Global standards, local realities: institutional diversity and the adoption of sustainability auditing and assurance in Europe and Latin America

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Provides a novel institutional theory framework for analyzing sustainability assurance adoption, with empirical evidence from six countries.

🏢実務担当者:Highlights the importance of professional infrastructure and enforcement capacity for credible assurance, relevant for assurance providers and companies preparing for assurance.

🏛政策担当者:Emphasizes that adopting global standards requires pairing with enforcement mechanisms and capacity building, informing regulatory design.

Purpose This paper aims to investigate how institutional voids and diversity influence the way global sustainability auditing and assurance (SAA) standards are translated into national regulatory frameworks. Design/methodology/approach A comparative regulatory analysis was conducted across six countries: Spain, Italy and Germany in the European Union (EU), and Argentina, Brazil and Chile in Latin America. Findings The analysis reveals three institutional trajectories shaping the adoption of global SAA standards. In the EU, a regulatory-driven trajectory results in complete adoption, with broad scope and high credibility supported by strong enforcement capacity and professional infrastructures. In Brazil and Chile, a market-driven trajectory produces selective adaptation, where reforms incrementally align with international standards but remain partial and uneven in credibility. In Argentina, a reputationally driven trajectory leads to symbolic compliance, with narrow scope and low credibility because of weak professional infrastructures and limited enforcement capacity. Practical implications For regulators, the study highlights the need to pair the adoption of global standards with credible enforcement mechanisms and capacity-building initiatives. For assurance providers, it underscores the importance of robust professional infrastructures and ethical safeguards in ensuring the reliability of engagements. For investors, it stresses that the credibility of assurance is context-dependent, varying according to the strength of regulatory traditions, professional bodiesand enforcement capacity. Social implications By clarifying the institutional conditions under which auditing and assurance enhance the reliability of environmental, social and governance disclosures, the study contributes to strengthening transparency and accountability in sustainability governance. Originality/value The paper offers one of the first, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, systematic EU–Latin America comparisons of SAA, applies the new International Standard on Sustainability Assurance 5000 framework to cross-country analysis and extends the institutional theory by distinguishing complete adoption, selective adaptation and symbolic compliance.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.1108/medar-01-2026-3638first seen 2026-08-13 05:10:07