Abstract
There is a growing realisation that the current upward trend in levels of disclosure of social, ethical and environmental performance by corporations and other organisations is not being accompanied by simultaneous greater levels of public trust. Low levels of confidence in the information communicated in public reporting is probably undermining the impetus for this disclosure.
This article suggests that this credibility gap can be narrowed through the use of third party independent assurance. However, this is not an unqualified panacea. Much verification and assurance practice itself has to date been of questionable robustness, reliability and consistency, and has been framed by financial assurance models that are inadequate for the broader, qualitative dimensions of social, ethical and environmental performance. The paper argues that there is need for a universal standard for the provision of assurance of social, ethical and environmental reporting, and indeed for the credibility of the assurance providers themselves. The new AA1000S Assurance Standard, developed by the Institute of Social and Ethical AccountAbility, offers an approach and a tool for addressing these gaps.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
AccountAbility: 1999, AA1000 Framework: Standard, Guidelines and Professional Qualification (London).
AccountAbility: 2002, AA1000S Assurance Standard Guiding Principles Consultation Document (London).
Simms, A.: 2002, The Five Big Brothers: The Rise and Nemesis of the Big Bean Counters (New Economics Foundation, London).
Ball, A., D. L. Owen and R. H. Gray: 2000, 'External Transparency or Internal Capture? The Role of Third Party Statements in Adding Value to Corporate Environmental Reports', Business Strategy and the Environment 9(1), 1-23.
Cowe, R.: 1999, 'First Standard for Ethical Balance Sheets Unveiled', The Guardian, November 15.
Doane, D.: 2000, Corporate Spin: The Troubled Teenage Years of Social Reporting (New Economics Foundation, London).
Gray: 2001, 'Thirty Years of Social Accounting, Reporting and Auditing: What (If Anything) have We Learnt?', Business Ethics: A European Review 10(1), 9-15.
GRI: 2002, Sustainability Reporting Guidelines, Global Reporting Initiative, www.globalreporting.org.
KPMG: 2002, International Survey of Corporate Sustainability Reporting (KPMG, De Meen NL).
Mitchell, S., T. Puxty, P. Sikka and H. Willmott: 1994, 'Ethical Statements as Smokescreens for Sectional Interests: The Case of the UK Accountancy Profession', Journal of Business Ethics 13(1), 39-51.
NEF: 2002, 'Tackling Company Law', Radical Economics (New Economics Foundation, London).
O'Dywer, B.: 2001, 'The Legitimacy of Accountants' Participation in Social and Ethical Accounting, Auditing and Reporting', Business Ethics: A European Review 10(1), 27-39.
Owen, D. L., T. A. Swift, C. Humphrey and M. C. Bowerman: 2000, 'The New Social Audits: Accountability, Managerial Capture or the Agenda of Social Champions?' European Accounting Review 9(1), 81-98.
Swift, T. and N. Dando: 2002, 'From Methods to Ideologies: Closing the Assurance Gap in Social and Ethical Accounting, Auditing and Reporting', Journal of Corporate Citizenship, forthcoming.
Sikka, P. and H. Willmott: 1995, 'The Power of Independence: Defending the Jurisdiction of Accounting in the United Kingdom', Accounting, Organizations and Society 20(6),547-581.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dando, N., Swift, T. Transparency and Assurance Minding the Credibility Gap. Journal of Business Ethics 44, 195–200 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023351816790
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023351816790