No abstract

Directive 2014/95, in force since 2017, is the first European step that requires undertakings to provide mandatory non-financial information. The regulation concerns sustainability information, such as environmental, social, and employee information, human rights, and anti-corruption and bribery matters, and the disclosure of diversity policies for board members. According to the theoretical framework of Integrated Assessment (IA), the study aims to examine the expected impact of the Directive within the analysis of empirical evidence before the mandatory approach. This allows, on the regulatory side, evaluation of the quality of the regulation, therefore, whether the law achieves its policy objectives (i.e., if it fills the gap in the sustainability disclosure) and, on the firms' side, to identify where companies have to invest to meet the legal requirements. The oil and gas sector is chosen as a sample for the study, because it is one of the most advanced sectors in sustainability disclosure, and if the regulation could impact on this sector, it would be the same for less-informed ones. The findings reveal a fair level of completeness of non-financial information, however, there are some areas that have to be improved to achieve the requirements of the Directive. The results also show the presence of overlap between financial and sustainability reports. In conclusion, the quality of regulation is good because it will also increase sustainability disclosure in an advanced sector, such as oil and gas, even if there is an open point on the location of information; companies in this sector will have to invest more in environmental and employee information in future years to comply with the Directive.

No abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the opinions of national stakeholders on the costs and benefits of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) implementation and to determine whether countries with disparate social, economical and political backgrounds have different experiences when complying with IFRS.Design/methodology/approachSemi‐structured interviews were conducted with preparers, users and auditors of annual reports and accounting regulators in the UK (including Ireland) and Italy.FindingsThere were some differences in the experiences of IFRS implementation between stakeholders from different countries. However, there was widespread agreement that costs exceeded the benefits of reporting under the new standards. Further it is recognised that international standard‐setters have a large set of stakeholder views to manage and it is therefore important that standard‐setters are aware of the costs and benefits of their accounting requirements.Originality/valueThis analysis is useful for companies that have not already adopted IFRS. It explains the differences and similarities of the costs and benefits of IFRS implementation from an Anglo‐Saxon and an EU continental perspective.

No abstract