This paper analyzes whether effective boards of directors in addressing shareholder interests also prove to be effective in guaranteeing the interests of the rest of the firm's stakeholders. We measure board effectiveness based on the shareholder perspective, and test whether it is valid for the stakeholder perspective. The novelty of this paper precisely lies in its approach, given that it considers both perspectives of corporate governance at a time. Using the transparency of sustainability reports as a proxy for the stakeholder perspective in an international sample of 2366 companies, the paper shows that effective boards are more likely to address the interests of both the shareholders and the rest of the firm's stakeholders. Furthermore, we propose a measure of board effectiveness by gathering several board characteristics. Our results contribute to research on corporate governance and corporate social responsibility reporting, and it has implications for policy makers.

This paper studies whether the failure of corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting practices to enable effective CSR communication allowing stakeholders to appreciate firms' CSR is due to the reporting model guiding firms in elaborating sustainability reports, the companies' application of the model, or both. Drawing on the communication theory and using interpretive textual analysis, the paper specifically assesses Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) guidelines, the most widespread CSR reporting model worldwide, and its application by a leading sustainability reporter. The findings indicate that GRI guidelines suffer from significant limitations that hamper the production of reports accounting for CSR impacts. This paper contributes to critical research on CSR reporting practices and calls for redirecting current reporting practice towards a more effective approach. Additionally, it also responds to the need to approach CSR reporting research relying on theories different from the one commonly used.

Purpose This paper aims to document and discuss the involvement of a group of Spanish academics in the process of social and environmental reporting regulation to reflect on the role of accounting academics in regulatory processes. Design/methodology/approach The paper describes the long-standing engagement of a group of Spanish scholars in social and environmental reporting regulation, with a particular focus on the transposition of the EU Directive 2014/95/EU on non-financial information to the Spanish legislation. Findings Despite failures and mistakes in the engagement history of those scholars with different regulatory processes, academics problematized social and environmental reporting regulation, bridged the gap between regulation and practice, and facilitated the debate about social and environmental reporting. This long-term and collective engagement generated the intellectual capital that allowed researchers to provide their perspectives when the Spanish political process was ripe to move such regulation in a progressive direction. Practical implications The paper remarks two important aspects that, according to the reported experience, are required for academics to engage in social and environmental reporting regulation: developing long-standing research projects that enable the accumulation of intellectual capital to effectively intervene in regulatory processes when the opportunity arises; and nurturing epistemic communities seeking to promote corporate accountability was fundamental to circulate ideas and foster the connection between academics and policymakers. This long-term and collective perspective is at odds with current forms of research assessment. Social implications Academics have a responsibility to intervene in regulatory processes to increase corporate transparency. Originality/value The experience reported is unique and the authors have first-hand information. It spans through two decades and extracts some conclusions that could feed further discussions about engagement and, hopefully, encourage scholars to develop significant research projects.

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose This paper aims to study companies’ strategic responses to regulative institutional pressures on sustainability reporting. Particularly, it investigates the role of multiple stakeholder demands in shaping corporate responses to Law 11/2018 that transposes the EU Non-Financial Reporting Directive in Spain. Design/methodology/approach Informed by Oliver’s framework, the study analyzes the 2018 non-financial information of Spanish listed companies mandated to report under Law 11/2018 to explore the relationship between adopting a particular strategic response and companies’ stakeholder configuration. Findings Companies facing multiple stakeholder pressures tend to use a compromise strategy favoring the disclosure of relevant topics to a specific stakeholder type. Specifically, environmentalists are the most influential stakeholder in determining the coverage of sustainability topics to the detriment of other stakeholders when companies suffer from regulatory pressures. Research limitations/implications The study contributes to disentangling the factors determining how companies respond to sustainability reporting regulation. Future research could perform longitudinal and large multinational analyses to study the evolutionary process of corporate responses. Practical implications The study is relevant to managers and policymakers as it highlights that sustainability reporting regulation should promote the coverage of relevant topics to less influential stakeholders. Social implications The study explores the extent to which current sustainability reporting regulation can increase transparency on sustainability issues for all stakeholders. Originality/value In contrast to previous literature exploring the extent to which firms comply with regulation, the study considers that companies can respond more actively to mandatory sustainability reporting requirements.

The role of sustainability accounting in promoting organizational change toward more sustainable practices is a relevant area of research for both accounting and organization studies. Despite the interdisciplinary nature of this topic, while accounting research was imagining and exploring the transformative potential of social and environmental accounting practices since the inception of this activity, scholars in organization studies have recently developed a more general interest in this matter. This article aims to review how the association between sustainability accounting and reporting and sustainable organizational change has been examined in both disciplines to elaborate on some potential bridges to foster the creation of an interdisciplinary research field around this association, where a fertile conversation could develop. The mapping of this literature prompts us to propose five bridges around: how accounting and reporting are conceived; the direction of causality between sustainability accounting and organizational change; the assemblage of explanatory factors; theoretical foundations; and research methods.

No abstract