Search results

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.

This paper aims to investigate the current state of knowledge in key reporting aspects in relation to sustainability reporting in general and to reflect on their relevance to Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) in particular. In doing so, the major gaps in that knowledge are identified, and the paper proceeds to suggest further research avenues.

The authors conduct a review of papers published in leading journals concerning sustainability reporting to analyse the progress in the literature regarding three important reporting topics: materiality, comparability and assurance.

The review conducted in this study shows that there is still work to be done to ensure high-quality and consistent sustainability reporting. Key takeaways from the review of the extant literature are as follows: there is ongoing debate about the nature of sustainability reporting materiality, and single versus double materiality. Clearer guidance and better contextualisation are seen as essential for comparability, and, as GRI suggests, there is an important link to materiality that needs to be considered. Finally, assurance has not been mandatory under the GRI, but the current development at EU level might lead to the GRI principles being incorporated in the primary assurance standards.

In this paper, the authors review and synthesise the previous literature on GRI reporting dealing with three key reporting aspects.

The authors extract some takeaways from the literature on materiality, comparability and assurance that will all be key challenges for GRI in the future.

This paper provides an updated review of the literature on GRI reporting dealing with three key reporting aspects.

The study aims to investigate whether the adoption of IFRS could ensure ultimate intercompany comparability of operating performance in terms of uniformity in the application of accounting methods and reporting style.

Using content analysis on 125 annual financial statements of 25 companies from five industries listed on the Dhaka Stock Exchange in Bangladesh, this study reports that only the sole adoption and application of principle based IFRS cannot ensure ultimate intercompany comparability of financial reports.

The findings document that the adoption of IFRS cannot ensure the application of same accounting methods as well as way of presentations which is a precondition of greater comparability of operating performance of competitive firms. The methodological and reporting direction through local regulatory agencies alongside maximum compliance with principle based IFRS can enhance intercompany comparability of financial reports in the same industry.

This study tries to manifest that sole adoption cum implementation of IFRS could not ensure ultimate intercompany comparability of operating performance within the same industry and urges to conduct further research to find out the ways to do so.

While corporate social responsibility (CSR) standards are amongst the most widely adopted instruments for supporting firms in becoming more accountable, firms who adopt them frequently fail to comply. In this context, the purpose of this study is to explore to what extent CSR standards are designed for accountability. In the analysis, this paper investigates design characteristics related to accountability across different standard types, namely, principle-based, reporting, certification and process standards.

This study reviews the design characteristics of 50 CSR standards in a systematic and comparative fashion. This paper combines qualitative deductive coding with exploratory quantitative analyses methods to elucidate structural variance and patterns of accountability-related design characteristics across the sample.

This study finds that the prevalence of design characteristics aimed at fostering accountability varies significantly between different types of standards. This paper identifies three factors related to the specific purpose of any given standard that explain this structural variation in design characteristics, namely, implementability, comparability and measurability.

Non-compliance limits the effectiveness and legitimacy of CSR standards. The systematic exploration of patterns and structural variation in design characteristics that promote accountability may provide valuable clues for the design of more effective CSR standards in the future.

Better understanding the role of design characteristics of CSR standards is critical to ensure they contribute to greater corporate accountability.

This study strives to expand the current understanding of the design characteristics of CSR standards beyond individual cases through a systematic exploration of accountability-related design characteristics across a larger sample.

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.

In this study, the authors provide a systematic literature review of articles in the emerging areas of green finance and discuss the status and challenges in sustainability disclosure, which is crucial for the efficiency of green financial instruments. The authors then review the literature on the economic implications of green finance and outline future research directions.

The authors use the analytical framework – Search, Appraisal, Synthesis, and Analysis (SALSA) to conduct the systematic review of the literature.

Increasing public attention to the environment motivates the use of green finance to fund environmentally sustainable projects, and the rise of green finance intensifies the demand for environmental disclosure. Literature has documented tremendous growth in sustainability reporting over time and around the globe, as well as raised concerns about how such reporting lack consistency, comparability, and assurance. Despite these challenges, the authors find that in general, the literature agrees that a firm’s green practice is positively associated with its financial performance and negatively related to a firm’s cost of capital. Green finance is also found to bring about enhanced risk management and economic development.

The authors provide one of the first reviews of green finance, sustainability disclosure and the impact of green finance on financial performance, capital market and economic development.

The aim of this paper is to investigate the gap between cost-based and time-based revenue recognition schemes in the accounting of ship-owning corporations, and to propose cost-based revenue recognition (as in general accounting practice) in connection with the performance obligations.

For a comparative analysis of time-based (traditional approach) and cost-based schemes, a sample of dry bulk ships is selected and voyage estimations are performed by certified professional shipbrokers (Fellow of the Institute of Chartered Shipbrokers) (data collection and voyage estimation by practitioner). Performance obligations are also defined by certified shipbrokers (i.e. survey and expert opinion) and certified public accountant based on common shipping business practice and accounting practice in general.

Empirical results indicate the significant gap between two alternative schemes. Cost-based revenue recognition accelerates the revenue recognition (benefit of shipowner), and it enables comparability among other industries since cost-based allocation is the common practice in accounting (matching principle, Generally Accepted Accounting Principles).

It is obviously impossible to observe all kinds of freight market transactions for all different kinds of vessel particulars. The sample size does not undervalue the current study since the central idea of this paper is not the verification of the cost-based recognition in all possible transactions.

The proposed approach debiases the existing recognition practice as well as improving the speed of revenue recognition. In the existing practice, time-based recognition is still based on voyage estimations (time estimation). Voyage estimations conventionally answer two questions: “What is the cost of the voyage?” and “What is the duration of the voyage?” Therefore, the proposed approach does not require any additional work done. Common practice also clarifies the cost-based schedule for revenue recognition.

This paper addresses the unconventional accounting practice and its incomparability problem for the first time. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is also the first study on accounting economics of the shipping business. This paper proposes a practical solution to the debate raised by Financial Accounting Standards Board 2014-09 regulation on accounting standards by utilizing a staging approach and cost-based revenue allocation.

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 porpose of this study is to critically consider the use of global reporting initiative (GRI) guidelines in universities’ sustainability reports.. In light of the recent literature and Habermas’s thinking, the study advances the research field by considering the process of internal colonisation from steering institutions and makes suggestions regarding the future role of GRI in the higher education (HE) context.

This study presents a systematic literature review and content analysis for enhancing the critical reading of GRI applications in HE studies. The results are analysed in light of Habermas’s thinking, considering the GRI as a steering institution and its guidelines as steering mechanisms.

This study updates the literature review on sustainability reporting (SR) at universities and underlines the general trend in the employment of the GRI in this context. The results highlight the need to adapt the GRI to enhance its applicability in the HE context by considering additional dimensions such as research, teaching and operations. In doing so, the framework loses effectiveness and weakens the role of the GRI as a steering institution.

The results suggest that the GRI guidelines should be reframed to enhance comparability among reports and increase its wider employment at universities.

Universities need to be guided in their accountability process towards SR by dedicated frameworks. This study suggests the potentially pivotal role that the GRI could play in providing dedicated tools for HE to steer and enhance the development of SRs at universities.

This study presents an updated review of studies on SR at universities and suggests possible paths for the future of the GRI framework applicability to universities’ SR.

The purpose of this paper is to conceptualise our understanding of public value accounting (PVA) by studying the use and usefulness of performance measurements (PM) as a management tool. The authors do this from a perspective in which they address the complexity of various (sometimes conflicting) assessments of performance measurement and management (PMM) by different stakeholders.

An interpretative case study using qualitative methods. The paper is based on 30 interviews conducted in 2018 and 2019 with respondents working with PMM at different levels, such as politicians, officials and health-care professionals. The study context was Region Stockholm (RS) in Sweden and its health-care division.

PMs become an instrumental tool for PMM, which led to output being promoted above outcome. The authors show that there is a conceptual shortcoming in the discussion of PVA, as the effort needed to achieve outcome-based information might exceed the ability of an organisation to deliver it. The authors address the importance of studying the interaction among different stakeholders, including politicians, the public and media, in research on PVA, as well as possible power relationships among stakeholders.

The authors contribute to the growing research on PVA and its call for more empirical research by offering a more nuanced interpretation of PVA activities. The authors do this by studying PMM and the nature of these activities in a public sector organisation from a multiple-stakeholder perspective.