Why “Less is More” in Non-Financial Reporting Initiatives: Concrete Steps Towards Supporting Sustainability

Author:

Tsagas Georgina1,Villiers Charlotte2

Affiliation:

1. Brunel University , Uxbridge , UK

2. University of Bristol , Bristol , UK

Abstract

Abstract Calls are repeatedly made on corporations to respond to the challenges facing the planet from a sustainable development perspective and governments take solace in the idea that corporations' transparency on their corporate activity in relation to sustainability through voluntary reporting is adequately addressing the problem. In practice, however, reporting is failing to deliver truly sustainable results. The article considers the following questions: how does the varied reporting landscape in the field of non-financial reporting impede the objectives of fostering corporations' sustainable practices and which initiative, among the options available, may best meet the sustainability objectives after a decluttering of the landscape takes place? The article argues that the varied corporate reporting landscape constitutes a key obstacle to fostering sustainable corporate behaviour, insofar as the flexible and please all approach followed in the context of corporate sustainability reporting offers little to no real incentive to companies to behave more sustainably and ultimately pleases none in the long run. The case made is that “less is more” in non-financial reporting initiatives and hence the article calls for a revision of key aspects of the European Non-Financial Reporting Directive, which, as is argued, is more likely to achieve the furtherance of sustainable corporate behaviour. Although the different reporting requirements offer the benefits of focussing on different corporate goals and activities, targeting different audiences and allowing for a level of flexibility that respects the individual risks to sustainability associated with each industry, the end result is a landscape that lacks overall consistency and comparability of measurements and accountabilities, making accountability more, rather than less, difficult to achieve. The article acknowledges the existence of several variances relating to the notion of sustainability per se, which continues to remain a contested concept and variances between companies and industries in relation to how each is operating sustainably or unsustainably respectively. Such variances have so far inhibited the legislator from easily outlining through tailored legislation the individual risks to global sustainability in an all-encompassing manner. The end product is a chaotic system of financial reporting, CSR reporting, non-financial reporting and integrated reporting and little progress to increase comparability and credibility in order for companies to be held accountable and to behave in ways that do not harm the planet. A “clean up” of the varied initiatives in the terrain of non-financial reporting is recommended.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Subject

Law,Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous),Accounting

Reference95 articles.

1. Accounting Directive replaced the 4th Directive (Directive 78/660/EEC) and the 7th Directive (Directive 83/349/EEC), which governed the preparation, by companies incorporated in the EU, of individual company financial statements and group financial statements respectively (other than those prepared by credit institutions and insurance undertakings).

2. Adams, C. A. (2015). The international integrated reporting council: A call to action. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 2, 23–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2014.07.001.

3. Agenda 21, UN Conference on Environment and Development (Earth Summit), Rio de Janeiro June 13, 1992, available at https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/ Agenda21.pdf.

4. Ahern, D. (2016). Turning up the heat? EU sustainability goals and the role of reporting under the non-financial reporting directive. European Company and Financial Law Review, 13(4), 599–630. https://doi.org/10.1515/ecfr-2016-5007.

5. Alhaddi, H. (2015). Triple bottom line and sustainability: A literature review. Business and Management Studies, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.11114/bms.v1i2.752.

Cited by 18 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3