Purpose This paper aims to achieve the following objectives. First, through a longitudinal study, the authors explore the trend of voluntary external assurance of sustainability reports among Italian listed companies from 2008 to 2012. Thus, the authors aim to analyse the content level of the assurance statements and to test whether it is affected by certain corporate variables and by the type of practitioner chosen. Design/methodology/approach A legitimacy theory framework is adopted to investigate the phenomenon of sustainability report assurance services in Italy. The authors developed an assurance statement disclosure index (ASDI) constructed on the basis of the standards ISAE 3000 and AA1000AS. Thus, the authors tested whether the ASDI is affected by certain corporate variables using an ordinary least square (OLS) regression model. To test how each specific item is related to the assurance provider, a contingency table was developed. Findings The results of this paper show many differences in the assurance statements content in particular with reference to the criteria used, conclusive comments and recommendations. The presence of a corporate social responsibility committee and an expert who serves on it is positively related to a higher rank on the ASDI. In contrast, Big4 firms seem to be associated with a lower disclosure rank. Finally, Big4 are positively associated with the indications of the provider’s characteristics and negatively with their conclusive comments and recommendations. Originality/value This paper presents some findings in an area where little evidence exists, that is, the effects of some variables on the quantity of information disclosed in the assurance statements.

A descriptive-exploratory analysis of assurance practices is presented in this paper, by analysing the patterns of sustainability assurance reporting in two national contexts with different levels of assurance activity (Italy and the U.S.) over a period of 11 years (2003/2013). The study is based on theoretical insights drawn from institutional sociology and normativity production. It is framed both in the Italian situation, where assurance statements consistently include a narrow set of formal and procedural communications, and in an unsettled situation in the U.S., where assurance activity is more incipient, but where experimentation in substantial assurance disclosure practices has more room to develop. Its main implication is that the diffusion of sustainability assurance and the creation of sustainability assurance disclosure norms are not without its cost: information quality does not increase with patterned practice. The results also point towards the noteworthy role of specific professionals in the earlier and later stages of assurance practice norms. They reveal a significant influence of non-Big4 firms (mainly certification bodies and consulting and engineering firms) in the diffusion of sustainability assurance disclosure norms. In contrast, the Big4 firms appear to be positively associated with the narrowing down of the assurance focus to a selected subset of this activity in later stages of the development of the assurance norm. In this regard, this study provides insight into the circumstantial-but relevant-carrier role of the Big4 firms in determining what "assurance" means.

Purpose This study aims to examine the process through which sustainability is integrated into the organizational practices of accounting. Design/methodology/approach Action research, drawing on the lens of neo-institutional theory, is used to explore the integration process of sustainability in an Italian company. Findings The results show how different factors and organizational dynamics contribute to the initiation of both sustainability reporting and the progressive diffusion of sustainability practices in this organization, within the small- and medium-sized enterprise (SME) category. In addition, signs of integrated thinking were identified while charting the process of sustainability reporting and its institutionalization within the company. Research limitations/implications The study shows that the idea of integrated thinking was rooted in organizational culture prior to the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) framework and the momentum it gave to integrated reporting. In this sense, this research provides evidence to confirm the existence of an alternate narrative in relation to the one offered by the IIRC framework. Practical implications The present study contributes to understanding how SMEs can integrate sustainability into their accounting systems. Managers working in these organizations may learn from this experience. Originality/value On the one hand, this study further the knowledge of sustainability integration processes within an organizational practice, especially in the case of SMEs. On the other hand, the study is, perhaps, the first to identify signs of integrated thinking on the journey through the sustainability institutionalization process.

No abstract

No abstract