The challenges and potential benefits of the external assurance of mandatory non-financial reporting. Evidence from Poland

• Authors: Maraghini Maria Pia , De Micco Patrice , Bartoszewicz Anna

Title variants

PL

Wyzwania i potencjalne korzyści zewnętrznej atestacji obowiązkowej sprawozdawczości niefinansowej. Dowody z Polski

• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Purpose: The paper analyses the challenges and potential benefits that stem from the relationship between an auditing firm and the companies engaged in mandatory sustainability reporting from the companyʼs point of view. Methodology/approach: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a sample of Polish companies that engage in mandatory non-financial disclosure. Findings: The evidence collected through the interviews suggests that cooperation with an auditing company that goes beyond the minimum normative requirements brings benefits to the reporting company while also improving the non-financial reporting process, as well as the companyʼs awareness. This is particularly true for companies that started their non-financial reporting experience when it was not mandatory, as they were able to gradually adopt and grasp the related potential benefits. Research limitations/implications: A significant limitation is that the research was conducted on a small sample. To draw broader conclusions, the sample should be expanded to include additional companies. Originality/value: The paper provides empirical evidence on the relationship and cooperation between companies and auditors in the field of non-financial reporting, focusing on the conditions that enable the potential benefits of this relationship to materialize. Such relationships can be essential drivers that foster a sustainability culture within companies.

PL

Cel: Celem artykułu jest analiza, z punktu widzenia firmy, wyzwań i potencjalnych korzyści wynikających z relacji między firmą audytorską a podmiotami zaangażowanymi w obowiązkowe raportowanie zrównoważonego rozwoju. Metodyka/podejście badawcze: Do realizacji celu przeprowadzono częściowo ustrukturyzowane wywiady z przedstawicielami wybranych spółek w Polsce, zaangażowanych obecnie w obowiązkowe ujawnianie informacji niefinansowych. Wyniki: Z materiału zebranego w trakcie wywiadów wynika, że współpraca z firmą audytorską, która wykracza poza minimalne wymagania normatywne, przynosi firmie raportującej korzyści i skutkuje usprawnieniem procesu raportowania niefinansowego. Ponadto podnosi świadomość firmy. Dotyczy to w szczególności podmiotów, które rozpoczęły raportowanie niefinansowe, gdy nie było ono obowiązkowe. Były one w stanie ustanowić stopniowy proces adaptacji i dostrzec związane z tym potencjalne korzyści. Ograniczenia/implikacje badawcze: Istotnym ograniczeniem jest realizacja przedmiotowych wywiadów na małej próbie badawczej. Aby wyciągnąć szersze wnioski, należy powiększyć badaną próbę o kolejne przedsiębiorstwa. Oryginalność/wartość: Artykuł dostarcza dowodów empirycznych na istnienie relacji i współpracy między firmami a biegłymi rewidentami w zakresie sprawozdawczości niefinansowej, które mogą być realizowane w firmie na warunkach umożliwiających uzyskanie potencjalnych korzyści z tej współpracy. Tego rodzaju relacje mogą być jednym z podstawowych czynników stymulujących kulturę zrównoważonego rozwoju w firmach.

Keywords

EN

non-financial disclosure process; sustainability reporting; assurance, audit; sustainable development

PL

proces ujawniania informacji niefinansowych; raportowanie niefinansowe; atestacja; audyt; zrównoważony rozwój

• Publisher: Stowarzyszenie Księgowych w Polsce (SKwP), Zarząd Główny, Rada Naukowa
• Journal: Zeszyty Teoretyczne Rachunkowości
• Year: 2024
• Issue: 48(2)
• Pages: 111-128

Contributors

author

Maraghini Maria Pia

• University of Siena, Italy, Department of Business and Law

author

De Micco Patrice

• University of Siena, Italy, Department of Business and Law

author

Bartoszewicz Anna

• University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Faculty of Economic Sciences, Department of Finance

References

• Adams C.A. (2015), The international integrated reporting council: A call to action, “Critical Perspectives on Accounting”, 27, pp. 23–28; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2014.07.001.
• Adams C.A., McNicholas P. (2007), Making a difference: SR, accountability and organizational change, “Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal”, 20 (3), pp. 382–402; https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570710748553.
• Ball A., Owen D.L., Gray R. (2000), External transparency or internal capture? The role of third-party statements in adding value to corporate environmental reports, “Business Strategy and the Environment”, 9 (1), pp. 1–23; https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0836(200001/02)9:1%3C1::AID-BSE227%3E3.0.CO;2-H.
• Bartoszewicz A., Rutkowska-Ziarko A. (2021), Practice of Non-Financial Reports Assurance Services in the Polish Audit Market – The Range, Limits and Prospects for the Future, “Risks”, 9 (176), pp. 1–23; https://doi.org/10.3390/risks9100176.
• Boiral O., Heras-Saizarbitoria I., Brotherton M.C. (2019a), Assessing and Improving the Quality of Sustainability Reports: The Auditors’ Perspective, “Journal of Business Ethics”, 155, pp. 703–721; http://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3516-4.
• Boiral O., Heras-Saizarbitoria I., Brotherton M.C., Bernard J. (2019b), Ethical issues in the assurance of sustainability reports: Perspectives from assurance providers, “Journal of Business Ethics”, 159, pp. 1111–1125; https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3840-3.
• Carmo C., Ribeiro C. (2022), Mandatory Non-Financial Information Disclosure under European Directive 95/2014/EU: Evidence from Portuguese Listed Companies, “Sustainability”, 14 (8), 4860; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084860.
• Carungu J., Di Pietra R., Molinari M. (2020), Mandatory vs voluntary exercise on non-financial reporting: does a normative/coercive isomorphism facilitate an increase in quality? “Meditari Accountancy Research”, 29 (3), pp. 449–476.
• Cohen J.R.A., Simnett R. (2014), CSR and assurance services: A research agenda, “Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory”, 34 (1), pp. 59–74; https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-50876.
• Darnall N., Ji H., Iwata K., Arimura T.H. (2022), Do ESG reporting guidelines and verifications enhance firms’ information disclosure? “Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management”, 29 (5), pp. 1214–1230; https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2265.
• De Beelde, I., Tuybens S. (2015), Enhancing the credibility of reporting on corporate social responsibility in Europe, “Business Strategy and the Environment”, 24, pp. 190–216; https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1814.
• De Micco P., Rinaldi L., Vitale G., Cupertino S., Maraghini M.P. (2021), The challenges of sustainability reporting and their management: the case of Estra, “Meditari Accountancy Research”, 29 (3), pp. 430–448; https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-09-2019-0555.
• De Villiers, C., Rinaldi, L., Unerman, J. (2014), Integrated reporting: Insights, gaps and an agenda for future research, “Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal”, 27 (7), pp. 1042–1067; https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-06-2014-1736.
• Du K., Wu, S.J. (2019), Does external assurance enhance the credibility of CSR reports? Evidence from CSR-related misconduct events in Taiwan, “Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory”, 38 (4), pp. 101–130; http://doi.org /10.2308/ajpt-52418.
• García I.M., Sierra-Garcia L., Garcia-Benau M.A. (2022), How does the EU non-financial directive affect the assurance market? “Business Ethics Environment & Responsibility”, 31 (3), pp. 601–898; https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12428.
• Gürtürk A., Hahn R. (2016), An empirical assessment of assurance statements in sustainability reports: Smoke screens or enlightening information? “Journal of Cleaner Production”, 136, pp. 30–41; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.089.
• Junior R.M., Best P.J., Cotter J. (2014), Sustainability reporting and assurance: A historical analysis on a world-wide phenomenon, “Journal of Business Ethics”, 120, pp. 1–11; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1637-y.
• Kolk A., Perego P. (2010), Determinants of the adoption of sustainability assurance statements: An international investigation, “Business Strategy and the Environment”, 19, pp. 182–198; https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.643.
• Lu M., Simnet R., Zhou S. (2023), Using the Same Provider for Financial Statement Audit and Assurance of Extended External Reports: Choices and Consequences, “Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory”, pp. 1–54; https://doi.org/10.2308/AJPT-19-080.
• Manetti G., Becatti L. (2009), Assurance services for sustainability reports: Standards and empirical evidence, “Journal of Business Ethics”, 87 (1), pp. 289–298; http://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9809-x.
• Massa L., Farneti F., Scappini B. (2015), Developing a sustainability report in a small to medium enterprise: process and consequences, “Meditari Accountancy Research”, 23 (1), pp. 62–91; https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-02-2014-0030.
• Matonti G., Tucker J., Tommasetti A. (2016), Auditor choice in Italian non-listed firms, “Managerial Auditing Journal”, 3 (4/5), p. 458–491; https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-07-2015-1215.
• Mock T.J., Rao S.S., Srivastava R.P. (2013), The development of worldwide sustainability reporting assurance, “Australian Accounting Review”, 23, pp. 280–294; https://doi.org/10.1111/auar.12013.
• Perego P., Kolk A. (2012), Multinationalsʼ accountability on sustainability: The evolution of third-party assurance of sustainability reports, “Journal of Business Ethics”, 110 (2), pp. 173–190; http://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1420-5.
• Prajogo D., Castka P., Searcy C. (2020), Paymasters and Assurance Providers: Exploring Firms’ Discretion in Selecting Non‑financial Auditors, “Journal of Business Ethics”, 173, pp. 795–811; https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04539-9.
• Simnett R., Vanstraelen A., Chua W.F. (2009), Assurance on sustainability reports: An international comparison, “The Accounting Review”, 84 (3), pp. 937–967; https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2009.84.3.937.
• Venter E.R., van Eck L. (2021), Research on extended external reporting assurance: Trends, themes and opportunities, “Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting”, 32, pp. 63–103; https://doi.org/10.1111/jifm.12125.
• Yan M., Jia F., Chen L., Yan F. (2022), Assurance process for sustainability reporting: Towards a conceptual framework, “Journal of Cleaner Production”, 377, 134156; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134156.
• Act of 15 December 2016 on amending the Accounting Act.
• Directive 2014/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council.
• Directive 2022/2426 EU of the European Parliament and of the Council.
• Accountancy Europe (2020), Towards Reliable non-financial information across Europe, https://www.accountancyeurope.eu/wp-content/uploads/Accountancy-Europe-NFI-assurance -practice_facthseet.pdf (access 10.06.2023).
• Dadacz J. (2017), Raportowanie niefinansowe w Polsce – transpozycja dyrektywy 2014/95/UE, Ministerstwo finansów. https://mf-arch2.mf.gov.pl/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=cc70e5ba-d876-434f-8dbb-38aba4583a22&groupId=764034 (access 14.05.2023).
• IAASB (2018), International framework for assurance engagements, https://sea8401dd76b4febd.jimcontent.com/download/version/1566942467/module/14448388730/name/IAASB-2018-International%20framework%20for%20assurance%20engagements.pdf (access 9.06.2023).