This paper presents the case for the sustainability reporting field as a contested arena and examines the behavior and the influence of the various actors, such as the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB), the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC), and the European Commission, including the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) and the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation in influencing the shape of the regulation in the arena. Drawing on the arena concept and documentary analysis, this study explores the dynamic in which each actor is attempting to change the rules within the arena and how this contributes to the harmonization and future direction of sustainability reporting. The findings of this study show that the actions and behavior of the various actors are premeditated and strategically calculated to maintain their influence, relevance, and defend their technical authority in the arena. The findings also suggest that sustainability reporting regulation is still far away from harmonization due to the perceived hegemony in the arena, and diversity in the overarching objective of the various actors and the inability of each actor to renounce its particular perspective and orientation. Insights are provided for policy makers on the urgent need to decide and reclassify the specific rules required in upholding the sustainability reporting arena.

Extant studies have investigated the relation between corporate social responsibility (CSR) endeavours and earnings quality based on monotonic models, showing mixed and inconclusive empirical evidence. By identifying heterogeneity in CSR investments, we extend prior literature to explore the potentially nonmonotonic nature of this relation. Specifically, we classify firms into two sub-groups, entities underinvesting and overinvesting in CSR activities, in which the levels of CSR investments are lower and higher than the theoretically optimal point respectively. Our empirical results show that the level of CSR underinvestment is positively associated with the magnitude of both accrual-based earnings management (AEM) and real earnings management (REM) and, hence, negatively related to earnings quality. For firms overinvesting in CSR activities, we do not find a significant relation between CSR overinvestment and AEM. The empirical analyses for real activities manipulation exhibit inconsistent results throughout our four REM proxies. However, the mixed evidence for firms with CSR overinvestment cannot fully exclude the possibility that overinvesting in CSR activities has a significant impact on future financial reporting quality. Varying incentives for CSR overinvestment in different firms could drive the inconsistent results. The positive effect of CSR overinvestment by some firms may offset the negative effect brought about by other entities, making the overall effect minor and unnoticeable. Our empirical results, together with some other CSR-related research, emphasise the need for more transparent reporting regarding the detailed nature, aim, and strategy of relevant CSR investments to help investing communities and other constituents better understand the incentives behind CSR activities.

The purpose of this research is to provide an account of whether extinction accounting and the use of IUCN categories offers a valuable and feasible addition to biodiversity disclosures for an organisation that has a professional interest in conservation programmes. Specifically, when and where IUCN categories can be used as biodiversity disclosures to address the threat of extinction. This study is based on a single anomalous case a Nordic zoo, located in Sweden, which has focused its operations exclusively on the conservation of threatened species and is the only zoo in Europe to do so. In order to comprehend the use of IUCN categories the annual report and the corporate website of Nordic Zoo have been examined. An open-ended interview with zoo management has been conducted to learn the intentions behind such specific disclosures and the use of IUCN categories. The findings of this study reveal that IUCN categories are appropriate biodiversity disclosures for highlighting extinction threats to various species. In an organisation with a professional interest in practicing conservation programmes, IUCN categories play a central role in communicating with stakeholders. This study demonstrates that biodiversity disclosures are part of a sincere effort to report on conservation.

There is no one-size-fits-all sustainability reporting model in practice. However, it is critical to understand the design of the model to ensure there is no room for manipulation by vested interests and to ensure the reported information has qualitative attributes. This study aims to explore the implementation of sustainability reporting model in the Malaysian palm oil industry. Specifically, it focuses on: (i) identifying the reporting entities and the reports they use to present information to stakeholders, including the forms, channels and scopes of such reports, and (ii) exploring the qualitative attributes of reported information, including the model limitations and challenges that can impede progress towards full transparency within this industry. Utilising a qualitative approach, this study reveals that the Malaysian palm oil industry exhibits a complex sustainability reporting model existing at both micro and macro levels, explicable through complex adaptive system theory.