Navigating regulatory ambiguity: evolving challenges and the sustainability expectation gap in assurance under the corporate sustainability reporting directive
規制の曖昧さを乗り越える：企業サステナビリティ報告指令における保証の持続可能性期待ギャップと進化する課題 (AI 翻訳)
John W. Laub, Marcel Steller
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本論文は、CSRD下での二重重要度原則が監査人にどのように影響するかを検討。ドイツ・オーストリアの監査人へのインタビューに基づき、規制の曖昧さと限定的保証が専門的判断に与える影響を分析。持続可能性期待ギャップ（SEGAP）フレームワークを導入し、手続き的・実用的正当性の低下を指摘。
English
This paper examines how auditors navigate double materiality under the EU's CSRD, based on 17 interviews in Germany and Austria. It introduces the Sustainability Expectation Gap (SEGAP) to explain legitimacy tensions, finding that regulatory ambiguity and limited assurance trap auditors in a reporting-centered, plausibility-based approach rather than risk-oriented auditing, widening the expectation gap.
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
EUのCSRDにおける保証の実態と課題は、現在SSBJの策定が進む日本にとって、同様の問題（二重重要度、限定的保証、期待ギャップ）の先例として示唆に富む。日本の有報や統合報告書におけるサステナビリティ情報の保証制度設計に直接的なインプリケーションを持つ。
In the global GX context
This paper provides timely evidence on the structural misalignment between regulatory ambitions (double materiality) and auditor capabilities under CSRD, informing global disclosure scholarship as jurisdictions like the UK, Australia, and Japan design their own mandatory sustainability assurance regimes. It directly contributes to debates on the Omnibus Proposal and the evolution of assurance from symbolic compliance to substantive assurance.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:The SEGAP framework offers a new lens to analyze legitimacy in sustainability assurance; future research should investigate user perspectives and comparative jurisdictional studies.
🏢実務担当者:Auditors and corporate sustainability teams should be aware that current assurance practices may not satisfy stakeholder expectations, and proactively engage with evolving standards.
🏛政策担当者:Policymakers should address the gap between regulatory intent and auditor capability by providing clearer guidance on double materiality and incentivizing a risk-oriented audit approach.
📄 Abstract（原文）
This paper aims to examine how auditors navigate the legal principle of double materiality under the European Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). It examines how regulatory ambiguity and limited assurance shape professional judgment. The study applies the Sustainability Expectation Gap (SEGAP), an extension of the Audit Expectation Gap (AEG), to explain emerging legitimacy tensions in sustainability assurance. Seventeen semistructured interviews with auditors in Germany and Austria were examined using grounded thematic analysis. Regulatory aspirations and auditor capabilities remain structurally misaligned. While double materiality is formally embedded, auditors’ professional judgment remains anchored in financial-materiality logics. Sustainability assurance is confined to management-defined audit scopes, limiting engagements to plausibility-based rather than a risk-oriented audit approach. These constraints cumulatively widen the SEGAP by eroding procedural and pragmatic legitimacy, while moral legitimacy remains fragile. The study focuses on auditor perspectives in jurisdictions, where CSRD transposition is evolving; broader stakeholder perspectives are not examined. Findings indicate that sustainability assurance contributes primarily to SDG 16 by strengthening transparency and accountability, while its broader contribution depends on methodological advancement toward a risk-oriented audit approach. Future research should therefore examine user perspectives and analyze auditors report on sustainability statements as communicative artifacts shaping the interpretation of assurance. Findings inform auditors, companies, and regulators about structural constraints in sustainability assurance and are relevant for jurisdictions introducing mandatory sustainability assurance regimes. The study informs debates on the Omnibus Proposal by showing how symbolic compliance persists, as the transition toward assurance remains constrained by a reporting-centered regime. The SEGAP framework explains how systemic conditions weaken double materiality and erode legitimacy, highlighting institutional limits of assurance in advancing sustainability goals.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.1108/sampj-05-2025-0652first seen 2026-07-16 06:02:27
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
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。