An interesting relatively new development in the field of corporate climate change disclosures is the Task force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD). The TCFD aims to help identify the information needed by financial stakeholders to appropriately assess and price climate change related risks and opportunities. In its first Report (2016), the TCFD recommends that companies provide climate change related disclosures specifying the impact thereof on their financial performance through mainstream (i. e. public) financial filings.
In this paper, we look at the financial accounting standards as an institutional framework, and in particular pose the question to what extent this framework supports companies to disclose how climate change impacts their operations and the value of the production assets. To test to what extent companies make disclosures in relation to climate change, we selected four energy companies and conducted a comparative case study analysis. Our focus is on the valuation of production assets, more specifically, drilling platforms, windmill platforms, heavy equipment and transport means used to support the production, and pipes and cables to transport the energy units produced.
Interesting findings were: (i) in all four cases, potential future changes (caused by climate change) concerning the valuation of the production assets are not (yet) accounted for in their Balance Sheet Annex. This is remarkable because climate change is likely to have an effect on the future value of the production assets employed in the two types of industries, among others caused by the development that renewable energy demand increases at the expense of non-renewable energy demand; and (ii) the current financial reporting system does not support renewable energy companies to provide meaningful and quantitative insights in expected increases of their future cash inflows and their financial and innovation potential. This impedes financiers and investors to accurately and meaningfully assess the value of a renewable energy company’s business compared with a non-renewable company’s business.
The revised Dutch Corporate Governance Code of 2016 (hereafter “the Code”) comprises provisions regarding the existence of an internal audit function. Following the comply or explain principle of the Code, Euronext Amsterdam listed companies with a registered office in the Netherlands either have established an internal audit function or have to explain why they did not.
Our research shows that the number of listed companies with an internal audit function has since grown. In 2016 53% of Euronext Amsterdam listed companies with their registered office in the Netherlands have established an internal audit function; in 2018 this figure is 64%. More than half of these listed companies have an in-house independent internal audit function, whereas other companies have internal audit functions with different characteristics, such as a combined internal audit and risk management function or have outsourced the internal audit function.
The majority of the companies without an internal audit function provide inadequate arguments for this absence. They thereby do not meet the standards as set forth in the Code. In most cases, the argument for not having an internal audit function is: “the organization is too small”. This is not a valid argument, as the Code specifically addresses this situation stating that in case the size of a company is not suited for an internal audit function, outsourcing may be an appropriate alternative.
We conclude that management boards should give this topic better thought and give better insight in their judgement by explaining the arguments. We therefore advocate that the principle of “comply or explain” should be “comply and explain”. Such is the case in the South African corporate governance code (King IV). The effect will be that management boards mindfully have to elaborate on how they obtain independent assurance on the company’s governance, risk management and control systems.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.