This paper presents the case for the sustainability reporting field as a contested arena and examines the behavior and the influence of the various actors, such as the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB), the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC), and the European Commission, including the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) and the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation in influencing the shape of the regulation in the arena. Drawing on the arena concept and documentary analysis, this study explores the dynamic in which each actor is attempting to change the rules within the arena and how this contributes to the harmonization and future direction of sustainability reporting. The findings of this study show that the actions and behavior of the various actors are premeditated and strategically calculated to maintain their influence, relevance, and defend their technical authority in the arena. The findings also suggest that sustainability reporting regulation is still far away from harmonization due to the perceived hegemony in the arena, and diversity in the overarching objective of the various actors and the inability of each actor to renounce its particular perspective and orientation. Insights are provided for policy makers on the urgent need to decide and reclassify the specific rules required in upholding the sustainability reporting arena.

Purpose This study aims to examine the influence and behaviour of the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG)/European Commission, and the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation/International Sustainability Standards Board in the standardisation of sustainability reporting arena and their implications for the Global Reporting Initiative’s (GRI) current position. Design/methodology/approach This paper draws on the arena concept, particularly the work of Renn (1992) and Georgakopoulous and Thomson (2008), to explore the EFRAG and the IFRS Foundation’s behaviour towards the standardisation of the sustainability reporting arena and their implications for the GRI’s current position. Further, the documents and public releases pertinent to the activities and output of the GRI, the EFRAG/European Commission and the IFRS Foundation are used. The documents are screened and analysed based on the key elements of arena concept that emerged, which includes “agenda, claims, network of bodies and group engaged, interaction and behaviour with arena issues (audience, materiality, scope and core priorities, purpose of reporting and relevance to sustainable development)”. Findings This study reveals the source of motivation and influence of the new standard setters in the sustainability reporting arena and documents the relevance of their behaviour as an actionable strategy to change the arena rule. Particularly, this paper demonstrates the perceived fall away from driving business behaviour towards the pursuit of sustainable development if the GRI and its standards cease to exist. Practical implications The pathway to achieve sustainable development and improve sustainability impact disclosure remains a debatable issue among policymakers and users of sustainability reporting standards. This study reconstructs the awareness of different dynamics at play inhibiting the harmonisation of sustainability reporting standardisation and the importance of the GRI in pursuing global sustainable development. Social implications The pattern of behaviour and agenda of sustainability institutions and influential standard setters harnessed in this paper are aimed at enabling the existence of the rules that can uphold the primary focus of the sustainability reporting arena, particularly in achieving global sustainable development. Originality/value This paper furthers the understanding of the importance of the GRI in upholding the key tenets and traditional agenda of sustainability reporting and sustainable development.

PurposeThe authors explore the behaviour and perspectives of SMEs' owners towards a greener economy and its implications for net zero carbon emissions target.Design/methodology/approachThe authors draw on the mirroring concept and 26 semi-structured interviews with SMEs' owners and managers to provide insights and explore the misalignment between SMEs' actions and perceptions and the technical architecture (and requirements) of achieving net zero carbon emissions in the UK.FindingsThe authors find that SMEs lack trust and are sceptical about the government's net zero emissions agenda. The authors also find that lack of understanding and perceived benefits, and supply chain complexities (end-to-end emissions) are the key factors hindering SMEs interests in engaging with better carbon emissions management and environmental management system (EMS). Moreover, pressure from external stakeholders, particularly banks and customers, is a strong driver to draw SMEs more effectively with sustainability and environmental impact disclosure.Research limitations/implicationsThe sample is limited to 26 SMEs' owners operating in seven industries. Future research could explore the result in other industries. Further research could also investigate how the sustainability reports produced by SMEs are useful for different user groups' decision-making. This study reinforces the social constructionist approach to advance our understanding of SMEs' actions towards carbon emission management and EMS.Practical implicationsThis study shows how government policies and SMEs' interests can be aligned to achieve the net zero carbon emissions target.Originality/valueThis is the first study to examine the perceptions and behaviour of SMEs towards the ongoing pursuit of a greener economy in the UK, including the key factors driving their actions and reasoning.