Disclosure of overlapping risks between financial disclosure and non-financial reporting: analysis of overlapping risks in audited reports

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

🔬研究者:Provides an empirical framework for analyzing overlapping risks in integrated reporting, useful for further research on connectivity between financial and non-financial disclosures.

🏢実務担当者:Highlights practical issues of consistency and integration in dual reporting; useful for banks and corporates reviewing their ESG and financial risk disclosures to avoid greenwashing.

🏛政策担当者:Supports regulators in understanding how climate and other risks are currently disclosed and where gaps exist, informing standard-setting like ISSB and SSBJ.

The demand for information by stakeholders has led to rise in the financial and non-financial disclosures. This study focused on the niche of overlapping risks between financial disclosure and non-financial reporting. The study sought to find out the extent to which these risks appear in financial statements and non-financial reporting. The study focused on Emirates NBD and used a mixed method approach, focusing mostly on case study, content analysis in qualitative aspect as well as Python to quantify the results. The study revealed an interesting mix of results. Five overlapping risks were found which are regulatory, reputation, cybersecurity, human capital and climate risk. Results showed that for the most part risks were disclosed more in the non-financial reporting compared to the financial disclosures with a glaring disparity on consistency levels. Regulatory risks showed excellent consistency of 4.7 out of 5 reflected in the ratio of 124:117 for the ESG and financial statement respectively. The financial recognition revealed that all the risks were disclosed through impairments. The financial recognition gap analysis showed major gaps on climate risk and human capital which reflected low integration and potential for greenwashing tendencies in terms of the connectivity analysis climate risk and regulatory risk were found to be the most connected which revealed integrated risk understanding. Siloed thinking was reflected in the lack of connection between cybersecurity and reputation. Overall, the company showed a forward looking and balanced future focus. The study was limited in terms of generalization as it particularly focused on one company. Future studies are recommended to widen their sample size as well as evaluate overlapping disclosures in a longitudinal way.

• semanticscholar https://ojs.cihanrtv.com/index.php/public/article/download/222/120/2822first seen 2026-07-18 07:31:42