Sustainability assurance (hereafter ‘SA’) has been a significant area of development in corporate reporting during the last two decades, but one that so far has been subject to limited research. Existing studies in this field have mainly focused on SA opinions, and have tried to understand the characteristics of, and the elements included in, assurance statements, instead of enquiring beyond such outputs to obtain evidence from SA providers themselves. This thesis aims to provide insights into the SA process regarding how decisions in the process are made and what could influence such decisions. It aims to understand what SA practice actually is by examining SA providers’ understandings of the meaning of the practice and the influences that such understandings have on the actual assurance process. Hence, the study focuses on the development of SA practice from the perspective of the assurance providers. It focuses on issues beyond the content of the SA statements to explore the processes leading to the actual delivery of such statements and a wide range of factors that influence the production of such statements and the development of SA practice in general. This study employs a qualitative research approach, using semi-structure interviews as the main data collection method supplemented by various textual data sources. Research participants are SA providers in the UK, including accounting and non-accounting assurance providers. Drawing on the perspective of actor-network theory (ANT), the thesis focuses on the associations involving both human (e.g. assurance providers, reporting organisations, and stakeholders) and non-human (e.g. reporting guidelines, and assurance standards) elements shaping the assurance practice. The theoretical framework based on ANT allows the flexibility in exploring important issues by following the actors, their associations, and their influence on the practice. The findings show that assurance providers’ understandings of the assurance practice vary significantly and that such variation has a major effect on how the assurance practice is conducted. The assurance providers may perceive their roles as independent assurance providers but also adopt other roles to match with the interests and demands of various constituencies. The study shows, in particular, that the providers’ perceived roles vary between what can be termed an ‘independent verifier’, a ‘sustainability consultant’ and a ‘sustainability promoter’, depending on the way in which they place importance on assurance- as against sustainability-related elements of the assurance process. Their different perceptions of their roles influence the internal dynamics of how assurance engagements are conducted. In particular, the study identifies four types of SA engagements, namely ‘social assurance’, ‘integrated assurance’, ‘formative assurance’ and ‘compliance assurance’. Such a categorisation provides a broad-based understanding of the SA as a practice field and the degree of heterogeneity within it. This study provides methodological and empirical contributions by providing evidence on the process associated with SA practice through interviews with different types of organisations providing SA services. Moreover, basing the theoretical framework on ANT highlights the interactions between different actors as a part of the development of SA practice and offers a new perspective to explore the practice and factors influencing its development.

Under de senaste årtiondena har det vuxit fram en ökad medvetenhet gällande den hållbara utvecklingen. Som en följd av denna ökade medvetenhet väljer en del företag att implementera hållbart arbete i sina verksamheter. Detta arbete kan företagen sedan redovisa i en frivillig så kallad Hållbarhetsredovisning. Men precis som vid finansiell information finns en osäkerhet kring reliabiliteten i den information som presenteras, något som skulle kunna åtgärdas om företagen låter en utomstående tredje part bestyrka hållbarhetsredovisningen. Då bestyrkandet av hållbarhetsredovisningar inte är reglerat i samma utsträckning som bestyrkande av finansiell information vilket visar sig i att det dels är frivilligt men också genom att det finns möjlighet att välja andra bestyrkandegivare än revisorer. Syftet med denna studie är att se om det finns ett samband mellan utvalda faktorer och företagens val att låta bestyrka sina hållbarhetsredovisningar samt val av bestyrkandegivare. Utifrån detta syfte valdes en kvantitativmetod där insamlingen av data bestod i skriftliga källor i form av hållbarhets-och årsredovisningar från 2013. Utifrån de data som samlats in gjordes sedan analyser och jämförelser med de hypoteser som formats gällande påverkansfaktorerna lönsamhet, storlek, användande av GRI samt branschtillhörighet. Resultaten visar att faktorer hos företag som bestyrkte var; låg lönsamhet, högt antal anställda, hög omsättning och hög balansomslutning. Samma faktorer kunde urskiljas för de företag som valde revisorer som bestyrkandegivare. När det gällde branschtillhörighet var det inte endast sociala-och miljökänsliga branscher som valde att bestyrka hållbarhetsredovisningen. Däremot var det dessa branscher som valde revisorer som bestyrkandegivare. Eftersom liknande studier gällande företag på Stockholmbörsen är få, kan denna studie bidra till kunskap om bestyrkande av hållbarhetsredovisningar för dessa företag. / During the last decades the consciousness regarding sustainable development has grown. As a part of this growing consciousness some companies choose to implement sustainability work into their corporations. The companies that choose to do this can also report their sustainability work in a Sustainability report. But as well as with financial information there is an uncertainty regarding the reliability in the information, which could be fixed if the companies would let the sustainability report be assured by an independent third party. The assurance of sustainability reports are not as regulated as for the financial information, this is shown in that the assurance is voluntary and that there are different types of assurance providers. The purpose of this study was to see if certain factors influence companies concerning assurance of sustainability reports and concerning the type of assurance provider chosen. Do to the purpose of the study a quantative method was chosen, in which the data was collected through documents such as sustainability reports and annual reports from 2013. The data that was collected was then analyzed and tested in relations to the formed hypothesis regarding the corporate factors; profitability, size, use of GRI and industry. Corporate factors in companies that had assured their sustainability reports were; low profitability, a high number of employees, high number in sales and high number in total assets. The same factors were found in the companies that had chosen an auditor as assurance provider. Regarding the industries, it was not companies in social-and environmental industries that assured their sustainability reports but those industries did choose to hire an auditor as the assuranceprovider. Since similar studies regarding companies on Stockholmsbörsen are scarce, this study may contribute to further knowledge concerning assurance of sustainability reports for these companies.

<p><strong>Bakgrund: </strong>Hållbarhetsredovisning har utvecklats från att vara ett undantag till en norm, dock är enbart cirka 40 procent av de utgivna hållbarhetsredovisningarna granskade enligt en undersökning utförd av KPMG från 2008. Det saknas krav när det gäller granskningen av hållbarhetsredovisningarna och det finns ett antal standarder som kan användas vid granskningen, både internationella och nationella sådana. I och med detta försvåras jämförelser mellan företag samtidigt och det blir svårt att bedöma vilken kvalité den utförda granskningen har.</p><p><strong>Syfte:</strong> Uppsatsen syfte är att undersöka huruvida granskningsrapporten skiljer sig åt beroende på granskande aktör och/eller vilken granskningsstandard som används i Sverige, Tyskland, Storbritannien och Danmark. Med skillnader menas i det här fallet att undersöka vilka egenskaper i redovisningen som lyfts fram av den granskande aktören, vilken nivå på granskningen som lämnas samt vilka intressenter som granskningen riktar sig till i första hand. Genom att undersöka detta är det möjligt att bidra med kunskap om huruvida användbarheten av hållbarhetsredovisningarna påverkas av granskande aktör och använd granskningsstandard och om detta ser olika ut i de undersökta länderna.</p><p><strong>Metod:</strong> En undersökning av 30 hållbarhetsredovisningar i respektive land. Uppsatsen är en fallstudie och har en kvalitativ ansats.</p><p><strong>Slutsats:</strong> Granskningsrapporternas utformning skiljer sig mellan de undersökta länderna samt beroende på granskande aktör och använd granskningsstandard. En större andel av de hållbarhetsredovisningar som granskas av annan aktör än revisionbyrå ges ett bestyrkande med hög men inte absolut säkerhet. Granskningsrapporterna utgivna av revisionsbyråerna är betydligt mer standardiserade än de övriga vilket gör att dessa inte ger läsarna/intressenterna en fullständig bild av det granskade företagets hållbarhetsarbete. Därmed kan användbarheten av granskningen ifrågasättas. Användbarheten kan dock även ifrågasättas hos de granskningsrapporter som är utfärdade av annan aktör än revisionsbyrå. Då dessa aktörer inte är tydligt kontrollerade på samma sätt och det inte ställs samma krav på oberoende på dessa aktörer, så är det svårt att avgöra om den utförda granskningen är tillförlitlig.</p><p> </p> / <p><strong>Background:</strong> Sustainability Reporting has developed from being an exception to becoming a norm. According to a research performed by KPMG in 2008, only 40 per cent of the issued sustainability reports are assured by an independent assurance provider. There are no requirements regarding assurance of sustainability reports and it exist a number of standards that could be used in the assurance process for sustainability reports, as well international standards as national standards. As a result of this the comparison between companies becomes difficult and it is difficult to evaluate the quality of the performed assurance.</p><p><strong>Purpose:</strong> The purpose of this thesis is to examine whether the assurance report given by the assurance provider differ depending on assurance provider and/or the assurance standard that is used in Sweden, Germany, Great Britain and Denmark. Assurance reports differ if the assurance provider emphasizes on different qualities and different stakeholders and provide different level of assurance. By examining this it would be possible to contribute with knowledge regarding whether the usefulness of sustainability reports depend on assurance provider and assurance standard and whether it exist differences between the examined countries.</p><p><strong>Methodology:</strong> A research involving 30 sustainability reports from each country. This thesis is based on case study and has a qualitative research method.</p><p><strong>Conclusion:</strong> The content in the assurance reports differ between the countries in this thesis and is depending on assurance provider and assurance standard. A majority of the sustainability reports that provide a conclusion with reasonable assurance are assured by other assurance provider than accountants. The assurance reports issued by accountants are more standardized than the remaining reports and therefore give the readers/stakeholders an uncomplete picture of the sustainability actions performed by assured company. A consequence of this is that the usefulness of the assurance provided could be questioned. The usefulness could also be questioned regarding the reports provided by other provider than accountants because these providers do not have the same requirements regarding independence and control as the accounting firms and therefore it is difficult to judge the reliability of this reports.</p>

Bakgrund: Hållbarhetsredovisning har utvecklats från att vara ett undantag till en norm, dock är enbart cirka 40 procent av de utgivna hållbarhetsredovisningarna granskade enligt en undersökning utförd av KPMG från 2008. Det saknas krav när det gäller granskningen av hållbarhetsredovisningarna och det finns ett antal standarder som kan användas vid granskningen, både internationella och nationella sådana. I och med detta försvåras jämförelser mellan företag samtidigt och det blir svårt att bedöma vilken kvalité den utförda granskningen har. Syfte: Uppsatsen syfte är att undersöka huruvida granskningsrapporten skiljer sig åt beroende på granskande aktör och/eller vilken granskningsstandard som används i Sverige, Tyskland, Storbritannien och Danmark. Med skillnader menas i det här fallet att undersöka vilka egenskaper i redovisningen som lyfts fram av den granskande aktören, vilken nivå på granskningen som lämnas samt vilka intressenter som granskningen riktar sig till i första hand. Genom att undersöka detta är det möjligt att bidra med kunskap om huruvida användbarheten av hållbarhetsredovisningarna påverkas av granskande aktör och använd granskningsstandard och om detta ser olika ut i de undersökta länderna. Metod: En undersökning av 30 hållbarhetsredovisningar i respektive land. Uppsatsen är en fallstudie och har en kvalitativ ansats. Slutsats: Granskningsrapporternas utformning skiljer sig mellan de undersökta länderna samt beroende på granskande aktör och använd granskningsstandard. En större andel av de hållbarhetsredovisningar som granskas av annan aktör än revisionbyrå ges ett bestyrkande med hög men inte absolut säkerhet. Granskningsrapporterna utgivna av revisionsbyråerna är betydligt mer standardiserade än de övriga vilket gör att dessa inte ger läsarna/intressenterna en fullständig bild av det granskade företagets hållbarhetsarbete. Därmed kan användbarheten av granskningen ifrågasättas. Användbarheten kan dock även ifrågasättas hos de granskningsrapporter som är utfärdade av annan aktör än revisionsbyrå. Då dessa aktörer inte är tydligt kontrollerade på samma sätt och det inte ställs samma krav på oberoende på dessa aktörer, så är det svårt att avgöra om den utförda granskningen är tillförlitlig. / Background: Sustainability Reporting has developed from being an exception to becoming a norm. According to a research performed by KPMG in 2008, only 40 per cent of the issued sustainability reports are assured by an independent assurance provider. There are no requirements regarding assurance of sustainability reports and it exist a number of standards that could be used in the assurance process for sustainability reports, as well international standards as national standards. As a result of this the comparison between companies becomes difficult and it is difficult to evaluate the quality of the performed assurance. Purpose: The purpose of this thesis is to examine whether the assurance report given by the assurance provider differ depending on assurance provider and/or the assurance standard that is used in Sweden, Germany, Great Britain and Denmark. Assurance reports differ if the assurance provider emphasizes on different qualities and different stakeholders and provide different level of assurance. By examining this it would be possible to contribute with knowledge regarding whether the usefulness of sustainability reports depend on assurance provider and assurance standard and whether it exist differences between the examined countries. Methodology: A research involving 30 sustainability reports from each country. This thesis is based on case study and has a qualitative research method. Conclusion: The content in the assurance reports differ between the countries in this thesis and is depending on assurance provider and assurance standard. A majority of the sustainability reports that provide a conclusion with reasonable assurance are assured by other assurance provider than accountants. The assurance reports issued by accountants are more standardized than the remaining reports and therefore give the readers/stakeholders an uncomplete picture of the sustainability actions performed by assured company. A consequence of this is that the usefulness of the assurance provided could be questioned. The usefulness could also be questioned regarding the reports provided by other provider than accountants because these providers do not have the same requirements regarding independence and control as the accounting firms and therefore it is difficult to judge the reliability of this reports.

Corporate environmental social and governance (ESG) reporting is becoming subject to increased scrutiny by regulators, investors and public. This dissertation will contribute to several research streams in the extant literature. This dissertation is the first to show the impact of employee environmental values and attitudes on reporting and whistleblowing decisions, making contributions to accounting, management, whistleblowing and environmental psychology literatures. Next, it is among the first to examine the role of the identity of ESG assurance provider in ESG reporting context. Further, it is among the first to examine the impact of SEC assurance mandate and the value of assurance over ESG information, thus contributing to audit literature. Using experimental methodology, I examine how ESG report assurance, ESG report assurance provider, ESG issue type, and environmentalism as a personality factor influence employee decisions to accede to a supervisory request to misrepresent ESG information, to report management's actions to a corporate hotline, to post information about management wrongdoing on social media, to switch jobs, and to judge ESG misreporting actions as unethical. The results indicate that (1) employee personality factor environmentalism impacts their ESG reporting decisions; (2) pro-environmental employees are more likely to whistleblow when assurance is not mandated, and they judge management actions to be more unethical when assurance is required; (3) under pressure to misreport ESG information, employees are more likely to switch jobs and judge management actions significantly more unethical, when they are dealing with quantitative data (as opposed to qualitative data), and when ESG assurance is provided by a consultant (versus an auditor); (4) pro-environmental employees do not differentiate between the issues impacting financial statements or ESG report only, whereas, employees with low-level environmentalism judge management actions to be more unethical when facing ESG issue with immediate impact to financial statements as opposed to an issue impacting ESG report only; (5) older employees (over 35) with low-level environmentalism are more likely to post information on social media when dealing with an environmental issue as opposed to a social issue; and (6) majority of participants (57%) perceive ESG misreporting to be a widespread phenomenon.

Titel: Den ekonomiska skillnaden mellan frivillig kontra obligatorisk CSR Assurance Nivå: Examensarbete på Grundnivå (kandidatexamen) i ämnet företagsekonomi Författare: Björn Eklund &amp; Sarah Andersen Handledare: Anders Hedman Datum: 2022 - Januari Syfte: 2024 blir det obligatoriskt för svenska företag att genomföra en extern granskning av sina CSR rapporter. Studiens syfte har därför varit att genom en jämförande studie, undersöka de ekonomiska konsekvenserna av obligatorisk kontra frivillig CSR Assurance bland företag. Metod: Studien förhåller sig till en positivistisk forskningsfilosofi med en hypotetisk deduktiv forskningsansats. En kvantitativ metod används för att samla in kvantifierbara och generaliserbara resultat. En longitudinell design har använts där data från Thomson Reuters Eikon hämtats hem för företag under 2015–2019. Resultat &amp; slutsats: Studien har kommit fram till att kortsiktigt påverkas företags lönsamhet negativt med CSR Assurance. Dessutom har obligatorisk CSR Assurance en större negativ påverkan där man kan anta att det beror på användning av frivillig CSR Assurance är mera uppskattat av läsarna vilket medför en mindre negativ påverkan på företagets lönsamhet. Vidare enligt signaleringsteorin där signalen måste kosta, påverkar företagets kortsiktiga lönsamhet negativt men positivt på långsiktigt.  Examensarbetets bidrag: Studien visar att kortsiktigt påverkas företagets lönsamhet negativt av CSR Assurance men mer negativt när företagen använder obligatorisk CSR Assurance. Studiens resultat ger även beslutsfattarna i företag en konkret drivkraft till att tänka långsiktigt i sina investeringar.  Förslag till fortsatt forskning:  Förslag för framtida forskning är att inkludera en annan databas, som tar mer hänsyn till begreppet CSR Assurance och ger en mer uppdaterad urvalslista. Vidare är ett annat förslag att undersöka om användning av GRIs riktlinjer och CSR Assurance nivå även har en påverkan på företagens ekonomiska prestanda. / Title: The financial difference between voluntary versus mandatory CSR Assurance Level: Student thesis, final assignment for bachelor’s degree in Business Administration Author: Björn Eklund &amp; Sarah Andersen Supervisor: Anders Hedman Date: 2022 - January Aim: In 2024, it will be mandatory for Swedish companies to carry out an external review of their CSR reports. The purpose of the study has therefore been to, through a comparative study, examine the financial consequences of compulsory versus voluntary CSR Assurance among companies. Method: The study relates to a positivist research philosophy with a hypothetical deductive research approach. A quantitative method is used to collect quantifiable and generalizable results. A longitudinal design has been used where data from Thomson Reuters Eikon was retrieved for companies during 2015–2019. Result &amp; Conclusions: The study has concluded that in the short term, companies' profitability is negatively affected by CSR Assurance. In addition, compulsory CSR Assurance has a greater negative impact where it can be assumed that it is due to the use of voluntary CSR Assurance is more appreciated by readers, which entails a less negative impact on the company's profitability. Furthermore, according to the signaling theory where the signal must cost, the company's short-term profitability has a negative but positive effect in the long term. Contribution of the thesis: The study shows that in the short term, the company's profitability is negatively affected by CSR Assurance, but more negatively when companies use mandatory CSR Assurance. The results of the study also give decision-makers in companies a concrete drive to think long-term in their investments. Suggestions for future research: Suggestions for future research are to include another database, which takes more account of the concept of CSR Assurance and provides a more updated selection list. Furthermore, another proposal is to investigate whether the use of GRI's guidelines and CSR Assurance level also has an impact on companies' financial performance.