Assurance of environmental, social and governance disclosures in a developing country: perspectives of regulators and quasi-regulators

IF 2.8 4区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE
S. Simpson, Francis Aboagye-Otchere, Rhoda Ahadzie
{"title":"Assurance of environmental, social and governance disclosures in a developing country: perspectives of regulators and quasi-regulators","authors":"S. Simpson, Francis Aboagye-Otchere, Rhoda Ahadzie","doi":"10.1080/01559982.2021.1927481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The paper explores the assurance of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosures in a developing country. Unlike other papers, this study focuses on regulators and quasi-regulators understanding of ESG assurance, their perception and preferences for assurance providers, and the considerations in choosing an assurance provider. Using a qualitative research design, the Strong Structuration Theory was employed to draw meanings from data gathered through semi-structured interviews. Findings reveal that external factors such as the emerging nature of ESG in Ghana, the working fields of interviewees, the developing nature of the internal audit function, non-Big 4 audit firms, and the accounting profession were crucial in interviewees’ conceptualization of ESG assurance and their preferences for various assurance providers. Also, there is low preference for accountants, internal auditors, and non-Big 4 firms as ESG assurance providers, particularly for environmental and social disclosures. Regulators, however, received a high endorsement. It was evident that expertise and regulatory oversight were the main factors interviewees considered in choosing assurance providers. Accountants, non-Big 4 audit firms, and internal auditors would need to improve stakeholders’ perception of their capacity and independence for ESG assurance. Moreover, considerations such as the value for expertise, independence, and reputation for regulators affect the choice of an ESG assurance provider. The findings have implications (outcomes) for regulators to consider their ESG assurance participation and its consequences.","PeriodicalId":47566,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Forum","volume":"66 1","pages":"109 - 133"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounting Forum","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01559982.2021.1927481","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

ABSTRACT The paper explores the assurance of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosures in a developing country. Unlike other papers, this study focuses on regulators and quasi-regulators understanding of ESG assurance, their perception and preferences for assurance providers, and the considerations in choosing an assurance provider. Using a qualitative research design, the Strong Structuration Theory was employed to draw meanings from data gathered through semi-structured interviews. Findings reveal that external factors such as the emerging nature of ESG in Ghana, the working fields of interviewees, the developing nature of the internal audit function, non-Big 4 audit firms, and the accounting profession were crucial in interviewees’ conceptualization of ESG assurance and their preferences for various assurance providers. Also, there is low preference for accountants, internal auditors, and non-Big 4 firms as ESG assurance providers, particularly for environmental and social disclosures. Regulators, however, received a high endorsement. It was evident that expertise and regulatory oversight were the main factors interviewees considered in choosing assurance providers. Accountants, non-Big 4 audit firms, and internal auditors would need to improve stakeholders’ perception of their capacity and independence for ESG assurance. Moreover, considerations such as the value for expertise, independence, and reputation for regulators affect the choice of an ESG assurance provider. The findings have implications (outcomes) for regulators to consider their ESG assurance participation and its consequences.
发展中国家环境、社会和治理信息披露的保证:监管者和准监管者的视角
摘要:本文探讨了发展中国家环境、社会和治理(ESG)披露的保证。与其他论文不同,本研究侧重于监管机构和准监管机构对ESG保证的理解、他们对保证提供者的感知和偏好,以及选择保证提供者时的考虑因素。采用定性研究设计,采用强结构化理论,从半结构化访谈收集的数据中得出意义。调查结果显示,外部因素,如加纳ESG的新兴性质、受访者的工作领域、内部审计职能的发展性质、非四大审计事务所和会计职业,对受访者对ESG保证的概念和对各种保证提供者的偏好至关重要。此外,会计师、内部审计师和非四大会计师事务所作为ESG保证提供商的偏好较低,特别是在环境和社会披露方面。然而,监管机构得到了高度认可。很明显,专业知识和监管监督是受访者在选择保证提供商时考虑的主要因素。会计师、非四大会计师事务所和内部审计师需要提高利益相关者对其ESG鉴证能力和独立性的认识。此外,专业知识的价值、独立性和监管机构的声誉等因素也会影响ESG保证提供商的选择。研究结果对监管机构考虑其ESG鉴证参与及其后果具有启示(结果)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Accounting Forum
Accounting Forum BUSINESS, FINANCE-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
6.50%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Accounting Forum publishes authoritative yet accessible articles which advance our knowledge of theory and practice in all areas of accounting, business finance and related subjects. The journal both promotes greater understanding of the role of business in the global environment, and provides a forum for the intellectual exchange of academic research in business fields, particularly in the accounting profession. Covering a range of topical issues in accounting, business finance and related fields, Accounting Forum''s main areas of interest are: accounting theory; auditing; financial accounting; finance and accounting education; management accounting; small business; social and environmental accounting; and taxation. Of equal interest to practitioners, academics, and students, each issue of the journal includes peer-reviewed articles, notes and comments section.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信