Search results

This paper aims to examine sites of dissonance or consensus between global investor responses to the draft standards, International Financial Reporting Standards S1 (IFRS) (General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information) and IFRS S2 (Climate-related Disclosures), issued by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB).

A thematic content analysis was used to capture investor views expressed in their comment letters submitted in the consultation period (March to July 2022) in comparison to the ex ante position (issue of draft standards, March 2022) and ex post summary feedback (ISSB staff papers, September 2022) of the ISSB.

There was investor consensus in support of the ISSB and the development of the draft standards. However, there were sites of dissonance between investors and the ISSB, notably regarding the basis and focus of reporting (double or single/financial materiality and enterprise value); definitional clarity; emissions reporting; and assurance. Incrementally, the research further highlights that investors display heterogeneity of opinion.

The ISSB standards will provide a framework for future sustainability reporting. This research highlights the significance of such reporting to investors through their responses to the draft standards. The findings reveal sites of dissonance in the development and alignment of draft standards to user needs. The views of investors, as primary users, should help inform the development of sustainability-related standards by a global standard-setting body apposite to current policy and future reporting requirements, and their usefulness to users in practice.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper makes an original contribution to the comment letter literature, hitherto focused on financial reporting with a relative lack of investor engagement. Using thematic analysis, sites of dissonance are examined between the views of investors and the ISSB on their development of sustainability reporting standards.

The aim of this paper is to propose a basis upon which accounting reporting can be developed to reflect real values and the real economy. It aims to address the environmental considerations discussed in the UN debate (Bebbington and Unerman, 2020) and the concern for a “better life-world”, which is the theme of this special issue.

Addressing the task involves the application of the philosophy of pragmatic constructivism (which explains how people can relate to their reality in ways that lead to successful action) and the philosophical concept of the “good life” (which establishes the values to be pursued through action and so defines action success). Also, it outlines the necessary characteristics of measurement frameworks if they are to be effective in the development and control of human practices to achieve desired values.

This paper proposes a conceptual framework for guiding the measurement of how a sustainable good life has improved and/or deteriorated as a result of organisational activities. It outlines a system of concepts on basic and instrumental values for analysing the condition of maintaining a sustainable good life in real terms. This is related to the financial results and societal regulations to analyse and adjust controls according to the real economic goals. Also, it provides a system of value measurands to produce valid information about the development of a sustainable good life. The measurand makes accounting reporting reflect the conditions of the good life that constitute the real economy instead of merely the financial economy driven by shareholder capitalism. Providing tools to analyse whether the existing practices of business and social regulations promote or counteract the real economic goals of producing a sustainable good life means the measurement system proposed makes the invisible hand of the market visible.

The mechanism proposed to enable accounting reporting to reflect real values and the real economy is a new conceptual framework that will allow accounting to more fully realise its potential to contribute to a “better world”. In aiming to serve a sustainable good life, accounting reporting will inherently foster ethical social practices.

This paper offers a way of revivifying classical accounting research in the form of a pragmatist neoclassical programme with a sound epistemological underpinning.

The paper draws on a pragmatist perspective on financial accounting and accounting research springing from John Dewey's theory of inquiry.

Although a pragmatist underpinning does not entail specific methodological prescriptions, it can provide fruitful insights in research design. The paper discusses the structure and content of a research programme drawing on a pragmatist underpinning and sets out proposals for a practical research agenda. Although the agenda is shaped around the topic of identifiable intangibles, much of the paper has substantially wider relevance.

The approach justifies a revival in scholarly research employing classical methods and directed at improving accounting methods and standards.

The approach would promote closer engagement between scholarly accounting and practitioners such as standard-setters, making some contribution to closing the widely acknowledged gap between research and practice.

The paper offers a neoclassical programme of research drawing considerably more extensively on pragmatist philosophy than did theorisation in the classical period.

The implementation and reporting of the sustainable development goals (SDGs) is one of the emerging challenges for higher education institutions (HEIs), but the lack of well-defined reporting structures and topics for this sector makes it difficult to map and evaluate HEI performance in relation to 2030 Agenda. This study aims to assess the SDG performance and reporting by the 13 HEIs that integrate the Times Higher Education Impact Ranking (THE_IR), from the perspective of the five pillars of the 2030 Agenda in the Portuguese context, where research on this topic is quite scarce.

Considering the THE_IR methodology, an SDG reporting assessment framework with 85 key topics has been developed to search for in the institutional reports of the 13 studied HEIs. For each topic, depending on the number of institutions that disclose it, a reporting index (RI) has been calculated, which was used to compare the level of reporting between the different SDGs and pillars.

Concerning HEIs’ SDG performance in the THE_IR, the People pillar was the one with the most HEIs ranked, followed by the Prosperity pillar. The Planet pillar was less highlighted. SDG reporting varied widely among Portuguese HEIs. The SDG RI presented a mean value of 43.1%. The Kruskal–Wallis test revealed that the RI for the Planet pillar (RI = 23.6%) was statistically and significantly lower than those for the People and Prosperity pillars (RI = 48.6% and 53.5%, respectively). The results thus demonstrated some conformity of the SDG reporting with Portuguese HEI performance in THE_IR. Aside from Goal 5, the SDGs 4 and 3 stood out in the first four positions of the HEIs in the THE_IR. Goals 3 and 4 were also the most disclosed in institutional reports.

This study proposed and applied a new SDG reporting assessment framework for HEIs, contributing to better evaluation of the inclusion of important SDG-related topics in their institutional reports.

There are countless challenges concerning the process of interest mediation. Regarding territorial planning, the participation of different stakeholders is essential. In this sense, Geodesign is a method that supports decision-making based on geocollaboration and co-creation, using geospatial data and tools. The purpose of this study was to use the method to support the co-creation of environmental projects and policies climate-oriented for the Iron Quadrangle region, Brazil.

The Brazilian platform of Geodesign, GISColab, was used to support the activity. The experiment involved undergraduate and graduate students in Urban Planning and in Geography and technicians that work with planning subjects. Social isolation measures imposed by the pandemic resulted in an adaptation of the dynamic, which was held entirely online.

The study group proposed 28 designs, in which the most discussed topics were landscape (43%), climate (25%) and risk (25%). This may be associated with the fact that the workshop was conducted in consideration of the UN's Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the environmental crisis, but it might also suggest the group’s prior concern with such issues. Other SDGs were contemplated, with the productive sector as the most negatively impacted by proposals. This situation reinforces the importance of incorporating different actors (a term used for participants in the Geodesign method, referring to representatives from groups of the society) into planning processes. Geodesign was easily accepted and assimilated by participants.

The proposed methodology proved to be positive for this type of study and GISColab, the Brazilian Geodesign platform, was easily adapted to the characteristics and demands of the experience.

In this paper the authors aim to examine whether shareholder activism is associated with accounting reporting complexity (ARC).

The authors employ ordinary least squares (OLS) and a sample of 19,530 firm-year observations (representing 3,377 unique firms) over the 2010–2019 period to test the prediction.

The authors find that firms with shareholder activism provide more complex accounting reporting. Further, both types of activism (including Concern & Dispute and Control & Discussion) are positively associated with ARC. The authors also find that the association between shareholder activism and ARC is more pronounced when the firms have a higher level of litigation risk and a higher proportion of institutional ownership. Collectively, the findings suggest that firms with shareholder activism may be under more pressure to disclose more accounting items, leading to more complex accounting reporting.

The study may be informative to regulators considering the costs and benefits of shareholder activism in financial reporting.

The purpose is to present proposals to foster what we call a socially meaningful transparency practice that aims to enhance public understanding of data-based systems through the production of accounts that are relevant and useful to diverse publics, and society more broadly.

The authors’ proposals emerge from reflections on challenges they experienced producing written and visual accounts of specific public sector data-based systems for research purposes. Following Ananny and Crawford's call to see limits to transparency practice as “openings”, the authors put their experience into dialogue with the literature to think about how we might chart a way through the challenges. Based on these reflections, the authors outline seven proposals for fostering socially meaningful transparency.

The authors identify three transparency challenges from their practice: information asymmetry, uncertainty and resourcing. The authors also present seven proposals related to reduction of information asymmetries between organisations and non-commercial external actors, enhanced legal rights to access information, shared decision making about what gets made transparent, making visible social impacts and uncertainties of data-systems, clear and accessible communication, timing of transparency practices and adequate resourcing.

Socially meaningful transparency aims to enhance public understanding of data-based systems. It is therefore a necessary condition not only for informed use of data-based products, but crucially for democratic engagement in the development of datafied societies.

The paper contributes to existing debates on meaningful transparency by arguing for a more social, rather than individual, approach to imagining how to make transparency practice more meaningful. The authors do this through their empirical reflection on our experience of doing transparency, conceptually through our notion of socially meaningful transparency, and practically through our seven proposals.