Skip to content

1 June, 2023

Subscribe Advertise About Us
  • My Account
  • Register
  • Log In
  • Log Out

Board Agenda

  • Governance
  • Strategy
  • Risk
  • Ethics
  • News
    • Categories

      • View All
      • Board Moves
    • EU CSDDD

      Pressure builds on EU to amend due diligence rules

      More companies have added their voices to the call to make the EU Corporate Sustainability...

    • norges vote Norges Bank leads investor voting against Exxon and Chevron

      The fund seeks to push the companies into speeding up their climate transition plans and...

    • ESG battle ‘Change fiduciary laws’ to end ESG battle in US

      Academics suggest a truce between left and right, based on separating political issues from investment...

  • Insight
    • Categories

      • View all
      • Governance
      • Strategy
      • Risk
      • Ethics
      • Board Expertise
      • finance
      • Technology
    • Climate finance

      How climate change alters the financial landscape

      To achieve sustainability, companies and boards will need to look not only to their operations,...

    • generative AI

      Five AI issues to consider right now

      We may not know what AI will mean for us all in the long term,...

    • sexual misconduct

      How to prevent sexual misconduct in your organisation

      Revelations about the CBI may be shocking, but there is no place for complacency and...

  • Comment
      • View all
    • hybrid AGM

      Hybrid AGMs maximise shareholder participation

      Avoid virtual-only annual general meetings: although pragmatic in an emergency, they water down shareholders’ rights.

    • ESG break up ESG: Should E and S break up with G?

      In the world of investing, maturity has revealed significant practical shortcomings in combining environmental, social...

    • controlling shareholders The politics and geopolitics of controlling shareholders

      Shareholders with a controlling interest influence not only financial matters but can also wield great...

  • Interviews
      • View All Interviews
      • Podcasts
      • Webinars
    • information resilience IT transformation sees boards moving to ‘continuous’ management

      Data analytics available on demand requires a resilient—and selective—approach to sharing information, a webinar panel...

    • life sciences podcast Reform of NHS levy ‘harms UK competitiveness’

      Boards in the pharmaceutical and life sciences sector face increasingly difficult decisions, according to a...

    • Board priorities 2023 Board priorities 2023: tact, trust and transparency

      We asked key figures what would help boards this year. The answers ranged from 'smarter...

  • Careers
      • View all
      • Selection
      • Board Moves
    • board survey 2023 Board appointments fell sharply in 2022

      Companies appear to be sticking with experienced leaders—to the detriment of progress—suggests FTSE 350 boardroom...

    • diversity statistics Diversity statistics challenged by new scorecard

      Companies can ‘hit the target, but miss the point’, say academics researching a more ‘holistic’...

    • CEO turnover CEO turnover rises steeply

      The researchers say political changes and business difficulties may have accelerated turnover, which has risen...

  • Resource Centre
      • White Paper Downloads
      • Book Reviews
      • Corporate & Advisory Services
    • Mazars c-suite 2023

      Mazars C-suite barometer 2023

      The Mazars C-suite barometer is based on responses from more than 800 C-suite executives from...

    • CFO Career Survey Report

      Our survey, in December 2022, of almost 200 CFOs across the public, private and non-profit...

    • The Engagement Appeal: The Path to Inclusive Investor Engagement

      The Engagement Appeal: The Path to Inclusive Investor Engagement

      The Path to Inclusive Investor Engagement highlights the need for greater engagement between companies and...

  • Events
  • Search by topic
    • Governance
    • Strategy
    • Risk
    • Ethics
    • Regulation
    • ESG
    • Investor Relations
    • Selection
    • Board Expertise
    • finance
    • Technology

Better sustainability disclosures require clear reporting boundaries

by Kate Ringham and Samantha Miles

Sustainability reporting needs to be internally consistent, theoretically sound and a useful source of data for decision-making. We’re not there yet.

carbon emissions, CO2, sustainability reporting

Image: Momojung/Shutterstock

Following news of Oxford Brookes University’s recent analysis and the demonstrable shortcomings of FTSE 100 organisations’ sustainability reporting, it’s time to stand back and contemplate what the purpose of this reporting actually is and how best to achieve it.

In the current climate of global stakeholder concern over growing environmental degradation, social inequality and high-profile corporate misdemeanours, there is an increased focus, particularly among the millennial generation, on corporate behaviour.

Stakeholders, including investors, regulators, consumers, employees and civil society need to understand both financial and non-financial data in order to assess corporate performance.

Pressure from shareholders for a fair presentation of sustainability impacts is likely to escalate, particularly given the requirement from October 2020 onwards for pension funds to publish statements of investment principles, outlining the extent to which environmental, social or governance (ESG) topics are considered in investment decisions.

Consequently businesses are looking to respond by investing to a greater or lesser extent, in improving corporate sustainability practices.

This rise in demand for accountability has led to a promulgation of independent sustainability reporting guidelines and corporate sustainability reporting is now accepted as a de facto requirement.

Reporting boundaries

While improvements in sustainability reporting practice are evident, the approach to the subject remains compromised. Corporate narratives are frequently decoupled from underlying organisational realities, resulting in a weak correlation between reporting quality and actual social and environmental performance.

As a result it is difficult for stakeholders, including investors, to use current non-financial information to assess risks to corporate reputation and the value added by sustainability initiatives. This means that the efforts of organisations seeking to offer genuine accounts of their activities and to discharge accountability are undermined.

Our research, analysing the boundaries companies adopt when creating sustainability reports, highlights this. For a report to be useful its boundaries should be transparent and, ideally, created in consultation with stakeholders to demonstrate a commitment to accountability, and a genuine acceptance of responsibility.

For a report to be useful its boundaries should be transparent and, ideally, created in consultation with stakeholders

On average, our findings show that sustainability reporting boundaries mirror those adopted within financial reporting, which are narrower in scope. The indirect impacts from activities that fall outside of the defined “group” of subsidiaries are excluded from such disclosure, resulting in sustainability reports that are promotional and effectively unfit for evaluating ESG impacts and risks.

Management are currently free to define the boundaries of sustainability reporting as standards such as the Global Reporting Initiative or Integrated Reporting Framework do not specify boundaries, or require the disclosure of the type of boundaries adopted.

Management have therefore been given licence to decide the extent to which an impact is included or excluded in sustainability reporting. For example, should reports include safety data relating to employees, but exclude data relating to contractors working at the same site? Should upstream or downstream impacts of products be ignored because they are deemed to fall outside of the organisational boundaries of the report?

This facilitates the provision of a partial, biased account of activity as a company can claim compliance with a reporting standard through the provision of disclosure on ESG topics prescribed, while concurrently adopting narrowly defined boundaries for those areas. This is misleading for stakeholders who wish to use the disclosure for decision-making purposes.

Regulation vs innovation

So what is the solution? We have found evidence that regulation, such as that associated with modern slavery, can be employed to improve disclosure as the boundaries are clearly defined. Regulatory compliance, however, is expensive and can stifle innovation from pioneer reporters, indicating that a market-led solution, if achievable, may be preferable.

There are some easy steps CSR executives can take, beginning with benchmarking their own approach to the best-in-sector, to better understand how more progressive companies have determined their reporting boundaries.

This is particularly pertinent for those areas that have been highlighted as being particularly importance to stakeholders following stakeholder engagement activities. There are, however, a substantial number of published corporate stakeholder interest matrices that bear no relationship to the ensuing disclosure because materiality has been determined from a shareholder, rather than stakeholder, perspective. This gives the impression of having satisfied stakeholder interests, but fails to discharge accountability.

The marketplace offers a confusing myriad of guidelines, developed by a mixed collection of organisations in pursuit of their own agendas

The provision of robust non-financial information for senior management scrutiny, as is the case with financial information, is beneficial to organisations as it allows monitoring of the impact of ESG initiatives, responds to stakeholder enquiries and evaluates associated financial benefits.

If there are also some agreed principles relating to the provision of non-financial information—for example, recognition, measurement and boundary of reporting—then organisations can learn from each other and best practice will be shared and further developed.

As a starting point, the following questions should be considered:

  • What is the objective of the sustainability report?
  • Who is the report being prepared for?
  • What is the boundary of reporting?
  • How is materiality defined and by whom?
  • How should disclosure be measured?
  • When should impacts be recognised?
  • How should the information be disclosed?

These are good starting points for the development of a much-needed conceptual framework providing guidance for reliable and robust sustainability reporting that is internally consistent, theoretically sound and a useful source of data for decision-making.

The interlocking principles should be considered jointly, as a lack consistency will result in reports that lack credibility.

The marketplace offers a confusing myriad of guidelines, developed by a mixed collection of organisations in pursuit of their own agendas. These need to be coordinated, aligned, rationalised and standardised.

In the absence of this type of meta-analysis, any void will be filled by increased complexity, which will amplify the opportunities to misappropriate, misinterpret and misunderstand sustainability disclosures.

Dr Samantha Miles is reader in accounting and finance, and Dr Kate Ringham is programme lead in applied accounting, at Oxford Brookes University.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • Mail

Related Posts

  • EU under fire over sustainability reporting reforms
    November 25, 2022
    sustainability directive

    Campaigners fear that ‘limited’ EU draft directives on corporate reporting will hinder the creation of a ‘sustainable and just economy’.

  • How to ensure stakeholders trust your sustainability reporting
    December 19, 2022
    sustainability report

    Assurance is growing in importance, sparking the need for robust global standards on sustainability data, and a focus on transferable skills.

  • Government confirms commitment to sustainability disclosure requirements
    May 13, 2022
    Houses of Parliament

    The UK will proceed with legislative plans for SDRs, including transition reports, after the proposals were missing from the Queen's Speech.

  • ESG legislation: What are the FRC proposals?
    August 17, 2022
    FRC proposals sustainability ESG

    The FRC has set out its plans to help integrate sustainability into corporate governance, reporting and audit reforms.

For thoughtful journalism, expert insights on corporate governance and an extensive library of reports, guides and tools to help boards and directors navigate the complexities of their roles, subscribe to Board Agenda

ESG, ESG reporting, Kate Ringham, non-financial disclosures, non-financial reporting, Samantha Miles, sustainability

Search


Sign up to our Newsletter

Receive independent news, thoughtful journalism & expert insights about leadership, corporate governance & key boardroom issues straight to your inbox every week.

SIGN UP

Follow Us

 

 

 

 

Most Popular

  • Corporate governance code review boosts internal controls
  • News round-up: this week in governance
  • New audit committee standards finalised
  • ESG: Should E and S break up with G?
  • Dual class shares have become ‘dual class stock lite’

Featured Partner Profile

Diligent

Diligent

Diligent Corporation, which was founded in 2001, is headquartered in New York, NY with a European HQ in London. Diligent’s modern governance platform empowers leaders and teams at every level of the organisation to digitally transform and create ...

Featured Partner Resources

The Engagement Appeal: The Path to Inclusive Investor Engagement

The Engagement Appeal: The Path to Inclusive Investor Engagement

This is the inaugural white paper from The Engagem...

Stakeholder Engagement: A Roadmap for UK Plc Boards

This guide aims to provide directors and their col...

Digital Boards: How Technology Adoption is Driving Culture Change and Resiliency

Digital tools proved their worth to boards during ...
Leadership in AI report

Leadership in AI

This report from Board Agenda and Mazars, in assoc...
Director's Guide to Internal Investigations

A Director's Guide to Conducting Internal Investigations

An internal investigation must be handled meticulo...
 

ADVERTISE – FREE CORPORATE LISTING

FREE - Add your company profile to our Corporate & Advisory Directory.
ADD

ADVERTISE – PROMOTE YOUR REPORTS & WHITEPAPERS

FREE - Add your company profile to our Corporate & Advisory Directory.
Add Resource

Register Free

Register to receive free article views, selected resource downloads, and all the latest news alerts straight to your inbox. Register


  • Editors & Contributors
  • Editorial Advisory Board
  • Corporate & Advisory Services
  • Media Marketing Solutions
  • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Board Director Network
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookies
  • Sitemap
|