Skip to main content
Log in

Sustainability Reporting and Assurance: A Historical Analysis on a World-Wide Phenomenon

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Sustainability reporting and assurance of sustainability reports have been used by organizations in an attempt to provide accountability to their stakeholders. A better understanding of current practices is important to provide a base for comparative and trend analyses. This paper aims to consolidate and provide information on sustainability reporting, assurance of sustainability reports and types of assurance providers. Another aim of this paper is to provide a descriptive analysis of these practices for a global sample, comparing results with previous studies, and suggesting opportunities for future research. To accomplish these objectives, a literature review was performed, an analysis of the organizations included in the Fortune Global 500 2010 was completed, and results were presented and consolidated by country. These results demonstrate that all organizations analysed provided some type of information in relation to their social or environmental performance in their official website. The percentage of organizations issuing a sustainability report has been increasing in the last few years. However, the percentage of organizations assuring their sustainability report has stagnated. Types of assurance engagements include those performed by accountants and non-accountants, and new practices have emerged, namely the “mixed approach” and the “stakeholder or specialist review”. The analysis also shows that the practices of issuing sustainability reports and having them assured have become a world-wide phenomenon, occurring in developed, and emerging economies around the world.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Fortune Global 500 is an annual ranking of the top 500 world’s largest corporations listed by revenue and it is published by Fortune magazine (www.money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500).

  2. Global Reporting Initiative is a network-based non-governmental organization that aims to drive sustainability and environmental, social and governance reporting (www.globalreporting.org).

  3. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has its theoretical base notion that responsibility of an organization extends beyond the traditional objective of providing financial returns to its shareholders. Instead, organization’s concerns should include broader objectives such as: sustainable growth, equitable employment practices, and long-term social and environmental well-being (Conley & Williams 2005).

  4. AccountAbility is a global organization providing corporate responsibility and sustainable development services (http://www.accountability.org).

  5. The International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) is an independent standard-setting body that serves the public interest by setting international standards for auditing, assurance, and other related standards, and by facilitating the convergence of international and national auditing and assurance standards (http://www.ifac.org/auditing-assurance/).

  6. KPMG (2008) have used the term “not professional assurance providers” to refer to this specific group.

References

  • AccountAbility. (2008). AA1000 assurance standard 2008, London.

  • AccountAbility. (2011). AA 1000 stakeholder engagement standard 2011—Final exposure draft, London.

  • Ball, A., Owen, D., & Gray, R. (2000). External transparency or internal capture? The role of third-party statements in adding value to corporate environmental reports1. Business Strategy and the Environment, 9(1), 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, P. (2005). Sustainability reporting—The role of auditors. Commonwealth Auditors-General Conference, Wellington.

  • Borglund, T., Frostenson, M., & Windell, K. (2010). Increasing responsibility through transparency? Ministry of Enterprise Energy and Communications, Stockholm.

  • Brown, H., de Jong, M., & Levy, D. (2009). Building institutions based on information disclosure: Lessons from GRI’s sustainability reporting. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(6), 571–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, M., Green, W. & Ko, J. (2012). The impact of sustainability assurance and company strategy on investors’ decisions, Melbourne.

  • Conley, J. M., & Williams, C. A. (2005). Engage, embed, and embellish: Theory versus practice in the corporate social responsibility movement. The Journal of Corporation Law, 31, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dando, N., & Swift, T. (2003). Transparency and assurance minding the credibility gap. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2), 195–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C. M., Cooper, B. J., & Shelly, M. (2006). An investigation of TBL report assurance statements: UK and European evidence. Managerial Auditing Journal, 21(4), 329–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fedération des Experts Comptables Eurepéens. (2003). Benefits of Sustainability Assurance, Brussels.

  • Fedération des Experts Comptables Européens. (2006). IAASB consultation paper on assurance aspects of G3The global reporting initiative’s 2006 draft sustainability reporting guidelines, Bruxelles.

  • Frost, G., & Martinov-Bennie, N. (2010). Sustainability reporting assurance: Market trends and information content. Victoria: CPA Australia Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Futerra Sustainability Communications, SustainAbility & KPMG Global Sustainability Services. (2010). Reporting Change: Readers & Reporters Survey 2010.

  • Global Reporting Initiative. (2002). Sustainability reporting guidelines, Boston.

  • Global Reporting Initiative. (2011). Sustainability reporting guidelines, Amsterdam.

  • Hodge, K., Subramaniam, N., & Stewart, J. (2009). Assurance of sustainability reports: Impact on report users’ confidence and perceptions of information credibility. Australian Accounting Review, 19(3), 178–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board. (2011). ISAE 3000 (Revised), Assurance engagements other than audits or reviews of historical financial information.

  • Kim, D., & Nam, Y. (2011). Corporate relations with environmental organizations represented by hyperlinks on the Fortune Global 500 companies websites. Journal of Business Ethics, 105(4), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolk, A. (2008). Sustainability, accountability and corporate governance: Exploring multinationals’ reporting practices. Business Strategy and the Environment, 17(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolk, A. (2010). Trajectories of sustainability reporting by MNCs. Journal of World Business, 45(4), 367–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolk, A., Perego, P. (2010). Determinants of the adoption of sustainability assurance statements: An international investigation. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19(3), 182–198 (EBSCOhost, eoah, item: 20767011).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolk, A., & Van Tulder, R. (2010). International business, corporate social responsibility and sustainable development. International Business Review, 19(2), 119–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • KPMG Global Sustainability Services. (2008). International survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2008, Amstelveen.

  • KPMG Global Sustainability Services & AccountAbility. (2005). Assurance standards briefingAA1000 assurance standard & ISAE3000, Amsterdam.

  • KPMG Global Sustainability Services & SustainAbility Ltd. (2008). Count me in: The readers’ take on sustainability reporting, Amstelveen.

  • Laufer, W. (2003). Social accountability and corporate greenwashing. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(3), 253–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manetti, G., & Becatti, L. (2009). Assurance services for sustainability reports: Standards and empirical evidence. Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 289–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKinsey & Company. (2010). How companies manage sustainability.

  • Mock, T. J., Strohm, C., & Swartz, K. M. (2007). An examination of worldwide assured sustainability reporting. Australian Accounting Review, 17(41), 67–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moneva, J., Archel, P., & Correa, C. (2006). GRI and the camouflaging of corporate unsustainability. Accounting forum, 30, 121–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mori Junior, R. (2009). ‘Elaboração de modelo para avaliação de sistemas de gestão ambiental com foco em risco’, Instituto de Pesquisas Tecnológicas do Estado de São Paulo.

  • Moroney, R., & Windsor, C., Aw, Y.T. (2012). Evidence of assurance enhancing the quality of voluntary environmental disclosures: An empirical analysis. Accounting & Finance, 52(3), 903–939.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Dwyer, B., & Owen, D. (2005). Assurance statement practice in environmental, social and sustainability reporting: A critical evaluation. The British Accounting Review, 37(2), 205–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owen, D., Chapple, W., & Urzola, A. (2009). Key issues in sustainability assurance. London: International Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility.

    Google Scholar 

  • Owen, D., Swift, T., & Hunt, K. (2001). Questioning the role of stakeholder engagement in social and ethical accounting auditing and reporting. Accounting Forum, 25(3), 264–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, J., & Brorson, T. (2005). Experiences of and views on third-party assurance of corporate environmental and sustainability reports. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13(10–11), 1095–1106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perego, P. (2009). Causes and consequences of choosing different assurance providers: An international study of sustainability reporting. International Journal of Management, 26(3), 412–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phatak, A. V., Bhagat, R. S., & Kashlak, R. J. (2005). International management managing in a diverse and dynamic global environment. Boston: McGraw-Hill Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perez, F., & Sanchez, L. E. (2009). Assessing the evolution of sustainability reporting in the mining sector. Environmental Management, 43(6), 949–961. doi:10.1007/s00267-008-9269-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramus, C. A., & Montiel, I. (2005). When are corporate environmental policies a form of greenwashing? Business & Society, 44(4), 377–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rikhardsson, P., Andersen, R., Jacob, A., Bang, H. (2002). Sustainability reporting on the internet. Greener Management International, 40, 57–75 (EBSCOhost, bth, item: 12175451).

    Google Scholar 

  • Romero, S., Ruiz, S., Fernández-Feijóo, B. (2010). Assurance statement for sustainability reports: The case of Spain. Proceedings of the Northeast Business & Economics Association, San Diego, pp. 105–112 (EBSCOhost, bth, item: 56100828).

  • Seuring, S., & Müller, M. (2008). From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(15), 1699–1710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simnett, R., Vanstraelen, A., Chua, W.F. (2009). Assurance on sustainability reports: An international comparison. Accounting Review, 84, 937–967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J., Haniffa, R., Fairbrass, J. (2011) A conceptual framework for investigating ‘capture’ in corporate sustainability reporting assurance. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(3), 425–439 (EBSCOhost, bth, item: 59460159).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Renzo Mori Junior.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Junior, R.M., Best, P.J. & Cotter, J. Sustainability Reporting and Assurance: A Historical Analysis on a World-Wide Phenomenon. J Bus Ethics 120, 1–11 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1637-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1637-y

Keywords

Navigation