Search results

New Space activities offer benefits for human progress and life beyond the Earth. However, there is a risk that the New Space Economy may develop according to an anthropocentric mindset favouring human progress and survival at the expense of all other species and the environment. This mindset raises concerns over the social and environmental impacts of space activities and the accountability of space actors. This research article explores the accountability of space actors by presenting a pluralistic accountability framework to understand, inspire and change accountability in the New Space Economy. This study also identifies future research opportunities.

This paper is a reflective and normative essay. The arguments are developed using contemporary multidisciplinary academic literature, publicly available evidence and examples. Further, the authors use Dillard and Vinnari's accountability framework to examine a pluralistic accountability system for space businesses.

The New Space Economy requires public and private entities to embrace hybrid and pluralistic accountability for their social and environmental impacts. A new way of seeing the relationship between human life, the Earth and celestial space is needed. Accounting language is used to mirror and mobilise broader forms of responsibility in those involved in space.

This paper responds to the AAAJ's special issue call for examining how accountability can be ensured in the New Space Age. The space activities businesses conduct, and the anthropocentric view inspiring their race toward space is concerning. Hence, the authors advocate the need for rethinking accountability between humans and nature. The paper contributes to fostering the debate on social and environmental accounting and the accountability of space actors in the New Space Economy. To this end, the authors use a pluralistic accountability framework to help understand how the New Space Economy can face the risks emanating from its anthropocentric mindset.

This study aims to investigate the impact of diverse practices in sustainability reporting and assurance on the disclosure of sustainable development goals (SDGs). Specifically, the authors examine the disclosure of SDGs along two dimensions: disclosure breadth, denoting the number of goals mentioned, and disclosure depth, encompassing the extent of actions disclosed to advance these goals.

Using a panel Tobit regression analysis, the authors analyse the communication on progress questionnaires from 299 companies (resulting in 1,015 firm-year observations) participating in the United Nations Global Compact from 2017 to 2021.

The findings revealed that greater adherence to Global Reporting Initiative standards increases SDG disclosure breadth; external assurance using publicly recognised standards, more than proprietary methods, is associated with SDG disclosure breadth and depth; and the review of information by multiple stakeholders improves the depth of SDG disclosure more than evaluation by a panel of peers.

The originality of this study lies in its examination of the intricate interplay between sustainability disclosure and assurance practices, on the one hand, and the disclosure of SDGs, on the other. Uniquely, the authors consider the various levels of implementation of these practices, allowing for a comprehensive assessment of their influence on SDG disclosure.

This paper aims to investigate the application of the Italian Banking Association (ABI) industry-specific reporting standard in microfinance institutions by determining whether or not a banking sector reporting standard can enhance non-financial reporting (NFR) quality and volume to meet stakeholders’ information needs in the specific setting investigated.

This paper develops an analysis of available ABI documents from 2006 to 2013 to conduct a content analysis of the quality and volume of the NFR of 98 Italian cooperative banks (CBs) during the 2008–2009 ABI implementation year. These data are analysed using two regression models to investigate the quality and volume of NFR disclosures.

The findings suggest that for CBs in the Italian banking sector, the information provided in the non-financial reports in adherence to the ABI sector reporting standard is relevant in terms of both volume and quality. However, when investigating specific categories of disclosure such as the community, the relevance of the ABI reporting standard is fairly low. The authors question the “one-size-fits-all” approach favouring a more sector-tailored approach to ensure that the NFR covers key sectoral concerns.

The high heterogeneity in the sector could negatively affect the capability of sector-specific standards to truly foster reliable, complete and extensive NFR. Therefore, NFR standard-setters, such as the International Sustainability Standards Board, should consider these heterogeneities.

Reporting standardisation should be multi-voiced and include different – even contrasting – perspectives to promote expert and non-expert engagements.

This paper focuses on hybrid organisations and shows how the theoretical approach of dialogic accountability can improve the quality of sector-specific reporting standards.

The purpose of this paper is to understand whether and how the Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) paradigm can be useful in social reporting in the context of nonprofit healthcare organizations. In other words, the study deals with non-financial reporting and information, allowing external stakeholders to comprehensively evaluate the organization’s performance and behavior, investigating internal stakeholder perception over ESG paradigm application.

The authors used a case study approach investigating four cases among nonprofit healthcare organizations in Italy. Analyses of available primary sources have been conducted, followed by semi-structured interviews. Interviews were then transcribed and coded in a joint blinded process by all authors. More specifically, three areas have been investigated: (1) factors motivating the development of non-financial disclosure practices; (2) the rationale behind the organization’s decision to include specific topics; and (3) the future perspective on the future of non-financial disclosure within the specific sector.

ESG may serve as a suitable framework to create comparable documents that can act as benchmarks for similar institutions. However, while nonprofit organizations (NPOs) can draw inspiration from ESG, the utility of these criteria should be thoughtfully tailored to align with the organization’s mission. The ESG using as a general guide, instead of implementing it as a real tool to assess performances, emerges as a positive practice. NPOs should not focus on fulfilling ESG requirements bur rather take inspiration from them. Otherwise, the risk is an excess of focus on the formal aspect rather than on its content.

The study contributes to a better understanding of social and ESG’ reporting activities and approaches in the healthcare sector by describing some case studies and the effect of sustainability in the social reporting of nonprofit healthcare organizations.

The debate about whether corporate reports should focus on numbers or narrative is long-standing. The recent push for business model information to be included in corporate reports has revitalised the debate. Many scholars suggest this constitutes a move towards narrative-based reporting. This study aims to investigate the debate and draws a comparison with the juxtaposition of the narrative and rational paradigms. This study also investigates how accountingisation influences the way business model information is presented in corporate reports.

This study analyses data from the financial and non-financial reports from 86 globally listed companies. This study first uses content analysis to code the data. This study then uses a partial least squares-structural equation model to test how accountingisation influences how firms report their business model information.

This study finds that accountingisation and a rational paradigm shape how companies present information about their business model in their financial and non-financial reports. This suggests that the dominance of quantitative measures in accounting affects even the presentation of narrative-based information. Despite the much-touted shift towards qualitative reporting, this study argues that companies find it difficult to cast off the yoke of a traditional numbers-based mindset.

This paper contributes to the debate on numbers- versus narrative-based corporate reporting and the workings of narrative and rational paradigms. In it, this study lays out theoretical and empirical findings of accountingisation. This study also makes a case for freeing corporate reports from the shackles of an accountingisation mindset.

This study provides new insights into how companies report information about their business models and the influence of narrative and rational paradigms on financial and non-financial reporting.