In 2022, the European Commission adopted a new directive that requires companies to report annually on sustainability in an attempt to reduce the environmental impact from companies around the world. The directive will apply to all large companies, a number of smaller companies and will indirectly affect companies in the entire value chain, including suppliers. This study aims to see how suppliers in a value chain are affected when new legislation is implemented on their customers. The study will also examine how the suppliers have historically chosen to work to adapt to sustainability requirements and to increase their competitiveness. Semi-structured interviews have been conducted to gather information about what affect the suppliers expected. An inductive analysis of the empirical material has been carried out and then compared to previous research in the area. The result shows that the suppliers see the directive as a positive development of sustainability and expect only a minor negative impact on resources such as time, finances and believe that a lack of knowledge can be an obstacle in the work. The suppliers also experienced that they historically had to adapt to the sustainability demands of customers, which has led to an increase in their competitiveness and secured the future of the companies. / År 2022 antog EU ett nytt direktiv som handlar om att företag krävs hållbarhetsrapportera årligen i ett försök att minska den miljöpåverkan som företag runt om i världen har. Direktivet kommer att gälla för alla stora företag, ett antal av de mindre företag och kommer indirekt att påverka företag i hela värdekedjan däribland leverantörer. Denna studie syftar till att se hur leverantörer i en värdekedja påverkas när nya lagstiftningar implementeras hos deras kunder som berörs av direktivet. Studien kommer även att undersöka hur leverantörerna historiskt valt att arbeta för att anpassa sig till hållbarhetskrav och för att öka sin konkurrenskraft. Semistrukturerade intervjuer har genomförts för att samla in information om hur leverantörer upplever att de påverkas. En induktiv analys av det empiriska materialet har genomförts och sedan jämförts mot tidigare forskning på området. Resultatet visar att leverantörerna ser direktivet som en positiv utveckling av hållbarhetsarbete och förväntar sig endast mindre negativ påverkan på resurser som tid, ekonomi och anser att även en kunskapsbrist kan vara ett hinder i arbetet. Leverantörerna har också upplevt att de historiskt har behövt anpassa sig till hållbarhetskrav från kunder, vilket har lett till en ökning av deras konkurrenskraft och säkrat företagens framtid.

Abstract Background: The European Commission has released the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) to make Europe the first climate-neutral continent, targeting a 55% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. The directive shifts sustainability reporting from a voluntary to mandatory framework, significantly expanding the range of companies to report. The implementation has gradually started in 2024.   Purpose: The study aims to investigate how Swedish consultancy firms are implementing the CSRD regulations among their clients and how the new regulations are communicated. Understanding this implementation phase can provide insights to manage stakeholder relationships and institutional pressure to remain competitive.  Method: Adopting an interpretivist paradigm, this case study uses Stakeholder and Institutional Theory to explore CSRD implementation among consultancy firms, clients, and other stakeholders. Qualitative interviews were conducted, followed by thematic analysis to identify key mechanisms for implementing the new reporting standards. Conclusion: The findings conclude that sustainability reporting has transitioned from a strategic choice to an institutional requirement. Companies now depend on sustainability consultants to develop strategies for complying with CSRD. Additionally, stakeholder engagement within companies becomes improved with the implementation of CSRD.

As required by the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) of the European Union, this thesis thoroughly examines the transition in corporate sustainability reporting from limited to reasonable assurance. The directive is being implemented at a crucial time as companies are progressively incorporating environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors into their core operating and reporting practices. The CSRD is intended to improve sustainability disclosures’ comparability, credibility and reliability. It is a legislative response to a larger movement for more corporate accountability and transparency. The study uses a qualitative technique using semi-structured interviews with professionals from leading audit firms. The purpose of these interviews is to provide many aspects of the transition with a particular emphasis on how businesses and audit firms are modifying their operations to comply with the stricter requirements of the CSRD. The study identifies the main factors behind this shift such as increased stakeholder demands for transparency and a changing regulatory environment that makes it necessary to reevaluate current assurance practices.  The study’s important conclusion is that putting reasonable assurance requirements into practice is difficult. Companies must create advanced data management systems that can handle the CSRD’s requirements for an increasing volume of information. In addition to ensuring data accuracy, these systems need to make it easier to analyse and report on the data in a way that complies with the new assurance standards.  Additionally, the shift needs a major improvement in auditor competencies. It is necessary for auditors to have a better understanding of both traditional financial auditing and the specific challenges presented by sustainability reporting. This includes having a thorough understanding of ESG factors and how they affect risk profiles and corporate performance. Hence, the CSRD acts as a catalyst for a significant shift in auditors’ professional development and training, emphasising the necessity to combine sustainability with financial auditing skills.  Strong internal controls are also important, as the research shows. Establishing and maintaining strict internal mechanisms is necessary for businesses to ensure the reliability of their sustainability reports. This involves a thorough review and a redesign of internal processes in order to meet the higher standards of reasonable assurance. These controls are essential for reducing the risks associated with sustainability reporting such errors or misrepresentations which can have a big influence on stakeholder trust and regulatory compliance.  This change has significant implications for society at large. Companies may give stakeholders more reliable and detailed disclosures about their sustainable practices by shifting toward reasonable assurance. This can have a big impact on investment choices and build stakeholder confidence. This shift promotes a more transparent and sustainable corporate environment by supporting the incorporation of ESG factors into core business strategies and by strengthening the credibility of sustainability reports.

Background: In an evolving business landscape, the need for regulations has emerged to foster sustainable business. To ensure that firms are held accountable, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) entered into force in January 2024, encompassing approximately 50,000 firms across Europe. This directive expands upon previous legislation in all conceivable metrics, and has put affected firms under significant pressure, posing implications for organizational change arising from the extensive implementation. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to identify what actions firms are taking to comply with the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and explore how their actions impact their organizational structure. Method: The study was conducted through a qualitative method including semi-structured interviews with eight participants, including HR Managers, Sustainability Managers, and Consultants. Conclusion: The study reveals that the effects on the organizational structure of firms as a consequence of the CSRD primarily involves incremental change. Efforts of coordinating across departments, allocating tasks and establishing supervisory functions emerges as core challenges when transitioning to CSRD compliance. These, in turn constituting structural changes in specialization, functional flexibility, formalization and standardization to accommodate new procedures necessitated by the CSRD. The analysis further highlights the expansion of middle management, support staff and technostructure, as a result of organization wide collaboration.

Med ökat fokus på hållbarhet och samhällsansvar inom företagsvärlden, står Volvokoncernen inför en kommande förändring för att rapportera enligt Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive 2025. Direktivet utvidgar hållbarhetskraven och kräver att företag är mer transparenta än någonsin. Studien utforskar Volvokoncernen med syfte att se hur direktivet påverkar företagets redovisningssystem. Den fördjupar sig i hur de nya kraven påverkar vilken typ av data som samlas in, den utdata som kommer att presenteras i kommande årsredovisningar och de kompetenser som eftersträvas till följd av direktivet. Studien använder sig av en kvalitativ fallstudie som metod, där datainsamlingen består av semistrukturerade intervjuer och dokument. Resultatet understryker att Volvokoncernen först behöver färdigställa sin väsentlighetsbedömning för att följa dubbel väsentlighetskravet innan de kan bestämma vilken ny data som ska inhämtas samt presenteras. Vidare belyses att koncernen ännu inte är tillräckligt mogna för att integrera hållbarhetsdata i sina redovisningssystem. För att uppnå den kompetens som eftersträvas visar resultatet att samarbete och kompetensutveckling mellan företagets avdelningar är centralt.

Sustainability assessment and decision-making is a complex task for companies and considering the new requirements of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, there will be an increased demand on companies to make sure that their impact on the environment and people is assessed. In alignment with these new requirements, this study aims to combine three methods; LCA, S-LCA, and LCC, also known as LCSA, to investigate the environmental-, social- and cost impact of a safety barrier called SVEA. This has been done in collaboration with Ramudden and Worxsafe who are the developers of SVEA. By combining these three methods the goal is to identify hotspots throughout the lifecycle to see where mitigations can be made to make SVEA even more adapted for a ‘green’ future. The environmental hotspots that have been identified are global warming potential and abiotic depletion. These were further interpreted in the discussion which shows that several improvements are possible in the life cycle of SVEA. These improvements are related to the concrete and steel that SVEA consists of. For the S-LCA, several social improvements for health and safety and the gap between employed men/women were further discussed and interpreted. Additionally, a “partial LCC” was applied in order to create an understanding of the possible trade-offs between environmental and social benefits and the cost of different improvement possibilities. The results showed that the suggested improvements can also provide economic advantages. Lastly, one big takeaway from this thesis is that the combination of LCA, S-LCA, and LCC is a promising method to reach a more holistic assessment of the three pillars of sustainable development, which can also help deal with the complexity of the new corporate sustainability reporting directive. However, as noticed when conducting this thesis, more harmonization and standardization of these three methods is still required to create a more effective and valuable implementation for companies and create a bigger foundation for LCSA.

This thesis investigates the intricate relationship between biodiversity and businesses within the regulatory realm. The study will specifically look into new compliances imposed by international organisations such as The Kunming-Montreal Global Framework for Biodiversity, the Biodiversity strategy for 2030 in the European Green Deal and the upcoming Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive. A meticulous literature review and thorough semi-constructed interviews were conducted and combined in the analysis. The research applies an Institutional theory framework and aims to seek the implications of institutional pressures. Furthermore, findings suggest collaboration and the use of external actors such as consultants are of importance in adaption. Challenges found highlight the need for standardised measurements, assistance to handle data and the lack of economic incentives. This study provides insightful findings in understanding how the current and upcoming biodiversity compliance affects businesses in Europe. Future research should focus on specific industry sectors, regions, and business sizes, investigate the dialogue between businesses and regulators, explore how businesses impact their external environment, and examine how they navigate new and unclear regulations.

In its recent surge in popularity, Kate Raworth's Doughnut Economics has garnered significant attention and has been applied on a global, national, and local scale. However, its implementation within organizational settings has yet to be adopted, despite evident interest. This paper delves into the potential application of the Doughnut Model (DM) within an enterprise context, examining both its strengths and limitations stemming from its core structure and principles, as well as the complexities of enterprise environments. By conducting interviews with Länsförsäkringar and another insurance company, this paper seeks to interpret the advantages and limitations of integrating the DM into organizational frameworks. Qualitative research methods, including interviews with sustainability managers, asset managers, and business development managers, were employed to gather diverse insights from industry professionals. Additionally, interviews with professors were conducted to gain deeper insights into the model's structure and foundational principles. Through qualitative thematic analysis, various advantages and limitations were uncovered. Advantages primarily revolved around visual representation, business strategy, grasping sustainability, inclusiveness, business transparency, comparability, regulations, and awareness. Identified limitations brought into question certain aspects of DE. These limitations included critiques of its principle's negative stance on GDP growth, challenges to its Western-centric ideology, and its oversight of altruistic social behaviors. Furthermore, concerns were raised regarding its historical and perceptual context, which could potentially mislead due to its anthropocentric characteristics and compartmentalized framing. Moreover, challenges in applying the model to enterprises were identified, such as external pressures to comply with upcoming regulations, resource constraints, financial limitations, and the overarching imperative of ensuring the company's survival. The absence of software tools and clear instructions on measuring all indicators further complicates implementation, highlighting the need for additional research in this area. It is recommended that future studies focus on developing guidelines for firms to address all boundaries effectively, offering pragmatic approaches for integration in operations.

Abstract  The concept of balancing work and life has been actively discussed for over 150 years. Whereas people today are experiencing difficulties managing their work and life and the time spent on each, something that is causing them feelings of stress, fatigue and conflicts between their job and life sphere appear. This is an indication of a non-working work-life balance. Meanwhile, organizations both globally, and in Sweden, are getting more pressure on how the social environment and social aspects of an organization is doing and being handled, i.e., the employees and their wellbeing. New directives, like the EU's CSRD, are reshaping how organizations approach social sustainability alongside the established CSR framework, prompting a heightened focus on employee wellbeing and work-life balance. The purpose of this research paper was to gain a broader understanding if the concept and implementation of a four-day work week (4DWW) could help improve and affect the work-life balance among Swedish employees.  To conduct this study, both a literature review and a theoretical framework were performed. The literature review was conducted to gather information on the concept of a 4DWW, work-life balance, CSRD, CSR and I-CSR. Whereas the theoretical framework presents work-life balance theories. Further, seven in-depth interviews were conducted with people living between the north and south of Sweden and that worked full-time Monday through Friday. The respondents were given the choice to choose between an in-person interview or a video call. The answers were to be analyzed using a thematical analysis method.  The results indicated that there is a need for Swedish organizations to improve how they work with providing work-life balance to their employees since the results showed that full-time workers today are experiencing, among other things: lack of time, tiredness and not having time for leisure. However, all respondents expressed that a 4DWW, speculatively thinking, would help them improve their work-life balance and were positive against the idea of working four instead of five days a week. This also had the respondents thinking they would become more excited and productive at work and have more time left for other important areas of life. Finally, what was found was that the 4DWW concept does not solve all the problems faced by employees regarding work-life balance but would, speculatively, solve many of them.

Från och med år 2024 kommer stora och vissa små/medelstora företag (SMEs) i EU bli hållbarhetsrapporteringsskyldiga enligt det nya EU-direktiv, Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) (2022/2464/EU). Direktivet medför lagkrav på att företagen som omfattas ska rapportera om deras påverkan på människor, miljö och vilka ekonomiska risker samt möjligheter som kan uppstå till följd av klimatförändringar. Direktivet medför krav på företag att ställa om sina rapporteringsrutiner vilket innebär att de står inför stora utmaningar och implementeringsbarriärer. Denna studie presenterar och analyserar de utmaningar och möjligheter företag kan komma stå inför med det nya rapporteringskravet. Därav lyder studiens forskningsfrågor: Vilka externa möjligheter och hot kan företag tänkas möta till följd av CSRD? Vilka interna styrkor och svagheter kan företag tänkas identifiera till följd av CSRD? Hur påverkar tidigare kommunikation kring hållbarhet organisationens syn på utmaningar som uppstår vid förändringar i hållbarhetsarbete? Studien baseras på intervjuer från ett svenskt företag som omfattas av CSRD, Parks and Resorts (PRS). Intervjusvaren har genomgått en innehållsanalys med ett analytiskt ramverk baserat i SWOT-analys. Analysen visar att informanterna upplever utmaningar med datainsamling, resurser och kommunikation. Mot bakgrund av den tidigare forskningen visar studien att företags rutiner, resurser och befintliga praktiska hållbarhetsarbete hotas under implementeringsfasen. Studien visar att CSRD bidrar med möjligheter för företag att utveckla sitt långsiktiga hållbarhetsarbete, och öka statusen för hållbarhetsfrågor inom företag. Vidare visar studien att företag som har god kommunikation blir mer mottagliga för förändringar i hållbarhetsarbete, då det finns en acceptans, ett redan etablerat kontaktnät och ett hållbarhetsengagemang inom organisationen. Studien bidrar till forskningsläget genom att påvisa utmaningar företag kan uppleva vid implementering av ny lagstiftning, i detta fall CSRD. Studien visar också hur organisationers tidigare kommunikation kring hållbarhet påverkar dess anpassningsmöjlighet till externt pålagda krav som medför förändringar för företaget. Till skillnad från tidigare forskning visar denna studie att jämförbarhet i mätdata upplevs svåruppnått, och därav finns det en risk att CSRD inte uppfyller sitt syfte att öka transparens. / From the year 2024, large enterprises and some small/medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the EU will be obliged to report on sustainability according to a new EU directive, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) (2022/2464/EU). The directive sets legal requirements that the companies covered must report on their impact on people, the environment and the financial risks and opportunities that may arise as a result of climate change (European Commission, u.å). The directive requires companies to change their reporting routines, which means that they face major challenges and implementation barriers (Ioannou & Serafeim, 2017). This study presents and analyzes the challenges and opportunities companies may face with the new reporting requirement. Hence the study's research questions are: What external opportunities and threats can companies face as a result of CSRD? What internal strengths and weaknesses can companies identify as a result of CSRD? How does previous communication about sustainability affect the organization's view of challenges that arise from changes in sustainability work? The study is based on interviews from a Swedish company covered by the CSRD, Parks and Resorts (PRS). The responses have been analyzed through content analysis with an analytical framework based on SWOT analysis. When compared to previous research, the study shows that companies' routines, resources and existing practical sustainability work are threatened during the implementation phase of the CSRD. The study shows that the CSRD can contribute to opportunities for companies to develop their long-term sustainability work and increase the status of sustainability issues within companies. Furthermore, the study shows that companies that have good communication become more resilient to changes in sustainability work, as there is acceptance, an already established network of contacts and a commitment to sustainability within the organization. The study contributes to research by identifying challenges companies may experience when implementing new legislation, in this case CSRD. The study also shows how organizations' previous communication about sustainability affects its ability to adapt to externally imposed requirements that bring about changes for the company. In contrast to previous research, this study shows that it is difficult to achieve comparability in climate-data, and hence there is a risk that CSRD does not fulfill its purpose of increasing transparency.