specific sustainability reporting standards. Practical implications The results could be used to improve universities’ sustainability reporting, as “good” practices are now readily available. Social implications The level of reporting on the social dimension is very low. Therefore, developing political incentives to improve universities’ social performance might be of interest. Originality/value The investigated setting is unique and contributes several findings in a less-researched area along with several practical, social and research implications.

Sustainability reporter classification matrix: explaining variations in disclosure quality

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 334-352
Author(s):  
Muhammad Bilal Farooq ◽  
Ammad Ahmed ◽  
Muhammad Nadeem
Keyword(s):  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Legitimacy Theory ◽  
Disclosure Quality ◽  
Lower Quadrant ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Report Quality ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Sustainability Reports ◽  
Quality Reports

Purpose The purpose of this study is to develop a sustainability reporter classification matrix (hereafter referred to as the “matrix”) to explain why some reporters publish better-quality sustainability reports than others and why some reporters experience improvements in the quality of their sustainability reports while others experience no improvement or a decline in sustainability report quality. Design/methodology/approach The study draws on the existing literature, which is analysed using a combination of legitimacy theory (i.e. commitment to sustainability reporting) and resource-based view (RBV, i.e. competencies in sustainability reporting). Findings A two-dimensional matrix is developed representing organisations’ competencies in (explained using the RBV) and commitment to (explained using legitimacy theory) sustainability reporting. Based on these two dimensions the matrix identifies four reporter classifications: incompetent uncommitted reporters (who publish low-quality reports); competent uncommitted reporters (who publish average-quality reports); incompetent committed reporters (who publish average-quality reports); and competent committed reporters (who publish high-quality reports). The matrix explains how reporters can transition from one quadrant/classification to another and how this transition can be either forward (moving from a lower quadrant to a higher quadrant), resulting in improvements in report quality, or backward (moving from a higher quadrant to a lower quadrant), leading to a deterioration in disclosure quality. Originality/value The study builds on the extant literature, combining legitimacy theory with the RBV, to provide a more complete explanation for why organisations publish sustainability reports of varying quality and why this quality varies over time. These insights can also be used to explain variations in the quality of integrated reports. The matrix may prove useful to practitioners as a tool for classifying reporters, identifying issues, assessing risk and tracking progress made.

scholarly journals Double materiality and the shift from non-financial to European sustainability reporting: review, outlook and implications

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Josef Baumüller ◽  
Karina Sopp
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Sustainability ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Corporate Reporting ◽  
Stakeholder Groups ◽  
Reporting Requirements ◽  
Historic Development ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
The Eu

PurposeThis paper outlines the development of the principle of materiality in the European accounting framework, from the Modernization Directive (2003/51/EC) to the NFI Directive (2014/95/EU) and on to the proposals for a Corporate Sustainability Reporting (CSR) Directive (2021/0104 (COD)). The authors highlight how the requirements for corporate reporting in terms of sustainability matters have changed, underlining the main issues that require further attention by practitioners, researchers and legislators.Design/methodology/approachThis paper is based upon a historic analysis of European Union (EU) regulations in the field of non-financial and sustainability reporting and how these have changed over time. A conceptual comparison of different reporting concepts is presented, and changes in their relevance to the EU accounting framework are discussed as part of the historic analysis. Implications from corporate practice are derived from previous empirical findings from the EU Commission's consultations.FindingsThe proposed change from non-financial to sustainability reporting within the EU affects more than simply the terminology used. It implies that a different understanding is needed of both the purposes of company reporting on sustainability matters and the aims of carrying out such reporting. This change was driven by the need and desire to appropriately interpret the principle of materiality set forth in the NFI Directive. However, the recent redefinition in the shift within the EU Commission's proposals presents considerable challenges–and costs–in practice.Research limitations/implicationsFuture research on the conceptualization and operationalization of ecological and social materiality, as well as on the use of this information by different stakeholder groups, is necessary in order to (a) help companies that are applying the reporting requirements in practice, (b) support the increased harmonization of the reports published by these companies and (c) fully assess the costs and benefits associated with the increase in reporting requirements for these companies.Practical implicationsCompanies have to establish relevant reporting processes, systems and formats to fulfil the increasing number of reporting requirements.Originality/valueThis paper outlines the historic development of the principle of materiality regarding mandatory non-financial or sustainability reporting within the EU. It outlines a shift in rationales and political priorities as well as in implications for European companies that need to fulfil the reporting requirements. In consequence, it describes appropriate interpretations of this principle of materiality under current and upcoming legislation, enabling users to apply this principle more effectively.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document