全球报告倡议的过去、现在和未来:可持续性报告的批判性思考和研究议程(标准制定)

IF 2.1 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE
C. de Villiers, Matteo La Torre, M. Molinari
{"title":"全球报告倡议的过去、现在和未来:可持续性报告的批判性思考和研究议程(标准制定)","authors":"C. de Villiers, Matteo La Torre, M. Molinari","doi":"10.1108/par-02-2022-0034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis paper aims to reflect on the future of sustainability reporting standards by examining the current practical initiatives and the Global Reporting Initiative’s (GRI) position in the arena of non-financial and sustainability reporting and identifies avenues for future research.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nA critical reflection and analysis of research on the GRI’s achievements and the influence of the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation’s initiative to develop global sustainability reporting standards.\n\n\nFindings\nThe GRI has a dominant position in sustainability reporting standard-setting related to the provision of information about the influence of reporting organisations on society and the natural environment. The IFRS Foundation’s initiative to enter the sustainability reporting standard-setting arena, although from the perspective of providing information to investors regarding the influence of society and the environment on the reporting organisation, is an attempt to solidify its own position as the reporting standard setter of choice, not only for financial reporting but for all reporting standards. However, despite its aim to differentiate its role from the GRI by leveraging the financial-oriented ideological side of double materiality, we argue that the IFRS is unlikely to harm the GRI’s global position in producing multi-stakeholder standards for sustainability reporting and accountability. This differentiated position is facilitated by the different sources of legitimacy the GRI and IFRS rely on.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThe paper identifies future research opportunities.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nDue to the recent initiatives for creating new sustainability reporting standard-setters, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper offers one of the first critical reflections on the past and the likely future of the GRI and its sustainability reporting standards. The paper also identifies several new avenues for future research.\n","PeriodicalId":46088,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Accounting Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"25","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Global Reporting Initiative’s (GRI) past, present and future: critical reflections and a research agenda on sustainability reporting (standard-setting)\",\"authors\":\"C. de Villiers, Matteo La Torre, M. Molinari\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/par-02-2022-0034\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThis paper aims to reflect on the future of sustainability reporting standards by examining the current practical initiatives and the Global Reporting Initiative’s (GRI) position in the arena of non-financial and sustainability reporting and identifies avenues for future research.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nA critical reflection and analysis of research on the GRI’s achievements and the influence of the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation’s initiative to develop global sustainability reporting standards.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThe GRI has a dominant position in sustainability reporting standard-setting related to the provision of information about the influence of reporting organisations on society and the natural environment. The IFRS Foundation’s initiative to enter the sustainability reporting standard-setting arena, although from the perspective of providing information to investors regarding the influence of society and the environment on the reporting organisation, is an attempt to solidify its own position as the reporting standard setter of choice, not only for financial reporting but for all reporting standards. However, despite its aim to differentiate its role from the GRI by leveraging the financial-oriented ideological side of double materiality, we argue that the IFRS is unlikely to harm the GRI’s global position in producing multi-stakeholder standards for sustainability reporting and accountability. This differentiated position is facilitated by the different sources of legitimacy the GRI and IFRS rely on.\\n\\n\\nResearch limitations/implications\\nThe paper identifies future research opportunities.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nDue to the recent initiatives for creating new sustainability reporting standard-setters, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper offers one of the first critical reflections on the past and the likely future of the GRI and its sustainability reporting standards. The paper also identifies several new avenues for future research.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":46088,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pacific Accounting Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"25\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pacific Accounting Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/par-02-2022-0034\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pacific Accounting Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/par-02-2022-0034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 25

摘要

目的本文旨在通过研究当前的实际举措和全球报告倡议(GRI)在非财务和可持续性报告领域的地位,反思可持续性报告标准的未来,并确定未来研究的途径。设计/方法论/方法对GRI成就的研究以及国际财务报告准则基金会制定全球可持续性报告准则的举措的影响进行批判性反思和分析。调查结果GRI在可持续性报告标准制定方面占据主导地位,该标准涉及提供报告组织对社会和自然环境影响的信息。国际财务报告准则基金会主动进入可持续性报告标准制定领域,尽管从向投资者提供有关社会和环境对报告组织影响的信息的角度来看,这是为了巩固其作为首选报告标准制定者的地位,不仅适用于财务报告,而且适用于所有报告标准。然而,尽管《国际财务报告准则》旨在通过利用双重重要性的财务导向意识形态方面,将其角色与GRI区分开来,但我们认为,《国际财务报表准则》不太可能损害GRI在制定可持续性报告和问责的多方利益相关者标准方面的全球地位。GRI和IFRS所依赖的不同合法性来源促进了这种差异化的立场。研究局限性/含义本文确定了未来的研究机会。原创性/价值据作者所知,由于最近为创建新的可持续性报告标准制定者而采取的举措,本文对GRI及其可持续性报告准则的过去和可能的未来进行了首次批判性反思。该论文还确定了未来研究的几个新途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Global Reporting Initiative’s (GRI) past, present and future: critical reflections and a research agenda on sustainability reporting (standard-setting)
Purpose This paper aims to reflect on the future of sustainability reporting standards by examining the current practical initiatives and the Global Reporting Initiative’s (GRI) position in the arena of non-financial and sustainability reporting and identifies avenues for future research. Design/methodology/approach A critical reflection and analysis of research on the GRI’s achievements and the influence of the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation’s initiative to develop global sustainability reporting standards. Findings The GRI has a dominant position in sustainability reporting standard-setting related to the provision of information about the influence of reporting organisations on society and the natural environment. The IFRS Foundation’s initiative to enter the sustainability reporting standard-setting arena, although from the perspective of providing information to investors regarding the influence of society and the environment on the reporting organisation, is an attempt to solidify its own position as the reporting standard setter of choice, not only for financial reporting but for all reporting standards. However, despite its aim to differentiate its role from the GRI by leveraging the financial-oriented ideological side of double materiality, we argue that the IFRS is unlikely to harm the GRI’s global position in producing multi-stakeholder standards for sustainability reporting and accountability. This differentiated position is facilitated by the different sources of legitimacy the GRI and IFRS rely on. Research limitations/implications The paper identifies future research opportunities. Originality/value Due to the recent initiatives for creating new sustainability reporting standard-setters, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper offers one of the first critical reflections on the past and the likely future of the GRI and its sustainability reporting standards. The paper also identifies several new avenues for future research.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pacific Accounting Review
Pacific Accounting Review BUSINESS, FINANCE-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
9.50%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: Pacific Accounting Review is a quarterly journal publishing original research papers and book reviews. The journal is supported by all New Zealand Universities and has the backing of academics from many universities in the Pacific region. The journal publishes papers from both empirical and theoretical forms of research into current developments in accounting and finance and provides insight into how present practice is shaped and formed. Specific areas include but are not limited to: - Emerging Markets and Economies - Political/Social contexts - Financial Reporting - Auditing and Governance - Management Accounting.
×
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