Bakgrund: Rapportering av hållbarhetsfrågor är i dagsläget av frivillig natur i den svenska kommunsektorn. En pågående debatt har därför lyft frågan om huruvida kommuner borde omfattas av ett lagkrav på hållbarhetsrapportering. Den rapportering av hållbarhetsfrågor som sker idag skiljer sig mellan kommunerna gällande upplägg, innehåll och ambitionsnivå.    Syfte: Syftet med studien är att förklara omfattningen av och innehållet i svenska kommuners frivilliga hållbarhetsrapportering.   Metod: Studien är utförd med en deduktiv ansats och har en tvärsnittsdesign. Hypoteserna har utformats med ett eklektiskt angreppssätt. Sekundärdata har i huvudsak samlats in från årsredovisningar, vars kvalitativa data har kvantifierats genom en innehållsanalys.   Resultat: Studien visar att ett intresse för Agenda 2030, kommunens lokala redovisningsnätverk och kommunens val av revisionsbyrå påverkar mängden och innehållet i hållbarhetsrapporteringen. Ytterligare visar studien även att den politiska majoriteten har en viss påverkan på mängden hållbarhetsrapportering.   Kunskapsbidrag: Studien bidrar till den befintliga forskningen inom hållbarhetsrapportering genom att tillföra kunskap om vilka faktorer som påverkar hållbarhetsrapporteringen i den kommunala sektorn. I den svenska kontexten bidrar studien utöver att ge en uppdaterad bild av det empiriska läget även genom att addera faktorer som inte testats i den svenska kommunala sektorn.

La divulgation d’informations sur les risques est une problématique centrale de la communication des entreprises cotées. De nombreuses dispositions réglementaires ont été mises en œuvre aux Etats-Unis et en Europe pour promouvoir la transparence sur les risques et les dispositifs de contrôle mis en place pour leur gestion. Les exigences de certification de l’efficacité de ces dispositifs conduit à la question de savoir si ou comment les entreprises non-financières françaises, ayant une double cotation aux Etats-Unis et en France, sont conformes à ces règlementations. Dans ce contexte, il est soutenu que la mise en évidence des différents niveaux de formalisation des dispositifs de contrôle des risques, à travers la communication des entreprises, permet de dégager des typologies originales de mise en conformité et de gouvernance des organisations. La démarche de recherche adoptée est basée sur l’étude de cas longitudinale qui permet de suivre les entreprises du lancement des projets de mise en conformité, à la stabilisation des processus de production de la certification des procédures de contrôle des risques. Les données recueillies (entretiens, rapports annuels) font l’objet d’une analyse de contenu à travers le COSO2. Une seconde étape est leur traitement statistique pour discriminer les réponses stratégiques dans le temps et entre entreprises. Les observations empiriques mettent en exergue différentes réponses stratégiques en fonction de deux périodes et des préoccupations économiques et stratégiques des entreprises. / Risk oriented disclosure is a central issue of listed companies communication. Many Risk-based regulations have been implemented in the US and Europe to promote transparency about risks and controls mechanisms. Under the requirements of the SOX, executives must certify the public company’s financial results (section 302) and have to issue a report on the effectiveness of the company’s internal controls over financial reporting (section 404). The increase of mandatory risk reporting leads to the question of whether or how the French non-financial companies cross-listed in the US and France are compliant with these regulations. In this context and across corporate communication, it is argued that different levels of risk control’s formalization can highlight original typology of compliance and corporate governance. This research uses a longitudinal case study in order to explore the implementation of risk control measures and the risk narrative disclosure strategies to enhance organizational legitimacy. The collected data (interviews, risk disclosures within annual reports) are subject to a content analysis through COSO2. A second step is a statistical analysis to discriminate strategic responses over the time and between companies. Empirical observations point to different strategic responses to institutional processes based on two periods as well as economic and strategic business concerns. The first phase shows that risk control process is structured in order to build the auditability of organization. While, in the second phase companies develop different strategic responses more consistent with their concerns.

Diese Dissertation umfasst drei Studien über Finanzberichterstattung gemäß International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) und Wirtschaftsprüfung. Da die IFRS ein prinzipienbasiertes Standardsystem sind, haben Abschlussersteller beabsichtigte Ermessensspielräume bei der Erstellung ihrer Finanzberichte. Die ersten beiden Studien widmen sich den Fragen, wie genau Abschlussersteller entsprechende Ermessensspielräume ausüben und inwieweit dies von der Wahl des Abschlussprüfers abhängt. Die erste Studie untersucht die Anhangangaben zu Ermessensentscheidungen und Schätzunsicherheiten (gemäß IAS 1). Sie liefert deskriptive Belege für ein insgesamt zunehmendes Niveau der Offenlegung dieser Anhangangaben und dafür, dass das Offenlegungsniveau über verschiedene Abschlussprüfer hinweg variiert. Inspiriert durch die Ergebnisse der ersten Studie widmet sich die zweite Studie der Frage, welche Arten von Abschlussprüfern (d.h. dominierende im Vergleich zu nicht dominierenden Abschlussprüfern) Unternehmen dazu motivieren, (mehr) relevante Angaben zu den erwarteten Auswirkungen der erstmaligen Anwendung des neuen IFRS 16 „Leasingverhältnisse“ im Erstanwendungsjahr offenzulegen. Die Ergebnisse deuten darauf hin, dass Mandanten dominierender Abschlussprüfer weniger standardisierte Angaben („boilerplate disclosures“) machen und der Zusammenhang zwischen der Leasingintensität und dem Detaillierungsgrad der Angaben bei diesen Mandanten stärker ist. Die dritte Studie nimmt die Ergebnisse der ersten beiden Studien zum Anlass, die Struktur des Prüfungsmarktes zu untersuchen. Der Fokus liegt hierbei auf der Entwicklung der Konzentration des Abschlussprüfermarktes in Großbritannien und Deutschland rund um eine regulatorische Änderung auf EU-Ebene, die neue Prüfungsanforderungen mit sich bringt, einschließlich der obligatorischen regelmäßigen Rotation von Prüfungsgesellschaften. Während die Ergebnisse auf einen etwa gleichstarken Rückgang der Konzentration der Prüfungsmärkte in beiden Ländern hindeuten, zeigen weitere statistische Tests, dass dieser Rückgang auf nationale Besonderheiten zurückzuführen ist. / This dissertation comprises three papers on financial reporting and auditing. The first two papers examine whether the extent to which the principles-based character of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) allows management to exercise judgement in the preparation of firms’ disclosures is contingent on auditor-type. The first paper explores judgment and estimation uncertainty disclosures (IAS 1) and provides descriptive evidence on an overall increasing trend of disclosure levels and that disclosure levels vary in the cross-section, among other things, by auditor. Inspired by that, the second paper goes a step further and emphasises on the question what type of auditors (i.e., dominant in comparison to non-dominant auditors) motivate firms to provide (more) relevant disclosures on how they expect IFRS 16 – a new standard on leasing – to affect their financial statements in the period of initial application. Results suggest that clients of dominant auditors use less boilerplate disclosures and that the association between leasing intensity and disclosure detail is stronger for those clients. Due to the results of both papers suggesting that the auditor choice matters when firms face judgement in the preparation of their disclosures, the (development of the) audit market structure underlying certain regulations becomes relevant. Thus, the third paper takes these findings of the first two papers as motivation to examine the audit market concentration in the UK and Germany around a regulatory change at the EU level that entails new audit requirements including mandatory audit firm rotation on a regular basis. While aggregate statistics suggest a decrease in market concentration of similar size in both countries, further tests reveal that these decreases are driven by national peculiarities.

In March 2018 the European Commission published the Action Plan on Financing Sustainable Growth. One of the main objectives with the actions presented in the action plan is to reorient capital flows towards sustainable investments, i.e. to influence more investors to invest sustainably. The action plan was followed by three proposals for transparency regulation regarding an EU taxonomy on sustainability, sustainability benchmarks and sustainability disclosures. Furthermore, the action plan included actions regarding two other transparency measures – sustainability labels and sustainability ratings. The first purpose of the thesis is to investigate if transparency regulation in the EU can be used as a tool to influence investors to choose sustainable investment funds. One of the main aims of the actions presented in the Action Plan on Financing Sustainable Growth, as well as the accompanying regulation proposals, is to reorient capital flows towards sustainable investments, i.e. to influence more investors to invest sustainably. In light of this, the Commission’s three proposed transparency regulations, as well as the concept of sustainability labels and ratings, are used as a basis for the investigation. The second purpose of the thesis is therefore to critically review the three regulation proposals and the concept of sustainability labels and ratings in order to gain an understanding of how different transparency measures can influence investors to choose sustainable investment funds. The transparency regulations and measures are analysed and critically reviewed in light of their objective to influence more investors to invest sustainably. A behavioural economics perspective, as well as consumer behaviour theories and decision-making models, are applied in order to analyse the transparency regulations and measures from an external perspective. Based on the analysis there are many indicators that transparency regulation can be used as a tool to influence investors to choose sustainable investment funds. However, to what extent transparency regulation can influence investor behaviour varies depending on which transparency measures are used and how they are designed. Sustainability benchmarks seem to have the least potential to influence investor behaviour, while the EU taxonomy on sustainability and sustainability labels seem to have the best potential to influence investor behaviour.

Abstracts in English, Afrikaans and Southern Sotho / The purpose of this study was to develop a best practice corporate community involvement disclosures (CCID) framework for JSE-listed organisations in South Africa. An analysis of the literature underscored the need for quality CCID and revealed the paucity of research on this topic. The study adopted a mixed-methods approach employing three research stages. Firstly, an initial CCID framework was constructed on the basis of a content and document analysis of top-performing JSE-listed organisations. Secondly, 30 CCI experts refined and validated the CCID framework through semi-structured interviews. The developed CCID framework comprised 36 specific disclosure items in nine general disclosure categories. Thirdly, the CCID framework was applied to 116 corporate reports, including the integrated reports, sustainability reports and corporate webpages of 20 JSE-listed companies for the years 2015 to 2017. The findings indicated that the sample of JSE-listed organisations disclose some aspects of CCI in their corporate reports. However, there is no consistent reporting framework, and a number of CCID items were under-disclosed according to the CCI expert “best practice” to meet stakeholder expectations. In both the integrated and sustainability reports, general category 2, CCI strategy, and general category 4, CCI projects, were the best-performing categories. General category 8, Evidence of CCI, was one of the best-performing categories disclosed in the sustainability reports and on the corporate webpages. General category 5, Relevant regulatory measures, general category 6, CCI benefits/business value creation, and general category 7, Assurance of CCI reporting, contained no or limited CCID. The development of the CCID framework resonated with stakeholder theory, while the findings on the application of the CCID framework supported the theoretical perspectives of legitimacy theory. In addition to the identified legitimising drivers, the findings suggested that local tensions and expectations are impacting on CCID in South Africa. The findings of this study provide useful insights into CCID practices, guidelines and the quality of CCID. It is unique because it is the first of its kind to develop and apply a CCID framework in South Africa. The findings have a number of implications for stakeholders, corporate managers, regulators and policymakers in South Africa and internationally. / Die doel van hierdie studie was om ’n raamwerk van beste praktykte te ontwikkel vir korporatiewe gemeenskapsbetrokkenheid-openbaarmakings (KGBO) vir JSE-genoteerde organisasies in Suid-Afrika. ʼn Ontleding van die literatuur het die behoefte aan gehalte-KGBO beklemtoon en die gebrek aan navorsing oor hierdie onderwerp aan die lig gebring. Die studie het ’n gemengdemetode-benadering gevolg wat drie navorsingstadiums gebruik het. Eerstens is ʼn aanvanklike KGBO-raamwerk op die grondslag van ’n inhoud-en-dokument-ontleding van bes presterende JSE-genoteerde organisasies saamgestel. Tweedens het 30 KGB-kundiges die KGBO-raamwerk deur middel van halfgestruktureerde onderhoude verfyn en geldig verklaar. Die ontwikkelde KGBO-raamwerk het 36 spesifieke openbaarmaking-items in nege algemene openbaarmakingkategorieë bevat. Derdens is die KGBO-raamwerk toegepas op 116 korporatiewe verslae, insluitend die geïntegreerde verslae, volhoubaarheidsverslae en korporatiewe webbladsye van 20 JSE-genoteerde maatskappye vir die jare 2015 tot 2017. Die bevindings het aangetoon dat die monster van JSE-genoteerde organisasies enkele aspekte van KGBO in hul korporatiewe verslae openbaar het. Daar is egter nie ’n konsekwente verslagdoeningsraamwerk nie, en volgens die KGB-bestepraktykkundige is ’n aantal KGBO-items onderverklaar om aan belanghebbers se verwagtinge te voldoen. In sowel die geïntegreerde as volhoubaarheidsverslae was die algemene kategorie 2, KGB-strategie, en algemene kategorie 4, KGB-projekte, die bes presterende kategorieë. Algemene kategorie 8, Bewys van KGB, was een van die bes presterende kategorieë wat in die volhoubaarheidsverslae en op die korporatiewe webbladsye openbaar gemaak is. Algemene kategorie 5, Relevante regulatiewe maatreëls, algemene kategorie 6, KGB-voordele/besigheidswaarde-skepping, en algemene kategorie 7, Gerusstelling van KGB-verslagdoening, het geen of beperkte KGBO bevat. Die ontwikkeling van die KGBO-raamwerk het by die belanghebberteorie aanklank gevind, terwyl die bevindings van die toepassing van die KGBO-raamwerk die teoretiese perspektiewe van die egtheidsteorie gesteun het. Benewens die geïdentifiseerde egtheidsaandrywers het die bevindings daarop gesinspeel dat plaaslike spanning en verwagtinge ’n uitwerking op KGBO in Suid-Afrika het. Die bevindings van hierdie studie verskaf nuttige insigte in KGBO-praktyke, -riglyne en die gehalte van KGBO. Dit is uniek omdat dit die eerste keer is dat ’n KGBO-raamwerk in Suid-Afrika ontwikkel en toegepas word. Die bevindings het ’n aantal implikasies vir belanghebbendes, korporatiewe bestuurders, reguleerders en beleidmakers in Suid-Afrika en internasionaal. / Morero wa thutelo ye e be e le go tšweletša tlhako ya maitokiši a kaonekaone a dikutollo tša seabe sa dikgwebo setšhabeng (CCID) ya mekgatlo ye e lego lenaneong la JSE ka Afrika Borwa. Tshekatsheko ya dingwalo e gatelela tlhokego ya CCID ye e nago le mohola gape e utollotše nyakišišo ye e sa lekanago ka ga hlogotaba ye. Thutelo e tšere mokgwatebelelo wa mekgwa ye e tswakantšwego ka go diriša magato a mararo a dinyakišišo. Sa mathomo, tlhako ya mathomo ya CCID e hlamilwe go ya ka tshekatsheko ya diteng le tokomane tša mekgatlo ye e lego lenaneong la JSE yeo e šomago gabotse. Sa bobedi, ditsebi tša CCI tše 30 di kaonafaditše le go laetša boleng bja tlhako ya CCID ka mokgwa wa dipotšišo tšeo di sa latelego lenaneo leo le itšeng. Tlhako ya CCID ye e tšweleditšwego pele e dirilwe ke dintlha tša kutollo tše itšeng tše 36 magorong a kakaretšo a kutollo a senyane. Sa boraro, tlhako ya CCID e phethagaditšwe go dipego tša kgwebo tše 116, go akaretšwa dipego tše di kopantšwego, dipego tšeo di fago tshedimošo ka ga boemo bja tšwelelo ya kgwebo le matlakala a wepo a dikhamphani tše 20 tšeo di lego lenaneong la JSE mengwageng ya 2015 go fihla 2017 Dikhwetšo di šupile gore sampolo ya mekgatlo yeo e lego lenaneong la JSE e utollotše dintlha tše dingwe tša CCI dipegong tša tšona tša kgwebo. Le ge go le bjalo, ga go tlhako ya go bega ye e sa fetogego, gomme dintlha tše mmalwa tša CCID di utollotšwe ka mo go sa lekanago go ya ka “maitokišo a makaonekaone” a ditsebi tša CCI go kgotsofatša ditetelo tša bakgahlegi. Ka go dipego tše kopantšwego le tšeo di fago tshedimošo ka ga maemo a tšwelelo ya kgwebo, legoro la 2 la kakaretšo, le legoro la 4 la kakaretšo, diprotšeke tša CCI, di bile magoro ao a šomilego gabotse. Legoro la 8 la kakaretšo, Evidence of CCI, e bile ye nngwe ya magoro ao a šomilego gabotse ao a utollotšwego ka go dipego tšeo di fago tshedimošo ka ga boemo bja tšwelelo ya kgwebo le go matlakala a wepo a kgwebo. Legoro la 5 la kakaretšo 5, Relevant regulatory measures, legoro la 6 la kakaretšo 6, CCI benefits/business value creation, le legoro la 7 la kakaretšo, Assurance of CCI reporting, di be di se na le goba le CCID ya bogolo bjo beetšwego mellwane. Tšwetšopele ya tlhako ya CCID e kwana le mekgwaboitshwaro bolaoding bja kgwebo, mola dikhwetšo go tirišo ya tlhako ya CCID e thekga tebelelo ya ditlhalošo tša diteori tša go dira go ya ka mekgwa ya boitshwaro ya setšhabeng. Go tlaleletša go ditlhohleletši tše di šupilwego tša go amogelwa ka semolao, dikhwetšo di šišintše gore dithulano le ditetelo tša selegae di na le khuetšo go CCID ka Afrika Borwa. Dikhwetšo tša thutelo ye di fa ditshedimošo tše di ka thušago tša ditlwaetšo tša CCID, mekgwatlhahli le mohola wa CCID. Ke ya moswananoši ka gobane ke ya mathomo ya mohuta wa yona go tšweletša le go diriša tlhako ya CCID ka Afrika Borwa. Dikhwetšo di na le ditlamorago tše mmalwa go batho bao ba nago le dikgahlego, balaodi ba dikgwebo, basepetši go ya ka molao le badiramelaotshepetšo ka Afrika Borwa le kemong ya boditšhabatšhaba. / Management Accounting / D. Phil. (Accounting Sciences)