The aim of the study is to analyze how Swedish large fashion companies' sustainability reports quality has been changed 2016-2019. The study wants to create a deeper understanding of the legislative change initiated by the EU that Sweden introduced in 2017. Quality is declared to consist of the three categories of credibility, content and communication. The study's issue was: “How has the quality of fashion companies' sustainability reports been affected when they became statutory to be produced?”. The sample consisted of 14 companies. Some of the companies prepared joint sustainability reports which led to the number of sustainability reports that the study analyzed being 10 reports per year 2016–2019. An additional report was added for 2019 when a company chose to prepare a report separately from the parent company. A qualitative content analysis was used as a method to study the selected 41 sustainability reports. The theories and concepts used in the study for analysis were triple bottom line, institutional theory, stakeholder theory, signal theory and GRI. The results showed that companies' quality of sustainability reports have changed both in accordance with the EU Directive 2014/95/EU, but largely due to surrounding factors. The study has provided a deeper understanding of companies' sustainability reporting and shown that there is no unambiguous change in quality when sustainability reporting for larger companies became mandatory by law.

Denna studie behandlar jämförbarhet inom hållbarhetsrapportering inom fordonsindustrin i Sverige. Tidigare forskning har visat att det finns brister i jämförbarhet gällande hållbarhetsredovisningar. Denna studie undersöker om detta fortfarande föreligger, och i så fall på vilket sätt och varför, med hjälp av en nulägesanalys. Studien undersöker även vilka förbättringsmöjligheter som finns bland identifierade brister. Studien är en kvalitativ studie med data i form av hållbarhetsrapporter. Resultatet från forskningen visade att jämförbarhet i fordonsindustrin i Sverige fortfarande brister. Intressenternas krav identifieras som främsta anledningen för brister i jämförbarhet, då det är per deras efterfrågan bolagen redovisar. Studien kom också fram till att skillnader i typ av kärnverksamhet hos företagen också är en determinant för detta. Förslag till förbättringar ges genom bättre integration av hela värdekedjan i hållbarhetsrapporteringen, samt ökad harmonisering av processer genom samarbete med branschorganisationer. Vidare ges förslag på skärpta och mer lämpliga formkrav av lagstiftning och bättre samarbete med lagstiftare och branschorganisationer för att uppnå detta. Författarna ger förslag för vidare forskning att undersöka de identifierade, såväl oidentifierade orsaker till brister i jämförbarhet och i vilken mån de är ansvariga för detta fenomen. / This study concerns comparability in sustainability reporting within the automotive sector in Sweden. Existing research has shown deficiencies in comparability of sustainability reports. The aim of the study is to examine, through an analysis of the current state of sustainability reporting, whether these shortcomings still exist and if so, how and why they present themselves. The study also aims to provide possible solutions for any identified deficiencies. The study is a qualitative study using empirical data in the form of sustainability reports. The results of the study show that sustainability reports in the automotive sector in Sweden still exhibit deficiencies in comparability. Stakeholder demands are identified as the primary reason for differences in reporting practices, as it’s per their demand that corporations report sustainability information. The study also identifies differences in the companies’ core activity as a determinant for this. Possible solutions are suggested as increased integration of the sustainability reporting of the value chain as a whole, as well as harmonisation of processes through cooperation with industry associations. Furthermore, increased quality control through legislation is suggested as well as increased cooperation between legislators and industry associations in order to achieve this. The authors suggest that further research can be aimed at identifying the respective importance of these different causes for shortcomings in comparability, as well as possible unidentified factors. The study was conducted and is presented in Swedish.