The pre-history of sustainability reporting: a constructivist reading

Abstract

PurposeThe aim of this paper is to provide an account of the period prior to the creation of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI): a body that was critical to the institutionalization of sustainability reporting (SR). By examining this “pre-history,” we bring to light the actors, activities and ways of thinking that made SR more likely to be institutionalized once the GRI entrepreneurship came to the fore.Design/methodology/approachThe paper revisits a time period (the 1990s) that has yet to be formally written about in any depth and traces the early development of what became SR. This material is examined using a constructivist understanding of regulation.FindingsThe authors contend that a convergence of actors and structural conditions were pivotal to the development of SR. Specifically, this paper demonstrates that a combination of actors (such as epistemic communities, carriers, regulators and reporters) as well as the presence of certain conditions (such as the societal context, analogies with financial reporting, environmental reporting and reporting design issues) contributed to the development of SR which was consolidated (as well as extended) in 1999 with the advent of the GRI.Research limitations/implicationsThis paper theorizes (through a historical analysis) how SR is sustained by a network of institutional actors and conditions which can assist reflection on future SR development.Originality/valueThis paper brings together empirical material from a time that (sadly) is passing from living memory. The paper also extends the use of a conceptual frame that is starting to influence scholarship in accounting that seeks to understand how norms develop.

Artificial intelligence based decision-making in accounting and auditing: ethical challenges and normative thinking

“…True to the (necessary) interdisciplinary and critical nature of research into the ethical decision-making in future scenarios of human–machine collaboration, it seems prudent to rethink the nature of accounting information as a whole. Furthermore, the societal implications of an AI-based decision-making, together with the multi-modal, technology-driven turn in (sustainability) reporting (Busco and Quattrone, 2018; Larrinaga and Bebbington, 2021; Quattrone et al ., 2021) might benefit from the inclusion of and dialogue with the stakeholders in specific decision-making processes.…”

“A new direction? The “mainstreaming” of sustainability reporting”

“…Accountability comprises the way in which an organisation sets strategy, governs and manages performance. AccountAbility (2018, p. 12) This detailed definition of accountability underscores the different lineage between financial and sustainability reporting (Larrinaga and Bebbington, 2021). There were other critical decisions taken at the time about the nature of what was being accounted for.…”

“…This essay makes a positive contribution to the literature as it explores the genealogy (Foucault, 1979) of reporting and the assumptions being made in the re-construction of reporting and the shifting focus from accountability to the market for information. It is different to other studies that have considered the evolution of sustainability and financial reporting looking at similarities and differences in characteristics and actors (Tschopp and Huefner, 2014) or have considered the prehistory of sustainability reporting to understand tensions, conflicts and resolutions over time (Larrinaga and Bebbington, 2021). This essay in many ways builds on those studies and focuses in on the role of concepts in the development of a dominant discourse.…”

“…Others have long argued that what passes for sustainability reporting has little to do with sustainability (Gray, 2013) and there is a rich and vibrant literature on that topic. In the critical literature, there is emphasis on the steady colonisation of sustainability reporting and these current developments mark a break with the antecedents that formed it (Larrinaga and Bebbington, 2021). Similarly, it represents a crowding out of sustainability objectives to satisfy the voracious appetite of markets for information (Flower, 2015).…”

How Boards Can Help Sustainability Transformations

“…Over the last few years, a clear evolution of corporate disclosure has become evident. This evolution has been driven by national and international regulations (e.g., the Directive 2014/95/UE and the national laws implementing the directive, such as the Legislative Decree 254/2016 in Italy) as well as increasing stakeholder awareness (Lai & Stacchezzini, 2021;Larrinaga & Bebbington, 2021).…”