The aim of this special issue
Our aim is to contribute to the literature on the historic and future role of GRI in responding to stakeholder demand for enhanced ESG information, the contributions GRI has made to the sustainability reporting space and the practice of sustainability reporting. In doing so, we aim to foster debate on how the efforts should focus on working with the different existing standards, particularly with GRI in conjunction with others standards (International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC), the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), or the SASB) which, unlike the GRI, are more focused on reporting to investors and financial stakeholders (see, for example, Greenstone, 2014; Adams and Abhayawansa, 2021) to achieve a globally accepted comprehensive corporate reporting system so that investors have information on sustainable development impacts.
We welcome the submission of empirical, conceptual and critical work which explores, but is not restricted to, the following topics:
- Critical reflections on what GRI has achieved as the first player in the sustainability reporting space.
- Why did various other bodies set up as standard/framework setters given GRI’s popularity with reporters?
- What are the challenges GRI faces in the imminent process of harmonisation of non-financial reporting?
- What could be the consequences for GRI if SASB is prioritised?
- What are the potential benefits and challenges to work on the basis of GRI for a single sustainability standard-setting body?
- Can GRI provide an overarching conceptual framework for potential standards?
- What has GRI achieved and what are the lessons learned from GRI’s experiences?
- What motivates managers’ and stakeholders’ interest in GRI? Has it always been like this and is this likely to change?
- If GRI standards were recognised as globally accepted reporting standards, what could be the reaction of investors and regulators in the capital markets?
Ca’ Foscari University of Venice