External Assurance and Anti-Corruption Disclosure: Evidence from the Early Adoption of Materiality-Centered Sustainability Reporting
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20961/akumulasi.v5i1.3687Keywords:
anti-corruption disclosure, external assurance, materiality principle, sustainability reportsAbstract
This study examines whether externally assured sustainability reports (SRs) are more likely to provide greater anti-corruption disclosure when stakeholder attention to corruption is higher. The study is set in the context of the early adoption of materiality-centered sustainability reporting, focusing on the period immediately following the introduction of GRI G4 (2013) — the first sustainability reporting framework to formally position materiality as the cornerstone of determining report content. Drawing on stakeholder theory and the materiality principle, this study stipulates three factors that may raise stakeholders’ attention to the corruption issue: industry corruption risk, country-level pressures on corruption (home-country corruption risk and home-country anti-corruption enforcement), and global pressure on corruption. By employing OLS regression with two groups of samples: 185 externally assured SRs and 145 non-assured SRs drawn from the GRI G4 early adoption years (2014–2015), this study finds that external assurers may play a role in promoting greater anti-corruption disclosure when companies face greater country-level and global pressure on corruption. However, this study finds no evidence of external assurers' role in the presence of higher industry corruption risk. Instead, the relation between industry corruption risk and anti-corruption disclosure is stronger when SRs are not externally assured. The findings contribute to the literature on sustainability assurance and the implementation of the materiality principle under GRI G4.
References
Al-Shaer, H., & Zaman, M. (2018). Credibility of sustainability reports: The contribution of audit committees. Business Strategy and the Environment, 27(7), 973–986. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2046
Barako, D. G., & Brown, A. M. (2008). Corporate social reporting and board representation: Evidence from the Kenyan banking sector. Journal of Management and Governance, 12(4), 309–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-008-9053-x
Barkemeyer, R., Preuss, L., & Lee, L. (2015a). Corporate reporting on corruption: An international comparison. Accounting Forum, 39(4), 349–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2015.10.001
Barkemeyer, R., Preuss, L., & Lee, L. (2015b). On the effectiveness of private transnational governance regimes: Evaluating corporate sustainability reporting according to the Global Reporting Initiative. Journal of World Business, 50(2), 312–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2014.10.008
Blanc, R., Islam, M. A., Patten, D. M., & Branco, M. C. (2017). Corporate anti-corruption disclosure: An examination of the impact of media exposure and country-level press freedom. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 30(8), 1746–1770. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-02-2015-1965
Branco, M. C., & Matos, D. (2016). The fight against corruption in Portugal: Evidence from sustainability reports. Journal of Financial Crime, 23(1), 132–142. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-05-2014-0027
Calabrese, A., Costa, R., Levialdi, N., & Menichini, T. (2016). A fuzzy analytic hierarchy process method to support materiality assessment in sustainability reporting. Journal of Cleaner Production, 121, 248–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.12.005
Casey, R. J., & Grenier, J. H. (2015). Understanding and contributing to the enigma of corporate social responsibility (CSR) assurance in the United States. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 34(1), 97–130. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-50736
Clarkson, P., Li, Y., Richardson, G., & Tsang, A. (2019). Causes and consequences of voluntary assurance of CSR reports: International evidence involving Dow Jones Sustainability Index inclusion and firm valuation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 32(8), 2451–2474. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-03-2018-3424
Edgley, C., Jones, M. J., & Atkins, J. (2015). The adoption of the materiality concept in social and environmental reporting assurance: A field study approach. The British Accounting Review, 47(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2014.11.001
Fisman, R., & Svensson, J. (2007). Are corruption and taxation really harmful to growth? Firm level evidence. Journal of Development Economics, 83(1), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2005.09.009
Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Parmar, B. L., & de Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Cambridge University Press.
Gerged, A. M., Salem, R., & Ghazwani, M. (2025). Corporate anti-corruption disclosure and corporate sustainability performance in the United Kingdom: Does sustainability governance matter? Business Strategy and the Environment, 34(2), 2589–2606. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.4108
Global Reporting Initiative. (2013a). G4 sustainability reporting guidelines: Implementation manual.
Global Reporting Initiative. (2015). Frequently asked questions: G4. https://www.globalreporting.org/resourcelibrary/G4-FAQ.pdf
Gupta, S., Davoodi, H., & Alonso-Terme, R. (2002). Does corruption affect income inequality and poverty? Economics of Governance, 3(1), 23–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s101010100039
Gyimah-Brempong, K. (2002). Corruption, economic growth, and income inequality in Africa. Economics of Governance, 3(3), 183–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s101010200045
Habib, M., & Zurawicki, L. (2002). Corruption and foreign direct investment. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(2), 291–307. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8491017
Hardoon, D., & Heinrich, F. (2011). Bribe Payers Index 2011. Transparency International.
Healy, P. M., & Serafeim, G. (2016). An analysis of firms' self-reported anticorruption efforts. The Accounting Review, 91(2), 489–511. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-51191
Hossain, M., & Adams, M. (1995). Voluntary financial disclosure by Australian listed companies. Australian Accounting Review, 5(10), 45–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1835-2561.1995.tb00381.x
Jones, M. J., & Solomon, J. F. (2010). Social and environmental report assurance: Some interview evidence. Accounting Forum, 34(1), 20–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2009.11.002
Jones, P., Hillier, D., & Comfort, D. (2016). Materiality and external assurance in corporate sustainability reporting: An exploratory study of Europe’s leading commercial property companies. Journal of European Real Estate Research, 9(2), 147–170. https://doi.org/10.1108/JERER-07-2015-0027
Jørgensen, S., Mjøs, A., & Pedersen, L. J. T. (2022). Sustainability reporting and approaches to materiality: Tensions and potential resolutions. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 13(2), 341–361. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-01-2021-0009
Khatib, S. F. A. (2024). Corrupt practice and sustainability reporting: Lifecycle perspective. Business Strategy & Development, 7(2), Article e396. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsd2.396
Khelil, I., Khlif, H., & Achek, I. (2025). Anti-corruption reporting: A review empirical literature. Journal of Money Laundering Control, 28(1), 30–44. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMLC-03-2024-0039
KPMG. (2022). Big shifts, small steps: KPMG survey of sustainability reporting 2022. KPMG International.
Moroney, R., & Trotman, K. T. (2016). Differences in auditors' materiality assessments when auditing financial statements and sustainability reports. Contemporary Accounting Research, 33(2), 551–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12162
Moroney, R., Windsor, C., & Aw, Y. T. (2012). Evidence of assurance enhancing the quality of voluntary environmental disclosures: An empirical analysis. Accounting and Finance, 52(3), 903–939. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-629X.2011.00413.x
Pflugrath, G., Roebuck, P., & Simnett, R. (2011). Impact of assurance and assurer's professional affiliation on financial analysts' assessment of credibility of corporate social responsibility information. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 30(3), 239–267. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-10047
Previtali, P., & Cerchiello, P. (2023), Corporate governance and anti-corruption disclosure. Corporate Governance, 23(6), 1217–1232. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-06-2022-0275
Puroila, J., & Mäkelä, H. (2019). Matter of opinion: Exploring the socio-political nature of materiality disclosures in sustainability reporting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 32(4), 1043–1072. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-11-2016-2788
Rosati, F., & Faria, L. G. D. (2019). Business contribution to the Sustainable Development Agenda: Organizational factors related to early adoption of SDG reporting. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(3), 588–597. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1705
Sari, T. K., Cahaya, F. R., & Joseph, C. (2021). Coercive pressures and anti-corruption reporting: The case of ASEAN countries. Journal of Business Ethics, 171(3), 495–511. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04452-1
Simnett, R., Vanstraelen, A., & Chua, W. F. (2009). Assurance on sustainability reports: An international comparison. The Accounting Review, 84(3), 937–967. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2009.84.3.937
Stanley, K. D., Shanley, M. G., Dellinger, B. R., Vries, A. D., & Dion, B. (2014). Business bribery risk assessment. RAND Corporation.
Steurer, R. (2006). Mapping stakeholder theory anew: From the “stakeholder theory of the firm” to three perspectives on business–society relations. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15(1), 55–69. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.467
Svensson, J. (2003). Who must pay bribes and how much? Evidence from a cross section of firms. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(1), 207–230. https://doi.org/10.1162/00335530360535180
Udayasankar, K. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and firm size. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(2), 167–175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9609-8
Vigneau, L., Humphrey, C., & 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. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24703515
Wagner, R., & Seele, P. (2017). Uncommitted deliberation? Discussing regulatory gaps by comparing GRI 3.1 to GRI 4.0 in a political CSR perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 146(4), 333–351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3654-8
Weitzel, U., & Berns, S. (2006). Cross-border takeovers, corruption, and related aspects of governance. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(6), 786–806. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400225
Wilkinson, P. (2006). Reporting on countering corruption. In United Nations Global Compact Office (Ed.), Business against corruption: Case stories and examples (pp. 96–107). United Nations.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 AKUMULASI: Indonesian Journal of Applied Accounting and Finance
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who submit a manuscript do so on the understanding that if the article is accepted for publication, the copyright will be transferred to AKUMULASI: Indonesian Journal of Applied Accounting and Finance.
This open-access journal uses the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 (CC BY-NC 4.0) license. This permits users to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
Non Commercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
![](<a target="_blank" href="https://www.imghost.net/t2YCosHoTGal3PY"><img src="https://www.imghost.net/ib/XgTtYft8xXyWSso_1724222378.jpg" alt="Google-Scholar.jpg"/></a>)
