SpringerLink
Log in

Path Evolution on Gender Reporting. Early Reflections

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Gender Issues in the Sustainable Development Era

Part of the book series: SIDREA Series in Accounting and Business Administration ((SSABA))

  • 45 Accesses

Abstract

This study analyses how the issue of gender equality is addressed by the two main European directives on sustainability disclosure: Directive 2022/2464 on Corporate Sustainability Reporting (CSRD) and Directive 2014/95 on Non-Financial Information (NFID), amended by the CSRD including with regard to gender disclosure. Based on a comparison of the texts of the two Directives, this paper investigates the factors influencing the renewal of gender information disclosure. The analyses highlight a significant increase in the obligations to disclose information on gender equality in the CSRD, in line with the principle of equal treatment between women and men that inspired European legislation. Furthermore, the CSRD requirements are consistent with the Pay Transparency Directive, which aims to strengthen the application of the principle of equal pay for men and women, the prohibition of discrimination, and pay transparency mechanisms. Thus, both Directives contribute to the achievement of gender equality and the empowerment of all women in the world. The changes in reporting required by the gender equality directives can reasonably be expected to impact business processes and structures significantly. These changes are of such importance and magnitude that they may require companies to introduce specific organisational units capable of managing and measuring continuous financial flows using appropriate metrics.

This article fills a gap in scholarship by highlighting an unexplored area of the literature related to changes in the quantity, quality, and modalities of regulatory gender disclosure requirements. It is the first research to examine the factors influencing the difference in gender disclosure requirements between NFID and CSRD. Finally, this is also the first work to anticipate the potential impact of ongoing regulatory changes on business structures and processes. This research has some limitations. It is a preliminary analysis. To reach more analytical conclusions, it is necessary to compare the standards adopted based on the two European Directives and wait for European companies’ first adoption of the CSRD.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
EUR 29.95
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
EUR 136.95
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
EUR 171.19
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adams, C. A., & Larrinaga, C. (2019). Progress: Engaging with organisations in pursuit of improved sustainability accounting and performance. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 32(8), 2367–2394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amel-Zadeh, A., & Serafeim, G. (2017). Why and how investors use ESG information: Evidence from a global survey (Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 17-079). Available from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=292531

  • Argento, D., Culasso, F., & Truant, E. (2019). From sustainability to integrated reporting: The legitimizing role of the CSR manager. Organization & Environment, 32(4), 484–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldini, M. A. (2023). Risks of false accounting: Some reflections on the new regulation in Italy. Risk Governance and Control: Financial Markets & Institutions, 13(1), 62–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Behnam, M., & MacLean, T. L. (2011). Where is the accountability in international accountability standards? A decoupling perspective. Business Ethics Quarterly, 21(1), 45–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benn, S., Dunphy, D., & Griffit, A. (2014). Organizational change for corporate sustainability (3rd ed.). Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Berg, F., Koelbel, J. F., & Rigobon, R. (2022). Aggregate confusion: The divergence of ESG ratings. Review of Finance, 26(6), 1315–1344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanco, C., Caro, F., & Corbett, C. J. (2017). An inside perspective on carbon disclosure. Business Horizons, 60(5), 635–646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouten, L., & Hoozée, S. (2013). On the interplay between environmental reporting and management accounting change. Management Accounting Research, 24(4), 333–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burritt, R. L., & Schaltegger, S. (2010). Sustainability accounting and reporting: fad or trend? Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 23(7), 829–846.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camilleri, M. A. (2015). Environmental, social and governance disclosures in Europe. Sustainability Accounting, Management & Policy Journal, 6(2), 224–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cerbone, D., & Maroun, W. (2020). Materiality in an integrated reporting setting: Insights using an institutional logics framework. The British Accounting Review, 52(3), 100876.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Contrafatto, M. (2014). The institutionalization of social and environmental reporting: An Italian narrative. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 39(6), 414–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cosentino, A., & Venuti, M. (2022). In search of materiality for nonfinancial information under the female lens, after the Directive 2014/95/EU transposed. A multiple Italian case study. In P. Paoloni & R. Lombardi (Eds.), Organizational resilience and female entrepreneurship during crises: Emerging evidence and future agenda (pp. 209–223). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cosentino, A., & Venuti, M. (2023). The issue of gender inequalities in the non-financial statements. An empirical analysis. In P. Paoloni & L. Lombardi (Eds.), When the crisis becomes an opportunity: The role of women in the post-covid organization (pp. 193–215). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Darendeli, A., Fiechter, P., Hitz, J. M., & Lehmann, N. (2022). The role of corporate social responsibility (CSR) information in supply-chain contracting: Evidence from the expansion of CSR rating coverage. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 74(2-3), 101525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Lange, P., & Howieson, B. (2006). International accounting standards setting and US exceptionalism. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 17(8), 1007–1032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhaliwal, D., Li, O. Z., Tsang, A., & Yang, Y. G. (2014). Corporate social responsibility disclosure and the cost of equity capital: the roles of stakeholder orientation and financial transparency. Journal of Accounting & Public Policy, 33(4), 328–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillard, J. F., Rigsby, J. T., & Goodman, C. (2004). The making and remaking of organization context: Duality and the institutionalization process. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 17(4), 506–542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doorey, D. J. (2011). The transparent supply chain: From resistance to implementation at Nike and Levi-Strauss. Journal of Business Ethics, 103(4), 587–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doppelt, B. (2010). Leading change toward sustainability (Updated 2nd ed). Greenleaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egan, M., & Tweedie, D. (2018). A “green” accountant is difficult to find: Can accountants contribute to sustainability management initiatives? Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 31(6), 1749–1773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engert, S., & Baumgartner, R. J. (2016). Corporate sustainability strategy–bridging the gap between formulation and implementation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 113, 822–834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, M., Flamholtz, E., & McDonough, J. J. (1976). Corporate social accounting in the United States of America: State of the art and future prospects. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 1(1), 23–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (EC). (2001). Green paper promoting a European framework for corporate social responsibility. Available from http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_DOC-01-9_en.pdf

  • European Commission (EC). (2011). Communication from the commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions—A renewed EU strategy 2011–14 for corporate social responsibility. Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52011DC0681&from=EN.

  • European Commission (EC). (2020). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions. A Union of Equality: Gender Equality Strategy 2020–2025, available at: COM(2020)152—Union of Equality: Gender Equality Strategy 2020–2025—EU monitor

    Google Scholar 

  • European Union. (2014). Directive 2014/95 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 amending Directive 2013/34/EU as regards disclosure of non-financial and diversity information by certain large undertakings and groups. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32014L0095

  • European Union. (2022). Directive (EU) 2022/2464 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 amending Directive 2013/34/EU, Directive 2004/109/EC, Directive 2006/43/EC and Regulation (EU) no 537/2014, as regards corporate sustainability reporting. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32022L2464.

  • European Union. (2023). Directive (EU) 2023/970 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 May 2023 to strengthen the application of the principle of equal pay for equal work or work of equal value between men and women through pay transparency and enforcement mechanisms. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2023/970/o

  • Gao, F., Dong, Y., Ni, C., & Fu, R. (2016). Determinants and economic consequences of non-financial disclosure quality. European Accounting Review, 25(2), 287–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia-Torea, N., Larrinaga, C., & Luque-Vílchez, M. (2023). Bridging the understanding of sustainability accounting and organizational change. Organization & Environment, 36(1), 17–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gebhardt, G. (2000). The evolution of global standards in accounting. Brookings-Wharton Papers on Financial Services, 2000(1), 341–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillan, S. L., Koch, A., & Starks, L. T. (2021). Firms and social responsibility: A review of ESG and CSR research in corporate finance. Journal of Corporate Finance, 66, 101889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giner, B. (2022). Sustainability reporting: Some challenges from and for the European Union. Comptabilité - Contrôle - Audit (Accounting Auditing Control), 28(4), 7–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R. (1992). Accounting and environmentalism: An exploration of the challenge of gently accounting for accountability, transparency and sustainability. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(5), 399–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R. (2002). Of messiness, systems and sustainability: Towards a more social and environmental finance and accounting. The British Accounting Review, 34(4), 357–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R. (2010). A re‐evaluation of social, environmental and sustainability accounting: An exploration of an emerging trans‐disciplinary field? Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 1(1), 11–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R., & Bebbington, J. (2000). Environmental accounting, managerialism and sustainability: Is the planet safe in the hands of business and accounting? In Advances in environmental accounting & management (Vol. 1, pp. 1–44). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R., & Milne, M. J. (2002). Sustainability reporting: Who’s kidding whom? Chartered Accountants Journal of New Zealand, 81(6), 66–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henriques, A., & Richardson, J. (2005). The triple bottom line. Does it all add up? Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimbrough, M. D., Wang, X., Wei, S., & Zhang, J. (2022). Does voluntary ESG reporting resolve disagreement among ESG rating agencies? European Accounting Review, 1–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • KPMG. (2022). Big shifts, small steps. Survey of Sustainability Reporting, 2022. Available at https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/se/pdf/komm/2022/Global-Survey-of-Sustainability-Reporting-2022.pdf

  • Larrinaga, C., & Bebbington, J. (2001). Accounting change or institutional appropriation?—A case study of the implementation of environmental accounting. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 12(3), 269–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larrinaga, C., & Bebbington, J. (2021). The pre-history of sustainability reporting: a constructivist reading. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 34(9), 162–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laughlin, R. C. (1991). Environmental disturbances and organizational transitions and transformations: Some alternative models. Organization Studies, 12(2), 209–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, T., & Belal, A. (2018). Authoritarian state, global expansion and corporate social responsibility reporting: The narrative of a Chinese state-owned enterprise. Accounting Forum, 42(2), 199–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lozano, R. (2013). Are companies planning their organisational changes for corporate sustainability? An analysis of three case studies on resistance to change and their strategies to overcome it. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 20(5), 275–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lozano, R. (2015). A holistic perspective on corporate sustainability drivers. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 22(1), 32–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lozano, R., Nummert, B., & Ceulemans, K. (2016). Elucidating the relationship between sustainability reporting and organisational change management for sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 125, 168–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, M., Curtis, A., & Davidson, P. (2012). Can triple bottom line reporting become a cycle for “double loop” learning and radical change? Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 25(6), 1048–1068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nobes, C., & Parker, R. H. (2010). Comparative international accounting. Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paoloni, P., Lombardi, R., & Principale, S. (2023). Gender contribution to the agenda 2030. In P. Paoloni & R. Lombardi (Eds.), When the crisis becomes an opportunity (SIDREA series in accounting and business administration). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, S. P., & Schepers, D. H. (2014). United Nations Global Compact: The promise-performance gap. Journal of Business Ethics, 122(2), 193–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stolowy, H., & Paugam, L. (2023). Sustainability reporting: Is convergence possible? Accounting in Europe, 20(2), 139–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (UN). (2015). Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015, 70/1.Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Tas, L. G. (1988). Measuring harmonisation of financial reporting practice. Accounting and Business Research, 18(70), 157–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vigneau, L., Humphreys, M., & Moon, J. (2015). How do firms comply with international sustainability standards? Processes and consequences of adopting the global reporting initiative. Journal of Business Ethics, 131(2), 469–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von der Leyen, U. (2023, March 15). Speech by President von der Leyen at the European Parliament Plenary on the preparation of the European Council meeting of 23–24 March 2023. European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/speech_23_1672.

  • World Economic Forum—WEF. (2023). Global gender gap report 2023. Insight report, June 2023.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Law and Economics of Productive Activities, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy

    Paola Paoloni & Antonietta Cosentino

  2. Department of Business and Law, University of Naples “Pegaso”, Naples, Italy

    Marco Venuti

Authors
  1. Paola Paoloni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Antonietta Cosentino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marco Venuti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antonietta Cosentino .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy

    Paola Paoloni

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Paoloni, P., Cosentino, A., Venuti, M. (2024). Path Evolution on Gender Reporting. Early Reflections. In: Paoloni, P. (eds) Gender Issues in the Sustainable Development Era. SIDREA Series in Accounting and Business Administration. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-57193-0_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation