Flattening or addressing complexity? The future role of GRI in light of the sustainability accounting (r)evolution

Caterina Pesci · Paola Vola · Lorenzo Gelmini

23 citations0/0 files storedSustainability Accounting Management and Policy Journal

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting Accounting Theory and Financial Reporting Accounting and Financial Management

Abstract

Purpose This paper discusses the evolution of sustainability reporting and the role of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) in relation to the social and environmental accounting (SEA) literature calling for a revolution in the standardization of sustainability reporting and the inherent complexities. This paper focuses on the future role of GRI in light of the changes resulting from harmonization supported by the International Sustainability Standards Board and the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group’s draft European Sustainability Reporting Directive. Design/methodology/approach Building on Bourdieu (1983, 1992) and SEA studies, the authors adopt a critical and qualitative approach to theorize power dynamics in the sustainability reporting field. After identifying the main issues arising from the complexity of the sustainability reporting standards and practices according to SEA scholars, the authors connect them with Bourdieu’s (1992, 1983) field theory to discuss the future role of GRI. Findings The findings suggest two distinct but intertwined roles that GRI could play in the future, namely, power related and theoretical/technical, aimed at engendering revolutionary rather than evolutionary changes in sustainability reporting. Practical implications This study offers practical implications for GRI to strengthen its future role in sustainability reporting standardization. Social implications The limited time available to mitigate the disastrous consequences of non-sustainable business on society and the environment calls for urgently addressing the complexities of sustainability accounting to foster a positive impact on society and the environment. Originality/value The authors’ reflections reclaim the SEA literature as central to identifying sustainability complexity and Bourdieu’s (1983, 1992) notions of power as key to understanding the role of GRI in the sustainability field. Furthermore, this paper emphasizes the intersection of different critical concepts, including power, complexity, value, capital and materiality.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 23 citations exist upstream.

References

2016Corporate Sustainability: First Evidence on Materiality 2006The role of environmental disclosures as tools of legitimacy: A research note 1983The field of cultural production, or: The economic world reversed 2009Is accounting for sustainability actually accounting for sustainability…and how would we know? An exploration of narratives of organisations and the planet 2012W(h)ither Ecology? The Triple Bottom Line, the Global Reporting Initiative, and Corporate Sustainability Reporting 2015Organized hypocrisy, organizational façades, and sustainability reporting 2002The social accounting project and Accounting Organizations and Society Privileging engagement, imaginings, new accountings and pragmatism over critique?2004The ethical, social and environmental reporting‐performance portrayal gap

Cited by

2024An Overview of Corporate Sustainability Reporting Legislation in the European Union

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.