Financial and ESG reporting in times of uncertainty

• Authors: Zyznarska-Dworczak Beata

Title variants

PL

Sprawozdawczość finansowa i sprawozdawczość ESG w czasach niepewności

• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Purpose: The paper aims to explore how financial and ESG reporting have changed under the influence of rising economic and business uncertainty and how these changes may influence corporate accountability. Methodology/approach: The main research method is the extensive literature review. For inference, the methods of analysis and synthesis are used. Findings: The paper is based on positive and normative approaches. The positive approach reveals the key corporate reporting changes in times of uncertainty, analyzed in the light of the legitimacy theory and stakeholder theory. The paper indicates how different levels of uncertainty (economic policy uncertainty, business uncertainty, accounting uncertainty, audit uncertainty, uncertainty in ESG performance, and ESG assurance) can influence corporate reports and thus cause a significant change in corporate accountability. The proposed normative approach assumes that corporate reporting will become more account-ability-based, depicting the uncertainties at their different levels, which should be support-ed by reporting companies, controllers, and regulators. Originality/value: Since limited studies exist that focus on corporate reporting in times of uncertainty, the paper fills the gap. The paper contributes to the understanding of the significance of uncertainty in corporate reporting and its influence on accountability, thus offering findings that are potentially useful for both theory and practice.

PL

Cel: Artykuł ma na celu zbadanie, jak sprawozdawczość finansowa i sprawozdawczość ESG zmieniły się pod wpływem rosnącej niepewności ekonomicznej i biznesowej oraz jak te zmiany mogą wpływać na proces rozliczalności organizacji. Metodyka/podejście badawcze: Główną metodą badawczą jest obszerny przegląd litera-tury. W artykule zastosowano metody analizy i syntezy. Wyniki: Artykuł jest oparty na pozytywnym i normatywnym podejściu. W ujęciu pozytyw-nym w artykule zostały ukazane kluczowe zmiany w sprawozdawczości przedsiębiorstw w czasach niepewności, analizowane w świetle teorii legitymizacji i teorii interesariuszy. Wskazano, w jaki sposób różne poziomy niepewności (niepewność polityki gospodarczej, niepewność biznesowa, niepewność księgowa, niepewność wyników ESG i niepewność atestacji wyników ESG) mogą wpływać na raportowanie korporacyjne, a przez to na proces rozliczalności organizacji. Proponowane podejście normatywne do raportowania zakłada, że sprawozdawczość przedsiębiorstw ma przekształcić się w model bardziej oparty na rozli-czalności, obrazujący niepewności na ich różnych poziomach, co powinno być wspierane przez organizacje raportujące, kontrolerów i regulatorów. Oryginalność/wartość: Z uwagi na brak wyczerpujących badań w przyjętym obszarze badawczym artykuł uzupełnia tę lukę. Artykuł przyczynia się do zrozumienia znaczenia niepewności w sprawozdawczości przedsiębiorstw i jej wpływu na rozliczalność organizacji, oferując tym samym wnioski, które mogą być potencjalnie przydatne zarówno dla teorii, jak i praktyki.

Keywords

EN

accountability; accounting; COVID-19; ESG; financial reporting; inflation; pandemic; sustainability; war; uncertainty

PL

rozliczalność; rachunkowość; COVID-19; ESG; sprawozdawczość finansowa; inflacja; pandemia; zrównoważony rozwój; wojna; niepewność

• Publisher: Stowarzyszenie Księgowych w Polsce (SKwP), Zarząd Główny, Rada Naukowa
• Journal: Zeszyty Teoretyczne Rachunkowości
• Year: 2022
• Issue: 46(4)
• Pages: 161-180

Contributors

author

Zyznarska-Dworczak Beata

• Poznań University of Economics and Business, Poland

References

• Abhayawansa S., Adams C. (2022), Towards a conceptual framework for non-financial reporting inclusive of pandemic and climate risk reporting, “Meditari Accountancy Research”, 30 (3), pp. 710–738, https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-11-2020-1097/FULL/PDF
• Adams C. A., Abhayawansa S. (2022), Connecting the COVID-19 pandemic, environmen-tal, social and governance (ESG) investing and calls for ‘harmonisation’ of sustainability reporting, “Critical Perspectives on Accounting”, 82, article number 102309, https:// doi.org/10.1016/J.CPA.2021.102309.
• Ahsan T., Mirza S. S., Al-Gamrh B., Bin-Feng C., Rao Z.U.R. (2021), How to deal with policy uncertainty to attain sustainable growth: the role of corporate governance, “Corpo-rate Governance (Bingley)”, 21 (1), pp. 78–91, https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-04-2020-0121.
• Albitar K., Gerged A.M., Kikhia H., Hussainey K. (2021), Auditing in times of social dis-tancing: the effect of COVID-19 on auditing quality, “International Journal of Accounting and Information Management”, 29 (1), pp. 169–178, https://doi.org/10.1108/IJAIM-08-2020-0128/FULL/PDF.
• Balata P., Breton G. (2005), Narratives vs Numbers in the Annual Report: Are They Giving the Same Message to the Investors? “Review of Accounting and Finance”, 4 (2), pp. 5–14, https://doi.org/10.1108/EB043421.
• Baldi F., Pandimiglio A. (2022), The role of ESG scoring and greenwashing risk in explain-ing the yields of green bonds: A conceptual framework and an econometric analysis, “Global Finance Journal”, 52, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2022.100711.
• Blois K.J. (1999), Trust in Business to Business Relationships: An Evaluation of its Status, “Journal of Management Studies”, 36 (2), pp. 197–215, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00133.
• Broadstock D.C., Chan K., Cheng L.T.W., Wang X. (2021), The role of ESG performance during times of financial crisis: Evidence from COVID-19 in China, “Finance Research Letters”, 38, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2020.101716.
• Chen C., Stratopoulos T.C., Wang V.X., Xing B. (2022), Do Firms Provide Informative Dis-closures in An Environment of Extreme Uncertainty? Evidence from the COVID-19 Pan-demic, “SSRN Electronic Journal”, https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.4004649.
• Chen H., Liu S., Liu X., Wang J. (2022), Opportunistic timing of management earnings forecasts during the COVID-19 crisis in China, “Accounting Finance”, 62 (S1), pp. 1495–1533, https://doi.org/10.1111/ACFI.12830.
• Crovini C., Schaper S., Simoni L. (2022), Dynamic accountability and the role of risk reporting during a global pandemic, “Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal”, 35 (1), pp. 169–185, https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2020-4793.
• Czaja-Cieszyńska H., Kordela D., Zyznarska-Dworczak B. (2021), How to make corporate social disclosures comparable? “Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues”, 9 (2), pp. 268–288, https://doi.org/10.9770/JESI.2021.9.2(18).
• De Villiers C., Molinari M. (2022), How to communicate and use accounting to ensure buy-in from stakeholders: lessons for organizations from governments’ COVID-19 strategies, “Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal”, 35 (1), pp. 20–34, https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2020-4791.
• Deegan C., Blomquist C. (2006), Stakeholder influence on corporate reporting: An explo-ration of the interaction between WWF-Australia and the Australian minerals indus-try, “Accounting, Organizations and Society”, 31 (4–5), pp. 343–372, https://doi.org/10. 1016/J.AOS.2005.04.001.
• Deloitte (2022), Need to know – Financial reporting considerations related to the Russia-Ukraine War, https://dart.deloitte.com/USDART/pdf/24ac2849-a0c0-11ec-a060-27d72b6db404.
• Dhole S., Liu L., Lobo G. J., Mishra S. (2021), Economic policy uncertainty and financial statement comparability, “Journal of Accounting and Public Policy”, 40 (1), article num-ber 106800, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JACCPUBPOL.2020.106800.
• Diwekar U. et al. (2021), A perspective on the role of uncertainty in sustainability science and engineering, “Resources, Conservation and Recycling”, 164, article number 105140, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RESCONREC.2020.105140.
• Du N., McEnroe J.E., Stevens K. (2014), The joint effects of management incentive and information precision on perceived reliability in fair value estimates, “Accounting Research Journal”, 27 (2), pp. 188–206, https://doi.org/10.1108/ARJ-10-2012-0081/FULL/PDF.
• Dyczkowska J., Krasodomska J., Robertson F. (2022), The role of integrated reporting in communicating adherence to stakeholder capitalism principles during the COVID-19 pandemic, “Meditari Accountancy Research”, 30 (7), pp. 147–184, https://doi.org/10.11 08/MEDAR-07-2021-1381.
• Einhorn E. (2007), Voluntary disclosure under uncertainty about the reporting objective, “Journal of Accounting and Economics”, 43 (2–3), pp. 245–274, https://doi.org/10.1016 /J.JACCECO.2007.03.001.
• El Ghoul S., Guedhami O., Kim Y., Yoon H. J. (2021), Policy uncertainty and accounting quality, “Accounting Review”, 96 (4), pp. 233–260, https://doi.org/10.2308/TAR-2018-0057.
• Epstein M.J., Buhovac A.R. (2006), The Reporting of Organizational Risks for Internal and External Decision-Making, The Society of Management Accountants of Canada and The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
• Fernando S., Lawrence S. (2014), A Theoretical Framework For CSR Practices: Integrating Legitimacy Theory, Stakeholder Theory And Institutional Theory, “The Journal of Theo-retical Accounting Research”, 10 (1), pp. 149–178, https://www.proquest.com/openview/ 8191f6e45b88654284c54ae65135ab41/1?pq-origsite=gscholarcbl=28068.
• Heidhues E., Patel C. (2012), The influence of uncertainty avoidance on accountants’ mate-riality judgments: A cross-cultural study of German and Italian accountants, “Studies in Managerial and Financial Accounting”, 23, pp. 123–149, https://doi.org/10.1108/S147 9-3512 (2012)0000023010/FULL/EPUB.
• Hoque Z. (2005), Linking environmental uncertainty to non-financial performance measures and performance: a research note, “The British Accounting Review”, 37 (4), pp. 471–481, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BAR.2005.08.003.
• Hsu Y.L., Yang Y.C. (2022), Corporate governance and financial reporting quality during the COVID-19 pandemic, “Finance Research Letters”, 47, article number 102778, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FRL.2022.102778.
• Huang D.Z.-X. (2021), An integrated theory of the firm approach to environmental, social and governance performance, “Accounting and Finance”, 62 (S1), pp. 1567–1598, https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12832.
• Kaplan R., Soonawalla K., Stroehle J. (2021), How to avoid greenwashing through au-dits? A framework for social and environmental assurance, Sbs.Ox.Ac.Uk, 1–12, https://www.sbs.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2021-09/Paper%202.%20How%20to%20av oid%20greenwashing%20through%20audits.pdf.
• Kizil C., Akman V., Muzır E. (2021), COVID-19 Epidemic: A New Arena of Financial Fraud? “SSRN Electronic Journal”, https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3899275.
• Klimczak K.M., Dynel M., Pikos A.M. (2016), Goodwill Disclosures under Uncertainty: Poland, “SSRN Electronic Journal”, https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2655525.
• Kocmanová A., Dočekalová M.P., Meluzín T., Škapa S. (2020), Sustainable investing model for decision makers (Based on research of manufacturing industry in the Czech Republic), “Sustainability (Switzerland)”, 12 (20), pp. 1–27, https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208342.
• Krasodomska J., Simnett R., Street D.L. (2021), Extended external reporting assurance: Current practices and challenges, “Journal of International Financial Management & Accounting”, 32, pp.104–142, https://doi.org/10.1111/jifm.12127.
• Krasodomska J., Zarzycka E. (2020), Key performance indicators disclosure in the context of the EU directive: when does stakeholder pressure matter? “Meditari Accountancy Re-search”, 29 (7), pp. 1–30, https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-05-2020-0876/FULL/PDF.
• Lau C.K. (2021), Measurement uncertainty and management bias in accounting estimates: the perspective of key audit matters reported by Chinese firms’ auditors, “Asian Review of Accounting”, 29 (1), pp. 79–95, https://doi.org/10.1108/ARA-07-2020-0109/FULL/PDF.
• Leung S., Parker L., Courtis J. (2015), Impression management through minimal narrative disclosure in annual reports, “The British Accounting Review”, 47 (3), pp. 275–289, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BAR.2015.04.002.
• Mäkelä H., Cho C.H. (2022), Calls for accountability and sustainability: how organiza-tions respond, [in:] Adams C. A. (ed.), Handbook of Accounting and Sustainability Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, Cheltenham-Northampton, MA, pp. 89–108, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4337/ 9781800373518.00012.
• Masztalerz M. (2016), Why narratives in accounting? “Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Eko-nomicznego we Wrocławiu”, 434, pp. 99–107, https://doi.org/10.15611/pn.2016.434.10.
• Milne M.J. (2002), Positive accounting theory, political costs And social disclosure analyses: a critical look, “Critical Perspectives on Accounting”, 13 (3), pp. 369–395, https://doi.org/ 10.1006/CPAC.2001.0509
• Ozili P.K. (2020), Financial reporting under economic policy uncertainty, “Journal of Finan-cial Reporting and Accounting”, 19 (2), pp. 325–338, https://doi.org/10.1108/JFRA-08-2020-0242.
• Palthe J. (2014), Regulative, Normative, and Cognitive Elements of Organizations: Implica-tions for Managing Change, “Management and Organizational Studies”, 1 (2), p. 59, https://doi.org/10.5430/MOS.V1N2P59.
• Procházka, D. (2011), The role of fair value measurement in the recent financial crunch, “Economics, Management and Financial Markets”, 6 (1), pp. 989–1001.
• Reber B., Gold A., Gold S. (2021), ESG Disclosure and Idiosyncratic Risk in Initial Public Offerings, “Journal of Business Ethics”, 16 (8), pp. 855–865, https://doi.org/10.1007/s105 51-021-04847-8.
• Rjiba H., Jahmane A., Abid I. (2020), Corporate social responsibility and firm value: Guid-ing through economic policy uncertainty, “Finance Research Letters”, 35, article number 101553, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FRL.2020.101553.
• Rowe W.D. (1994), Understanding Uncertainty, “Risk Analysis”, 14 (5), pp. 743–750.
• Shaikh I. (2021), On the relationship between policy uncertainty and sustainable investing, “Journal of Modelling in Management”, 17 (4), pp. 1504–1523, https://doi.org/10.1108/J M2-12-2020-0320.
• Simon J. (2010), Interpretation of probability expressions by financial directors and audi-tors of UK companies, “European Accounting Review”, 11 (3), pp. 601–629, https:// doi.org/10.1080/09638180220125599.
• Wellalage N.H., Kumar V., Hunjra A.I., Al-Faryan M.A.S. (2022), Environmental perfor-mance and firm financing during COVID-19 outbreaks: Evidence from SMEs, “Finance Research Letters”, 47, article number 102568, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FRL.2021.102568.
• Zharfpeykan R., Ng F. (2020), COVID-19 and sustainability reporting: what are the roles of reporting frameworks in a crisis?, “Pacific Accounting Review”, 33 (2), pp. 189–198, https://doi.org/10.1108/PAR-09-2020-0169.
• Zhu X., Ao X., Qin Z., Chang Y., Liu Y., He Q., Li J. (2021), Intelligent financial fraud de-tection practices in post-pandemic era, “The Innovation”, 2 (4), article number 100176, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.XINN.2021.100176.
• Zyznarska-Dworczak B. (2018a), Accounting Theories Towards Non-Financial Reporting, “Studia Ekonomiczne Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Katowicach. Współczesne Finanse”, 13 (356), pp. 157–169.
• Zyznarska-Dworczak B. (2018b), Legitimacy Theory in Management Accounting Research, “Problemy Zarządzania”, 16 (17[72], cz. 1), pp. 195–203, https://doi.org/10.7172/16449584.72.12.
• Zyznarska-Dworczak B. (2019), The impact of the accountability on accounting development as the essence of sustainability accounting, “Problems of Management in the 21st Cen-tury”, 14 (1), pp. 73–83, 3, https://doi.org/10.33225/PMC/19.14.73.
• Zyznarska-Dworczak B. (2020), Sustainability accounting-cognitive and conceptual approach, “Sustainability (Switzerland)”, 12 (23), pp. 1–24, https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12239936.
• Zyznarska-Dworczak B., Mamić Sačer I., Mokošová D. (2020), Accounting systems in Croatia, Poland, and Slovakia – a comparative study, “Zeszyty Teoretyczne Rachunkowości”, 109 (165), pp. 193–214, https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=906427.
• Zyznarska-Dworczak B., Rudžionienė K. (2022), Corporate COVID-19-Related Risk Disclo-sure in the Electricity Sector: Evidence of Public Companies from Central and Eastern Europe, “Energies”, 15 (16), 5810, https://doi.org/10.3390/EN15165810.
• ACFE (2022), Managing Fraud Risks in an Evolving ESG Environment. The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, https://www.acfe.com/fraud-resources/esg-report-gt-2022 (access 20.06.2022).
• Ciuffo B., Miola A., Punzo V., Sala S., European Commission (2012), Dealing with uncer-tainty in sustainability assessment, Report on the application of different sensitivity analysis techniques to field specific simulation models. Joint Research Centre. Institute for Environment and Sustainability, European Commission, https://doi.org/10.2788/5639, https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC68035/lbna25166enn.pdf (access 20.06.2022).
• IAASA (2020), Reporting the Impact of COVID-19. Information Note. Financial Reporting Supervision. http://www.iaasa.ie/getmedia/1d9145b3-ae50-499a-bcc8-3451be949053/Info-Note-COVID-19-final.pdf (access 11.06.2022).
• KPMG (2021), Sustainability reporting during COVID-19 Pandemic, https://assets.kpmg/ content/dam/kpmg/in/pdf/2020/05/sustainability-reporting-during-covid-19-pandemic.pdf (access 20.06.2022).
• Levi M., Smith R.G., Brown R. (2021), Fraud and its relationship to pandemics and eco-nomic crises: From Spanish flu to COVID-19, Australian Institute of Criminology, https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/141831/1/Fraud%20pandemics%20and%20economic%20crises%20final.pdf (access 20.06.2022).
• Marsh D. (2022), Evaluating ESG and pandemic risk reporting trends, FTSE 100 and Global Exchanges Risk Analysis 2021, https://www.marsh.com/es/en/risks/climate-change-sustainability/insights/evaluating-esg-and-pandemic-risk-reporting-trends.html (access 20.06.2022).
• PWC (2020), Accountability in time of uncertainty, https://www.pwc.co.uk/audit-assurance/ assets/pdf/accountability-in-time-of-uncertainty.pdf (access 20.06.2022).
• SEC (2021), Measurement uncertainty in financial reporting: how much to recognize and how best to communicate it, https://www.sec.gov/about/offices/oca/ocafrseries-briefing-measurement.htm (access 20.06.2022).