Search results

This paper aims to investigate the application of the Italian Banking Association (ABI) industry-specific reporting standard in microfinance institutions by determining whether or not a banking sector reporting standard can enhance non-financial reporting (NFR) quality and volume to meet stakeholders’ information needs in the specific setting investigated.

This paper develops an analysis of available ABI documents from 2006 to 2013 to conduct a content analysis of the quality and volume of the NFR of 98 Italian cooperative banks (CBs) during the 2008–2009 ABI implementation year. These data are analysed using two regression models to investigate the quality and volume of NFR disclosures.

The findings suggest that for CBs in the Italian banking sector, the information provided in the non-financial reports in adherence to the ABI sector reporting standard is relevant in terms of both volume and quality. However, when investigating specific categories of disclosure such as the community, the relevance of the ABI reporting standard is fairly low. The authors question the “one-size-fits-all” approach favouring a more sector-tailored approach to ensure that the NFR covers key sectoral concerns.

The high heterogeneity in the sector could negatively affect the capability of sector-specific standards to truly foster reliable, complete and extensive NFR. Therefore, NFR standard-setters, such as the International Sustainability Standards Board, should consider these heterogeneities.

Reporting standardisation should be multi-voiced and include different – even contrasting – perspectives to promote expert and non-expert engagements.

This paper focuses on hybrid organisations and shows how the theoretical approach of dialogic accountability can improve the quality of sector-specific reporting standards.

The paper aims to examine if corporate characteristics, general contextual factors and the internal context differentiate the quality and quantity of the disclosed non-financial Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).

The study is based on content analysis of the disclosures provided by large public interest entities operating in Poland after the introduction of the Directive 2014/95/EU. The quality of the KPIs disclosures is measured with the disclosure index. Regression analysis and selected statistical tests are used to examine the influence of the selected factors on the differences in the index value and corporate disclosure choices as regards the KPIs.

The study findings indicate that the sample companies provide a variety of non-financial KPIs in a manner that makes their effective comparison difficult. The research confirms that mainly industry, ecologists and the reporting standard determine the significant differences in the quality of the KPIs disclosures and the quantity of presented KPIs.

The paper adds to the understanding of the differences in the quality of KPIs presentation and the choice of disclosed KPIs.

The paper includes suggestions on how to change corporate practice with regard to the non-financial KPIs disclosures.

We shed additional light on the importance of internal contextual factors such as the reporting standard and the reporters' experience in providing non-financial KPIs disclosures.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the progress and future prospects of two relatively “new” institutions in this field: the European Commission (EC), together with the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG), and the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation.

This paper reflexively analyses the recent events that characterise the European Union (EU) regulatory standard-setting landscape in the sustainability field. It is mainly based on publicly available documents.

After analysing the different routes followed to enter the field, this paper shows how the EC/EFRAG takes a wider view than the IFRS Foundation on certain key reporting aspects, that is, target audience, materiality and reporting boundary. As for the reporting scope, although it seems that the IFRS Foundation has a more restrictive vision, it is working to broaden it.

This paper provides some ideas about the potential cooperation between the two institutions. This paper also highlights some potential problems stemming not only from their intrinsic characteristics but also from the routes they have taken to enter the field.

By envisioning how the EU sustainability reporting standard-setting landscape might evolve, this paper sheds light on how companies might need to approach sustainability reporting to adapt to the new institutional demands. Suggestions for collaboration between the two institutions could help them reach common ground and, thus, prevent misunderstandings for companies and stakeholders.

The reflections and takeaways benefit from the authors’ first-hand information, as both are involved in the EU process. The authors could, therefore, feed into further discussions on the developments and challenges facing the EU in this domain.

This paper aims to provide empirical evidence on formal stakeholder participation (or “lobbying”) in the early phase of the International Sustainability Standards Board’s (ISSB’s) standard-setting.

Drawing on a rational-choice framework, this paper conducts a content analysis of comment letters (CLs) submitted to the ISSB in response to its first two exposure drafts (published in 2022) to investigate stakeholder participation across different groups and jurisdictional origins. The analyses examine participation in terms of frequency (measured using the number of participating stakeholders) and intensity (measured using the length of CLs).

Preparers and users of sustainability reports emerge as the largest participating stakeholder groups, while the accounting/sustainability profession participates with high average intensity. Surprisingly, preparers do not outweigh users in terms of participation frequency and intensity; and large preparers outweigh smaller ones in terms of participation intensity but not participation frequency. Internationally, stakeholders from countries with a private financial accounting standard-setting system participate more frequently and intensively than others. In addition, country-level economic wealth and sustainability performance are positively associated with more participating stakeholders.

This study is of interest for organizations and stakeholders involved in or affected by standard-setting in the field of sustainability reporting. The finding of limited participation by investors and from developing countries suggests the ISSB take actions to enhance the voice of those stakeholders.

The imbalances in stakeholder participation that were found pose potential threats to an important aspect of the input legitimacy of the ISSB’s standard-setting process.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first to explore stakeholder participation by means of CLs with the ISSB in terms of frequency and intensity.

The study aims to identify whether international financial reporting standards (IFRS) or local generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) reporting provides investors and senior management of acquirer banks with superior information on target banks under post-merger bank performance.

The authors examine the claim that IFRS improves corporate transparency and increases financial reporting quality in European Bank merger and acquisitions (M&As). The authors compare the financial performance of merged banks where the target and acquirer banks employed the same reporting system (up to 305 merged banks) to the performance of a control group of banks not engaged in M&A activity (up to 1,690 European banks).

Local GAAP reporting allows a more transparent assessment of financial performance using traditional indicators, making it a superior tool for assessing potential acquisition targets.

Overall, the empirical findings are consistent with prior studies and indicate a significant relationship between local GAAP and post-merger performance, while IFRS does not contribute to post-merger bank performance.

The study is one of the very few studies to investigate the relationship between bank performance, M&A activity and accounting standards in EU-28 countries. The primary contribution the finding of poor performance of IFRS reporting merged banks compared to local GAAP banks in EU-28 countries in line with prior results of Huian (2012). In addition, several deal- and bank-specific characteristics that affect accounting standards influence M&A transactions in European banks.

As the comparability concept has recently garnered increased attention of policymakers and standard setters in the sustainability reporting (SR) arena, this paper aims to provide a reflexive viewpoint of this concept in this context.

To inform the authors’ viewpoint and disentangle the concept of comparability into different facets, the authors review policymakers’ and standard setters’ (including the Global reporting initiative) comparability principles, as well as relevant studies in the field. To provide insights into the different ways in which the comparability facets can be approached, the authors use multi-perspective reflexive practices and focus on the multiple purposes that reporting can serve. To empirically animate the authors’ reflection on the facets, the authors analyse the sustainability disclosures of two Italian banks over three years.

This study reveals that three facets form valuable starting points for extending the understanding of the meanings the comparability concept can carry in the SR arena. These facets are materiality and comparability, benchmarking/monitoring and comparability and operationalisation and comparability.

This study is intended to elicit policymakers’ and standard setters’ thoughts on the role of comparability and its complexities in SR.

By taking a critical and reflexive approach, the authors encourage policymakers and standard setters to reconsider the comparability principle, so it effectively embeds the accountability purpose of SR.

In this paper, the authors propose three facets for disentangling the concept of comparability.

The purpose of this study is to test the determinant of financial report quality and its consequences to the company values.

This research is using a quantitative approach and testing a theory by formulating some hypotheses. The sample of this study is 85 go public companies listed in the Indonesia Stock Exchange, for a 5-year observation period from 2016 to 2020. Hence, it has a total of 425 observations. Data were analyzed using path analysis.

The results found that innate factors from financial reporting quality (FRQ) consists of dynamic factors (operation cycle and sales volatility) as well as static factors (firm’s size, FS). These factors help to achieve FRQ and are able to provide a positive response to the market. On the other hand, static factors (firm’s age, FA) and institution risk factors (leverage) are not able to produce FRQ. Thus, it cannot be considered as an economic decision maker for an investor.

Research implications include theoretical and practical implications. Theoretical implications prove that the valuation of clean surplus theory, which shows the market value of the company, is reflected in the components of the financial statements. This study also uses more than one quality of financial reporting. The practical implication of the research is that the research results are expected to provide information for the company’s management, to fulfill quality financial reporting and so that the market or investors will respond positively to these conditions. In addition, quality financial reporting information provides benefits for investors and capital market analysts (consisting of investors, brokers and market securities analysts) in determining investment decisions. The Financial Services Authority is also able to improve the implementation of corporate governance practices in Indonesia, through reform of the framework supervision of the financial services sector.

This research examines the determinants of FRQ and its consequences on firm’s value (FV). Innate factors proxies from FRQ include dynamic factors (operation cycle and sales volatility), static factors (FS and FA) and institution risk factors (leverage). A follow-up study on the value of the company because it shows the magnitude of the market response (financial statement users) on the quality of financial reporting, which is reflected in FV, the originality of this research is that the object of research is carried out in developing countries, specifically in Indonesia, because most of the previous research was carried out in developed countries.