IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sorede/v34y2023i5d10.1134_s1075700723050027.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

New Information in Financial Disclosures Related to Sustainable Development in the Concept of ESG (Version IFRS)

Author

Listed:
  • M. P. Afanasiev

    (Institute of Economic Forecasting, Russian Academy of Sciences)

  • N. N. Shash

    (Plekhanov Russian Economic University)

Abstract

— The article deals with the formation of financial and nonfinancial reporting within the process of convergence of global financial reporting systems US GAAP and IFRS. The results of a comparative analysis of the main concepts of nonfinancial reporting systems in the corporate sector of the economy are given. Based on the results of the content analysis, the main barriers were identified that hinder the introduction of nonfinancial accounting and nonfinancial reporting systems in the corporate sector within the framework of global financial reporting systems. Based on the analysis of official statistical information, it was concluded that in Russia there is a global trend, reflecting a slight decrease in the number of submitted corporate nonfinancial reports. It is substantiated that the formation of uniform standards for the nonfinancial reporting system, which will be able to most fully reflect the industry specifics of companies, will not only improve the quality of the reporting documentation provided and its comparability, but will also allow the use of nonfinancial information in business practice, forming new progressive business models focused on sustainable development and the most complete consideration of ESG principles in activities. It was revealed that the main obstacle to sustainable corporate behavior following the ESG principles is a flexible approach, since its application does not form real incentives for a more effective corporate policy in the field of sustainable development. It is concluded that in the current conditions, attention should be focused on the preparation of unified nonfinancial reporting standards integrated into existing global and national financial reporting systems. It has been proved that a separate emphasis should be placed on the formation of a regulatory framework for the inclusion of metrics and indicators that evaluate the results of a company’s activities in the field of sustainable development in public corporate nonfinancial reporting.

Suggested Citation

  • M. P. Afanasiev & N. N. Shash, 2023. "New Information in Financial Disclosures Related to Sustainable Development in the Concept of ESG (Version IFRS)," Studies on Russian Economic Development, Springer, vol. 34(5), pages 696-703, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:sorede:v:34:y:2023:i:5:d:10.1134_s1075700723050027
    DOI: 10.1134/S1075700723050027
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1134/S1075700723050027
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1134/S1075700723050027?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Glen Lehman & Sanjaya Chinthana Kuruppu, 2017. "A framework for social and environmental accounting research," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(3), pages 139-146, September.
    2. Rob Gray & Andrew Brennan & Jeff Malpas, 2014. "New accounts: Towards a reframing of social accounting," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(4), pages 258-273, December.
    3. Markus Milne & Rob Gray, 2013. "W(h)ither Ecology? The Triple Bottom Line, the Global Reporting Initiative, and Corporate Sustainability Reporting," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 118(1), pages 13-29, November.
    4. Deegan, Craig, 2017. "Twenty five years of social and environmental accounting research within Critical Perspectives of Accounting: Hits, misses and ways forward," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 65-87.
    5. Andreas Christofi & Petros Christofi & Seleshi Sisaye, 2012. "Corporate sustainability: historical development and reporting practices," Management Research Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 35(2), pages 157-172, January.
    6. Filippo Vitolla & Nicola Raimo & Michele Rubino, 2019. "Appreciations, criticisms, determinants, and effects of integrated reporting: A systematic literature review," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 518-528, March.
    7. Roger L. Burritt & Stefan Schaltegger, 2010. "Sustainability accounting and reporting: fad or trend?," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 23(7), pages 829-846, September.
    8. Gray, Rob & Brennan, Andrew & Malpas, Jeff, 2014. "New accounts: Towards a reframing of social accounting," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 258-273.
    9. Lehman, Glen, 2017. "The language of environmental and social accounting research: The expression of beauty and truth," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 30-41.
    10. John Dumay & Cristiana Bernardi & James Guthrie & Paola Demartini, 2016. "Integrated reporting: A structured literature review," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(3), pages 166-185, September.
    11. Max Baker & Stefan Schaltegger, 2015. "Pragmatism and new directions in social and environmental accountability research," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 28(2), pages 263-294, February.
    12. Anne B. Fosbre & Ellen M. Kraft & Paul B. Fosbre, 2009. "The Globalization Of Accounting Standards : Ifrs Versus Us Gaap," Global Journal of Business Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 3(1), pages 61-71.
    13. Ikenna Elias Asogwa & Maria Estela Varua & Peter Humphreys & Rina Datt, 2021. "Understanding Sustainability Reporting in Non-Governmental Organisations: A Systematic Review of Reporting Practices, Drivers, Barriers and Paths for Future Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-26, September.
    14. Marianne Bradford & Julia B. Earp & Paul F. Williams, 2017. "Understanding sustainability for socially responsible investing and reporting," Journal of Capital Markets Studies, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 1(1), pages 10-35, October.
    15. Ivete Delai & Sérgio Takahashi, 2011. "Sustainability measurement system: a reference model proposal," Social Responsibility Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 7(3), pages 438-471, August.
    16. Rob Gray, 2016. "Reading for Displeasure: Why Bother with Social Accounting at All?," Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(2), pages 153-161, May.
    17. Matthias S. Fifka, 2013. "Corporate Responsibility Reporting and its Determinants in Comparative Perspective – a Review of the Empirical Literature and a Meta‐analysis," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(1), pages 1-35, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nuradhi Kalpani Jayasiri & Sriyalatha Kumarasinghe & Rakesh Pandey, 2023. "12 years of integrated reporting: A review of research," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(2), pages 2187-2243, June.
    2. Bigoni, Michele & Mohammed, Sideeq, 2023. "Critique is unsustainable: A polemic," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    3. Hao Yang & Laura Le Luo & Asit Bhattacharyya, 2021. "Mandatory Environmental Reporting in Australia: An In‐depth Analysis of Quantity and Quality," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 57(4), pages 737-779, December.
    4. Vinnari, Eija & Dillard, Jesse, 2016. "(ANT)agonistics: Pluralistic politicization of, and by, accounting and its technologies," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 25-44.
    5. Andrea Cardoni & Evgeniia Kiseleva & Paolo Taticchi, 2020. "In Search of Sustainable Value: A Structured Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-18, January.
    6. George, Sendirella & Brown, Judy & Dillard, Jesse, 2023. "Social movement activists’ conceptions of political action and counter-accounting through a critical dialogic accounting and accountability lens," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    7. Cuckston, Thomas, 2018. "Creating financial value for tropical forests by disentangling people from nature," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 219-234.
    8. Tweedie, Jonathan, 2023. "The emancipatory potential of counter accounting: A Žižekian critique," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    9. Chakhovich, Terhi & Virtanen, Tuija, 2023. "Accountability for sustainability – An institutional entrepreneur as the representative of future stakeholders," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    10. Charl de Villiers & Jing Jia & Zhongtian Li, 2022. "Corporate social responsibility: A review of empirical research using Thomson Reuters Asset4 data," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(4), pages 4523-4568, December.
    11. Stefania Veltri & Antonella Silvestri, 2020. "The value relevance of corporate financial and nonfinancial information provided by the integrated report: A systematic review," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 3038-3054, December.
    12. Mohammed S. Y. Omran & Mohammad A. A. Zaid & Aladdin Dwekat, 2021. "The relationship between integrated reporting and corporate environmental performance: A green trial," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(1), pages 427-445, January.
    13. Clément Feger & Laurent Mermet, 2017. "A blueprint towards accounting for the management of ecosystems," Post-Print hal-01930913, HAL.
    14. Ikenna Elias Asogwa & Maria Estela Varua & Peter Humphreys & Rina Datt, 2021. "Understanding Sustainability Reporting in Non-Governmental Organisations: A Systematic Review of Reporting Practices, Drivers, Barriers and Paths for Future Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-26, September.
    15. C. Feger & Laurent Mermet, 2021. "Advances in accounting for biodiversity and ecosystems: a typology focusing upon the environmental results imperative [Innovations comptables pour la biodiversité et les écosystèmes : une typologie," Post-Print hal-02549016, HAL.
    16. Islam, Muhammad Azizul & Deegan, Craig & Haque, Shamima, 2021. "Corporate human rights performance and moral power: A study of retail MNCs’ supply chains in Bangladesh," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    17. Francesco Badia & Grazia Dicuonzo & Saverio Petruzzelli & Vittorio Dell’Atti, 2019. "Integrated reporting in action: mobilizing intellectual capital to improve management and governance practices," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 23(2), pages 299-320, June.
    18. Saddam A. Hazaea & Ebrahim Mohammed Al-Matari & Khaled Zedan & Saleh F. A. Khatib & Jinyu Zhu & Hamzeh Al Amosh, 2022. "Green Purchasing: Past, Present and Future," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-28, April.
    19. Patrick Velte & Martin Stawinoga, 2017. "Empirical research on corporate social responsibility assurance (CSRA): A literature review," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 87(8), pages 1017-1066, November.
    20. María Luisa Pajuelo Moreno & Teresa Duarte-Atoche, 2019. "Relationship between Sustainable Disclosure and Performance—An Extension of Ullmann’s Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-33, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:sorede:v:34:y:2023:i:5:d:10.1134_s1075700723050027. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.