Search results

US tax-exempt nonprofits are chronically underdeveloped when it comes to reporting, communicating and comparing the value they create. This paper aims to explore an approach to address these reporting and disclosure issues, for the purpose of sustainability and impact.

First, the authors ask and then answer: is it time to clean up US tax-exempt nonprofit reporting? Second, the authors develop a theoretical argument, based on commensuration of impact, for a specific tax-exempt integrated report (IR), to compare the value of tax-exempt nonprofits. Third, this study offers an example of this tax-exempt IR in practice.

First, this study evidences the need for a drastic shift in the expectations and reporting practices of US tax-exempt nonprofits. Second, this study offers an IR framework that responds to recent scholarly calls to address organizational accountability boundaries and impact assessment in the nonprofit sector. Third, this contributes to sustainability policy conversation by mapping out an approach that US tax-exempt nonprofits could deploy to speed up the implementation of sustainable solutions (Sustainable Development Goal [SDG] 17).

This study contributes to sustainability conversation by closing with a discussion of why policymakers, managers and scholars should continue to push for maximum impact from US tax-exempt nonprofits. If addressing the UN SDGs is a desired outcome, then there is an immediate need for change in the way US nonprofits report what they do. This study suggests that learning from the European Union reporting practices and regulations will facilitate a move toward improved reliability, comparability and impact from US nonprofits.

The aim of this paper was to present a disclosure framework that provides reliable and comparable information of the value created by tax-exempt nonprofits. This principle-based framework is rooted in the IR literature and extends into the prosocial world of tax-exempt nonprofits, recognizing that is it goes farther than simply being a framework; it is a social process.

This paper responds to recent calls for more oversight and comparison disclosure mechanisms of US tax-exempt nonprofits, for the purpose of reducing social or environmental inequality. The framework makes an important contribution to the field of sustainability accounting, in that it promotes a principle-based approach for measuring and regulating tax-exempt nonprofits, in a way that motivates oversight and comparison of sustainability-related practices.

This paper aims to examine the moderating role of global reporting initiative (GRI) compliance in the association between sustainability reporting and firm value.

This study investigates a sample of 223 manufacturing firms, encompassing 11 industries from 2010 to 2019. Using GRI compliance as a moderator, the authors employed a generalized method of moments model to study how sustainability disclosure impacts firm value.

The results indicate a positive and significant association between sustainability disclosure and firm value. This study reveals that GRI compliance moderates the relationship between sustainability disclosure and firm value, such that firm value increases when the firm adopts GRI in sustainability reporting.

No prior studies have examined GRI compliance's direct and moderating effects on the association between sustainability disclosures and firm value in the Indian manufacturing sector. This study is also valuable for the managers and industry to understand the significance of implementing voluntary sustainability disclosure practices and being GRI compliant.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the engagement with integrated reporting (IR) of the Development Bank of Singapore (DBS), as one of the banks that pioneered IR. Banking industry members face critical sector-specific issues regarding the use of capitals, especially the disclosure of relational and natural capital-related information, and reporting of the outcomes of capitals. This study examines an innovative approach to accounting for multiple capitals adopted by DBS during its journey toward IR.

This empirical research follows the case study method, using semi-structured interviews with DBS’s managers, and analyzing reports and other documentation.

The authors find that DBS re-conceptualizes, re-categorizes and measures multiple capitals as a form of non-financial value using the balance sheet approach to make visible the interactions and potential tensions (trade-offs) among capitals.

Case studies are best used to understand a specific context, so the findings of this study cannot be generalized statistically. However, the study does provide insights into the banking industry that may be applicable to other organizations.

The categorization and reporting of multiple capitals using the balance sheet approach and the integration of the balanced scorecard are innovative operationalizations of the International <IR> Framework.

This study provides an innovative approach to the categorization and measurement of multiple capitals. It represents a step toward reducing the gap between research and practice on IR.

The framework of the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) is principles-based and does not provide specific key performance indicators (KPIs) for integrated thinking and reporting. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to propose KPIs for integrated reporting which decipher a firm’s sustainability through empirical analysis.

As a proxy of firms’ sustainability, the authors focus on firms that have survived for more than 100 years and that have already achieved sustainability, and analyze these firms to reveal the financial features that distinguish sustainable firms from the other firms.

The study found two distinguishing facts: the value added that is distributed to stakeholders other than shareholders is significantly larger, and the stability of profitability and the profitability itself are significantly higher in sustainable firms.

The study proposes a value-added distribution and the stability of profitability as sustainability KPIs for integrated reporting.

First, this study provides the first evidence that value added distribution and the stability of profitability distinguish a firm’s sustainability. Second, it provides a new perspective in the search for sustainability KPIs. Third, as the empirical data consist of all listed firms in 136 countries, the results should be robust and general.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

This paper has two purposes: to identify and explain the major forces that are causing the increasing need for operational reporting and intellectual capital (IC) reporting for European companies; and to identify the necessary and sufficient conditions for operational and intellectual capital reporting if such reporting is to be meaningful for information users.

The approach for this paper has been to examine relevant papers, reports, guidelines, compendiums, annual reports, opinions, submissions and legislation.

Eight determining forces are identified that make the basis of the case for the provision of operating and IC information: the long‐standing global dominance and growth of the US economy; the emergence of business models other than the value chain (especially the emergence of network businesses); the changing nature of stock exchanges; the influence of different investment fund types (mutual, pension and hedge funds); the roles of buy‐side and sell‐side analysts; global and European investment index development; rating agency activity; and financial reporting and corporate governance regime development.

The eight forces are interdependent and immutable. Comprehensive operational and IC reporting are unavoidable. Accordingly, the authors propose that the necessary and sufficient conditions for adequate enterprise information reporting are: a legal requirement for mandatory operational and IC reporting and attendant regulatory framework(s) where the legal framework is based on the concept of neglect; key operating and IC resource status and activity performance definitions and metrics that reflect the enterprise's underlying business model(s); and (3) a mapping of the capitalized operational and IC investments that are by definition normally expensed to the financial report accounts.

The authors believe that no one has previously formally proposed a mandatory operational and IC reporting requirement; a legal reference frame of reference based on the legal concept of neglect; standard definitions for operational and IC performance metrics; a reference framework for information quality that is, inter alia, based on the consistency, comparability and comprehensiveness of reported metrics; and the requirement to map all capitalized IC resources back to the financial reports of the company.

The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of nonfinancial sustainability reporting (NFSR) on enterprise value moderated by the management legitimate authority (MLA) for companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange.

To this aim, 190 firms were assessed during 2014–2019. This study used Arianpoor and Salehi’s indicators. The scoring method for NFSR, environmental sustainability reporting (ESR), social sustainability reporting (SSR) and governance sustainability reporting (GSR) was based on Zimon et al. Also, the CEO pay slice index was used to calculate the management’s legitimate authority. Tobin’s Q was used as a standard measure for the firm value, providing a suitable means of comparison.

The results revealed that NFSR affects enterprise value positively. In addition, ESR and SSR positively affect the enterprise value. However, GSR did not affect the enterprise value. MLA affects the relationship between NFSR/ESR/SSR/GSR and enterprise value, resulting from the effect of MLA on firm-related information quality and transparency.

Linking NFSR and management’s legitimate authority to firm value will enable managers to lead in helping firms enhance transparency and disclosure, improving their reporting standards and increasing the enterprise value. This, in turn, will ultimately result in better sustainability and governance practices.

The results can help understand that analysts and investors somehow consider discussions related to the NFSR in decisions related to the company’s value, and positive market reactions to these practices’ disclosures can motivate firms to improve value and performance.

The majority of prior research in this field has focused on developing countries. An international perspective is critical, and this study helps draw a more contextualized picture of sustainability than before. In addition, the present research explored the management’s legitimate authority role, which is considered an innovative aspect.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the current discussions about the concept of Integrated Reporting (IR) and provides a practical and useful proposal of an instrument that could help to apply the IR concept in corporate practice.

The study uses a deductive normative research approach.

Based on a comprehensive review of international literature and research, the paper argues that a structured presentation of the traditional measure of “value added” in a so-called “value added statement” (VAS) has the potential to serve as a practical and effective reporting instrument for IR. The proposed VAS not only meets the guiding principles of IR but also reports on the monetary effects of different types of capital included in IR and in this way complements and represents the concept of IR very well.

The authors intend to stimulate the academic as well as institutional discussion on how to apply the concept of IR at the corporate level. As the characteristics of the proposed VAS comply well with the guiding principles and concepts developed in the Integrated Reporting Framework project of the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) and with the ultimate objective of integrated thinking, the study can inform the current considerations within and outside of the IIRC.

The future of IR and the probability of its world-wide application in practice will depend on the development of appropriate reporting tools that incorporate the central ideas of IR, currently no such reporting tools exist. In this paper the authors make an argument for a VAS as a complementing, useful and therefore appropriate reporting tool for IR.

The paper aims to propose an integrated reporting (IR) framework rooted in Freeman’s stakeholder theory (ST). The proposed framework modifies the international integrated reporting framework (IIRF) and aims to overcome criticisms related to its focus on investors and the abandonment of sustainability.

The paper develops a modified IIRF based on an in-depth analysis of the IR and ST literature. The framework was then applied to a non-profit health-care organisation to verify its theoretical assumptions.

The modified IIRF was conceived as a ready-to-use tool. By applying it to a business case, it was validated with respect to whether and how it could help achieve better and more stakeholder-oriented reporting. The findings enabled us to validate the use of the tool not only for reporting but also for the self-assessment of organisations with respect to embedding ST.

The modified IIRF was implemented only in one case, and further implementations are needed to comprehensively identify its strengths and weaknesses, both in for-profit and non-profit organisations.

The revised IIRF represents an updated tool for reporting and disclosing the value created by an organisation for itself and for its stakeholders including the external entities affected by the impacts engendered by the organisation. In this way, the IIRF can give visibility to all value created and the value creation process, including sustainability matters. This allows integrated thinking processes to be incorporated accordingly, supporting better management.

This paper suggests three adjustments to improve the IIRF’s ability to incorporate ST as a theoretical foundation. The adjusted IIRF is a ready to-use-tool specifically highlighting what value or values an organisation delivers (its outcomes), for whom (its stakeholders) and how (its specific business processes) within a business model effectively connecting them. From this point of view, it fits the rising stream about the evolution of the sustainability reporting fostered jointly by the international integrated reporting council and sustainability accounting standard board, and by the European Union.

This paper aims to investigate whether providing voluntary external assurance on voluntary environmental information by firms operating in environmentally sensitive industries (ESI) is relevant in terms of market value. It also examines how various characteristics of assurance statements (i.e. level of assurance, scope of assurance and provider of assurance) affect the value-relevance of environmental disclosure by ESI firms.

To mitigate the endogeneity problem, the authors use the two-step generalized method of moments estimation approach.

Focusing on annual and social reports of French companies listed in the SBF120 index, results show that environmental disclosure by ESI firms and its assurance are destructive in terms of market value. Moreover, while providing a broader scope of assurance and having a professional accountant as the assurance provider enhance the value relevance of environmental reporting of the whole sample, this is unlikely to be the case for ESI firms. In particular, a higher level of environmental disclosure is financially rewarded by market participants for ESI firms that provide a higher level of assurance.

The study provides a better understanding of the circumstances under which market participants assign value to voluntary environmental information disclosed by companies operating in ESI. It also provides insights into the value added to different characteristics inherent in the quality of assurance provided with regard to environmental disclosure.

The study indicates that the institutional context of the relationship between the firm and its shareholders influence the value obtained from assurance. Results provide value insights regarding cultural and legal dimensions of environmental reporting.

The study extends the prior literature on the capital market benefits of voluntary assurance practices by focusing on the French legal environment. France can be considered as a new institutional context that has been little addressed by the existing literature.