COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT OF GLOBAL REPORTING INITIATIVE AND SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD ENVIRONMENTAL DISCLOSURE STANDARDS
グローバル・レポーティング・イニシアチブとサステナビリティ会計基準審議会の環境情報開示基準の比較評価 (AI 翻訳)
Z. Yang, A. Nizamdinova, Z. Hao
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本研究は、GRIとSASBの環境情報開示基準を比較し、カザフスタンの鉱山企業とフィンテック企業のケーススタディを通じて差異を明らかにした。GRIはステークホルダー志向で情報の完全性を重視するのに対し、SASBは投資家志向で財務的影響に焦点を当てる。両基準は補完的であり、企業の開示内容は規制要件や業種特性にも影響される。
English
This study compares GRI and SASB environmental disclosure standards through case studies of a Kazakh mining firm and fintech firm. GRI is stakeholder-oriented and emphasizes completeness, while SASB is investor-oriented and focuses on financially material information. The standards are complementary, and disclosure varies by regulation, industry sensitivity, investor structure, and leadership.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本ではSSBJがISSB基準（SASBを基盤）を採用し、GRIも広く使われている。本論文は、両フレームワークの特性を整理しており、日本企業が複数基準を併用する際の実務的な示唆を提供する。
In the global GX context
With ISSB (built on SASB) and GRI coexisting globally, this paper clarifies their complementary roles. It helps firms navigate overlapping frameworks and policymakers understand standard dynamics.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a clear comparative framework and case-based evidence on GRI vs SASB strengths and industry-specific variations.
🏢実務担当者:Useful for sustainability teams deciding which standard(s) to adopt or how to align dual reporting for different stakeholders.
🏛政策担当者:Highlights how regulatory context and industry sensitivity shape disclosure, informing standard-setting and convergence efforts.
📄 Abstract（原文）
In the context of the accelerating global sustainable development, environmental information disclosure has become an important tool that allows firms to respond to external forces. Over the last few years, different disclosure frameworks have emerged, with the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) becoming two widely used standards worldwide. Such frameworks encourage firms to pursue more transparent and responsible reporting. This study takes GRI and SASB as its research objects. It identifies the differences between these two frameworks and illustrates them through case studies of Solidcore Resources, a mining firm, and Kaspi.kz, a fintech platform firm, both based in Kazakhstan. The findings suggest that GRI, rooted in a stakeholder-oriented logic, emphasizes the completeness of disclosed information and its broader relevance to stakeholder groups. By comparison, SASB reflects an investor-oriented perspective and places greater emphasis on internally focused information that is financially material to firms. The two standards can therefore be complementary. In addition, variations in firms’ environmental information disclosure are shaped not only by regulatory requirements but also by industry environmental sensitivity, investor structure, and industry leadership.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.55871/2072-9847-2026-70-1-6-16first seen 2026-05-05 23:26:14
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。