Managers’ view towards sustainability reporting: Evidence from Iceland

Download This Article

Ingi Poulsen ORCID logo, Throstur Olaf Sigurjonsson ORCID logo

https://doi.org/10.22495/clgrv6i1p10

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

This study investigates the response of Icelandic firms to mandatory sustainability reporting laws, focusing on the synergy between legal mandates, corporate governance, and external pressures. Employing a qualitative approach through semi-structured interviews, the findings reveal that while legislation has brought sustainability to the forefront, stakeholder pressure is the key driver behind sustainability reporting. The research highlights the critical role of independent assurance in enhancing the credibility of these disclosures and calls for strengthened regulatory frameworks to ensure transparent, effective reporting that meets international standards (Posadas et al., 2023; Doni et al., 2020). By examining the Icelandic context, the paper provides valuable insights for policymakers and corporate entities on the need for legislative improvements. It anticipates future regulatory tightening to enforce more comprehensive sustainability reporting requirements, contributing to the discourse on mandatory versus voluntary reporting mechanisms.

Keywords: Corporate Governance, Non-Financial Information, Sustainability Reporting, Law and Regulation, Governance Codes

Authors’ individual contribution: Conceptualization — I.P. and T.O.S.; Methodology — I.P. and T.O.S.; Validation — T.O.S.; Formal Analysis — I.P.; Investigation — I.P. and T.O.S.; Writing — I.P.

Declaration of conflicting interests: The Authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

JEL Classification: G34, L1, L2, M1

Received: 12.12.2023
Accepted: 17.04.2024
Published online: 19.04.2024

How to cite this paper: Poulsen, I., & Sigurjonsson, T. O. (2024). Managers’ view towards sustainability reporting: Evidence from Iceland. Corporate Law & Governance Review, 6(1), 94–108. https://doi.org/10.22495/clgrv6i1p10