Search results

The Agenda 2030 have drawn a lot of interest in academic studies. This necessitates accounting research on nonfinancial reporting and sustainable development goals (SDG) disclosure in an under-investigated context. The purpose of this study is to examine the contribution of nonfinancial reporting practices to SDG disclosure by 120 companies from 12 African nations for the years 2016 to 2020.

The study uses a content analysis to gauge how much information are disclosed on SDG by the selected firms. The authors carried out content analysis using the global reporting initiative frameworks to determine the level of SDG disclosure across the companies by examining the selected nonfinancial reports.

Sustainability reports account for 50% of such SDG disclosure making it the highest. This is followed by corporate social responsibility report which accounts for 23%, while environmental reports account for 20% and Chairman’s statement accounts for 7%. The result is expected since corporate sustainability report has been the major channel for disclosing activities relating to social and governance issues in recent times.

The results of this study demand that corporate entities in Africa take responsibility for their actions and exert significant effort to achieve the SDG. While the government has the main responsibility, corporate entities must support the SDG to be realized.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is one of the few studies that examines nonfinancial reporting practices with a focus on SDG disclosure. In addition, this study offers novel insight into how accounting research contributes to nonfinancial reporting practices and SDG disclosure.

This paper aims to contribute to the development of the European Union (EU) regulatory environment for sustainability reporting by analyzing how materiality is defined in the Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD) and Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and by examining the added value and challenges of legalizing reporting and materiality requirements from both regulatory and practical company perspectives. It provides insights on whether this is reflected by EU pharmaceutical companies and to what extent companies report information on their materiality analysis process.

Doctrinal analysis was used to examine regulatory instruments. Qualitative document analysis was used to analyze companies’ reports. The added value and challenges were examined using a governance approach. It focused on legalizing reporting and materiality requirements, with a brief extension to corporate management and organization studies.

Materiality has evolved from a vague concept in the NFRD toward double materiality in the CSRD. This was reflected by the industry, but reports revealed inconsistencies in materiality definitions and reported information. Challenges include lack of self-reflection and company-centric perceptions of materiality. Companies should explain how they identify relevant stakeholders and how input is considered in decision-making.

Managers must consider how they conduct materiality assessments to meet society’s expectations. The underlying processes should be explained to increase the credibility of reports. Sustainability reporting should be seen as a corporate governance tool.

This work contributes to the literature on materiality in sustainability reporting and to the debate on the need for a holistic, society-centric approach to enhance the sustainability of companies.

The main purpose of this chapter is to understand climate change disclosures to achieve sustainable development goals (SDGs) by discussing in the context of developed and emerging countries’ company cases. Therefore, companies have been selected from the Forbes Global (2000–2021) list by looking at their climate change disclosures in their official websites and their corporate reports. Climate change disclosures have been discussed based on impression management perspective. The results of the study are that some of the tactics used in the reports are at a level that can affect the stakeholders of the enterprises. Therefore, it has been observed that climate change and the steps taken in the issue of climate change are at the top of the priority lists of companies in these four countries. This study is valuable to understand how country perspective changes in climate change disclosures to enhance SDGs by implementing impression management tactics.

The study examines the changes in audit market concentration, auditor choice and audit quality in Russia following International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) adoption. Scholars have called for further examination of the effects of IFRS adoption on auditors, with an emphasis on the importance of analyzing emerging markets that are characterized by enforcement challenges and lack of proper infrastructure. It focuses on a unique feature of Russian companies – dual audits under Russian Accounting Standards (RAS) and IFRS – and investigates changes in audit concentration and audit quality for the two audit markets.

The authors rely on the audited financial statements of Russian public companies and perform pre-/post-IFRS adoption estimation using a logit regression to ascertain whether public firms change auditors from local firms with limited IFRS expertise to those with global reputation, namely Big 4 audit firms. Further, they examine whether the change in audit market concentration post-2012 affects audit quality as proxied by companies' propensity to receive a modified audit opinion and discretionary accruals. Auditor attributes were hand-collected from audited financial statements and matched with financial variables from Datastream.

The IFRS audit market was dominated by the Big 4 audit firms prior to 2012, and there is strong evidence that audit market share (concentration) increases for IFRS reports but not for RAS reports. In addition, companies are more likely to choose a Big 4 audit firm for an RAS audit, conditional upon a Big 4 firm conducting the IFRS audit. The authors do not find evidence of decrease in the probability of audit firms issuing a modified audit opinion under either RAS or IFRS, indicating that, in the Russian setting, increased auditor concentration post-IFRS adoption does not lead to enhanced risk or decline in audit quality. Moreover, they find that discretionary accruals decline post-2012. Overall, the findings indicate that the concern of global regulators regarding audit market concentration is not justified.

The Russian reporting environment is unique and generally characterized by significant agency problems, and the study’s estimation sample is not large, compared to prior studies conducted predominantly in Western jurisdictions. Nevertheless, the authors shed light on the audit concentration phenomenon within emerging markets, for which empirical evidence is scarce. Future research could explore the impact of other capital market events and exogenous shocks, not limited to IFRS adoption, on the characteristics of Russia's audit market.

The IFRS reporting regime is commonly associated with enhanced reporting quality and improved information transparency among public companies. Yet, impairment of audit quality as a result of IFRS-driven increase in audit market share of Big 4 can potentially negate these capital market effects. This study shows that the concerns of global regulators are not valid and that audit quality does not change with increased share of Big 4 post-IFRS adoption.

Dual audits, whereby companies must prepare two sets of financial statements per the IFRS mandate, are not unique to Russia, and the evidence of IFRS reporting on the structural changes in the audit market and implications for audit quality under a dual regime is scarce. Accordingly, the study's findings are important and timely and are expected to aid regulators of countries that have announced or are contemplating the adoption of IFRS for public reporting purposes.

The growing business complexity has caused many risks (e.g. operational, financial, reputational, cybersecurity, regulatory and compliance) that threaten companies' sustainability and have received attention from regulators, investors, and businesses. The authors present a model for assessing and reporting corporate risk by examining the indicators underlying corporate risk reporting.

A thorough review of the literature and semi-structured interviews with experts were conducted and the fuzzy Delphi technique was used to obtain consensus and screening of risks. The relationships between these risk indicators were recognized, weighted and prioritized by employing a hybrid Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory Model (DEMATEL) method integrated with Analytic Network Process (ANP) (DEMATEL-ANP [DANP]) approach. Finally, using the Iranian setting of corporate risk reporting, a model was developed to calculate the risk-reporting scores.

The results indicate that risk disclosure quality is more important than risk disclosures' textual properties and quantity. According to the experts, reporting the key risks that the company faces, management's approach to dealing with these risks and quantifying their impact are more important than the other indicators. The results also show that risk reporting in Iran lacks quantitative and specific information, and most risk disclosures are sticky.

The data have been prepared and analyzed according to the unique Iranian reporting environment, which should be considered when interpreting the results.

The results of this research can be used by the regulators of the Stock Exchange Organizations (SEO) to evaluate corporate risk reports and rank companies. Results are also relevant to investors and policymakers to identify companies with poor risk disclosure and to take necessary measures to improve their reporting practices.

This paper contributes to the social and governance literature by presenting the importance of risk reporting in corporate disclosures.

The unique Iranian setting of corporate risk reporting furthers the understanding of risk reporting and thus provides education, policy, practice and research implications for other emerging economies like Iran. Many prior studies focus mainly on the quality of risk disclosure, and other aspects of corporate risk disclosure presented in the study have remained largely overlooked. The corporate risk reporting attributes identified in the study are relevant to the rise of non-financial risks, the textual and qualitative nature of risk reporting and textual risk disclosures.

The purpose of this study is to situate information and communications technology (ICT) “transparency reports” within the theoretical framework of corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting. The self-denominated transparency report serves a dual purpose of highlighting an ICT company’s socially responsible behavior while also holding government agencies accountable for surveillance and requests for user data. Drawing on legitimacy theory, neo-institutional theory and stakeholder theory, this exploratory study examines how ICT companies are implementing industry-specific voluntary disclosures as a form of CSR.

A content analysis of ICT voluntary nonfinancial reporting (N = 88) was used to identify motivating principles, the company positioning to stakeholders, the relevant publics and intended audience of these disclosures and the communication strategy used to engage primary stakeholders.

Key findings suggest that most ICT companies used transparency reporting to engage consumers/users as their primary stakeholders and most used a stakeholder information strategy. A majority of ICT companies signaled value-driven motives in their transparency reports while also positioning the company to stakeholders as a protector of user data and advocate for consumer rights.

This study enriches the literature on CSR communication strategies and reporting practices by extending it to an underdeveloped topic of study: novel voluntary disclosures as CSR activities of prominent ICT companies (i.e. “Big Tech”). These polyphonic reports reflect varied motives, varied positioning and varied stakeholders. For market-leading companies, transparency reporting can serve to legitimize existing market power. And for midsize and emerging companies, transparency reporting can be used to signal adherence to industry norms – set by market-leading companies.

The purpose of this study is to examine the associations between board size, board independence and triple bottom line (TBL) reporting. The TBL report consists of three components, namely, environmental, social and economic indices.

This study’s sample consists of top 50 listed companies from the year 2017 to 2019 on Tadawul Stock Exchange. Ordinary least squares, quantile least squares and robust least squares are used to investigate the associations between board characteristics and TBL reporting, including its separate components.

The authors find a significant negative association between TBL reporting and board independence. Social bottom line is significantly and negatively related to board size and board independence. Results indicate that board independence negatively influences the TBL disclosure of companies. Therefore, companies are encouraged to embrace TBL reporting. This suggests that businesses should improve the quality of their reporting while ensuring that voluntary disclosures reflect an accurate and fair view in order to preserve a positive relationship with stakeholders.

The present study explains the evidence for the determinants of the TBL in Saudi Arabia.

This paper aims to examine the nature and extent of disclosure on the use of big data by online platform companies and how these disclosures address and discharge stakeholder accountability.

Content analysis of annual reports and data policy documents of 100 online platform companies were used for this study. More specifically, the study develops a comprehensive big data disclosure framework to assess the nature and extent of disclosures provided in corporate reports. This framework also assists in evaluating the effect of the size of the company, industry and country in which they operate on disclosures.

The analysis reveals that most companies made limited disclosure on how they manage big data. Only two of the 100 online platform companies have provided moderate disclosures on big data related issues. The focus of disclosure by the online platform companies is more on data regulation compliance and privacy protection, but significantly less on the accountability and ethical issues of big data use. More specifically, critical issues, such as stakeholder engagement, breaches of customer information and data reporting and controlling mechanisms are largely overlooked in current disclosures. The analysis confirms that current attention has been predominantly given to powerful stakeholders such as regulators as a result of compliance pressure while the accountability pressure has yet to keep up the pace.

The study findings may be limited by the use of a new accountability disclosure index and the specific focus on online platform companies.

Although big data permeates, the number of users and uses grow and big data use has become more ingrained into society, this study provides evidence that ethical and accountability issues persist, even among the largest online companies. The findings of this study improve the understanding of the current state of online companies’ reporting practices on big data use, particularly the issues and gaps in the reporting process, which will help policymakers and standard setters develop future data disclosure policies.

From these findings, the study improves the understanding of the current state of online companies’ reporting practices on big data use, particularly the issues and gaps in the reporting process – which are helpful for policymakers and standard setters to develop data disclosure policies.

This study provides an analysis of ethical and social issues surrounding big data accountability, an emerging but increasingly important area that needs urgent attention and more research. It also adds a new disclosure dimension to the existing accountability literature and provides practical suggestions to balance the interaction between online platform companies and their stakeholders to promote the responsible use of big data.

The purpose of the study is to investigate the factors that influence the adoption of new sustainability reporting (SDG) and external assurance (EXTA) practices. This study also examines the relationship between sustainability reporting activity and corporate economic performance for a sample of 99 companies in Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries that addressed SDGs in their sustainability reports published in 2019.

Using a two-stage analysis, this study examines how firms’ characteristics and corporate governance variables affect SDG and economic performance, as well as the firm’s decision to adopt EXTA statements for a sample of companies in that addressed SDGs in their sustainability reports published in 2019. The authors collected data from the Global Reporting Initiative’s (GRI) Sustainability Disclosure database and the Bureau van Dijk for Orbis database.

The results show that the variables firm size, profitability, big 4 auditors and government ownership significantly affect SDG and economic performance. The results also reveal that firms operating in the manufacturing sector are positively correlated with SDG and the firm’s decision to adopt EXTA statements. Furthermore, the results indicate that board independence positively affects SDGs and EXTA.

The results can be particularly relevant and timely in helping large GCC companies promote their engagement to sustainable development practices by adopting more sustainable long-term strategies and policies. The findings could also guide managers in the strategic direction to identify firms’ characteristics and corporate governance features essential to promote sustainability reporting, an increasingly important performance indicator for investors and to enhance their confidence in the capital market. The results may also have practical implications to policymakers and other regulators in GCC countries to define effective frameworks that promote sustainable development reports and the use of EXTA.

The results make significant contributions by providing new insights to the existing literature on sustainability reporting in emerging markets by examining a unique perspective on the influence of firms’ characteristics and corporate governance features on the adoption of new sustainability reporting practices. The authors further add to the previous literature on the relationship between a firm’s economic performance and sustainable reporting by providing evidence from large companies in GCC countries, which might benefit from the adoption of multiple conceptual lenses, in this case, legitimacy and stakeholder theories. Lastly, through the empirical findings, this study provides economic validity to the 2018 joint initiative of the GRI and the United Nations Global Compact to strengthen corporate actions to achieve the United Nations SDGs.

Non-financial reporting (NFR) is viewed as a major step towards organisational transparency and accountability. While the number of non-financial reports published every year has been growing exponentially over the last two decades, their quality and effectiveness in managing environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance have been questioned. Addressing these concerns, several jurisdictions, including EU Member States, introduced mandatory NFR regimes. However, the evidence on whether such regulation truly translates into enhanced ESG performance remains scarce. This paper aims to fill this gap in the literature by investigating the impact of the EU’s Directive 2014/95/EU (Non-financial Reporting Directive, NFRD) on the ESG scores of Polish companies.

Drawing upon institutional and strategic perspectives on legitimacy theory, the authors test the relationship between the introduction of the NFRD and the ESG scores derived from the Refinitiv database, using a sample of all those companies listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange whose disclosure allows for measuring ESG performance (yielding 171 firm-year observations from 43 companies).

This study’s findings show an improvement of ESG performance following the introduction of the NFRD. The difference-in-differences approach indicates that the improvement is larger for companies that are subject to the legislation when it comes to overall ESG performance, particularly for environmental and social performance. Nonetheless, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, no significant effect is found for performance in the governance dimension.

This study investigates the role of transnational mandatory reporting regulation in the first years of its enactment. The evidence offers insights into the effects of disclosure legislation in the context of an underdeveloped institutional environment.