新興の基準設定アーキテクチャにおけるサステナビリティ報告の比較可能性の課題
The challenge of comparability in sustainability reporting within the emerging standard-setting architecture (原題)
Gianmarco Salzillo, Nicola Moscariello, Michele PIZZO
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本論文は、基準の標準化が必ずしも実質的な比較可能性を生まない理由を概念的に解明する。財務報告に根ざした機関への基準設定権限の集中が、画一性志向の規制ロジックを強め、文脈的差異を抑圧し relevance と faithful representation を弱めうると論じる。境界・構成概念・文脈解釈・測定・時間的接合の5条件から実質的比較可能性を評価する枠組みを提示する。
English
This conceptual paper explains why standardisation does not necessarily yield substantive comparability in sustainability reporting. It argues that concentrating standard-setting authority around financial-reporting-rooted institutions may amplify uniformity-oriented logics that suppress material contextual differences. It proposes five conditions—boundary, construct, contextual, measurement, and temporal equivalence—for assessing substantive comparability.
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
SSBJ基準の導入と有報・統合報告書でのサステナビリティ開示が進む日本では、IFRS財団・ISSB主導の基準設定が企業固有の文脈情報をどこまで許容するかが実務上の焦点となる。本論文の比較可能性5条件は、日本企業がグローバル基準に準拠しつつ自社の実態を適切に伝えるための開示設計に示唆を与える。
In the global GX context
As ISSB standards are adopted across jurisdictions and CSRD/SEC climate rules advance, this paper interrogates whether global baseline standardisation actually delivers decision-useful comparability. It offers standard setters and disclosure scholars a framework for distinguishing formal from substantive comparability, directly relevant to the ISSB's jurisdictional adoption and interoperability debates.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:比較可能性を条件依存的属性として再概念化し、開示品質研究に理論的枠組みを提供する。
🏢実務担当者:グローバル基準への準拠と企業固有の文脈情報のバランスをどう取るか、開示設計の指針となる。
🏛政策担当者:ISSB基準の国内導入や相互運用性を検討する際、画一性と実質的比較可能性のトレードオフを考慮すべき。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Purpose This paper aims to explain why standardisation does not necessarily produce substantive comparability in sustainability reporting and examines how the increasing concentration of standard-setting authority around institutions rooted in financial reporting may affect the conditions under which comparability enhances reporting quality. Design/methodology/approach This conceptual paper integrates insights from the accounting and sustainability reporting literature with a comparative documentary analysis of selected major reporting frameworks and guidance. It examines how comparability is conceptualised and operationalised across different reporting traditions and relates these approaches to the distinctive informational and measurement characteristics of sustainability reporting. Findings Sustainability reporting’s greater informational extensiveness and weaker calculative infrastructure amplify the risk that standardisation produces comparability in form without comparability in meaning. Institutional concentration is not inherently problematic, but concentration around institutions rooted in financial reporting may increase the salience of uniformity-oriented regulatory logics. Their translation is not deterministic; when reproduced without sufficient recalibration, however, they may suppress material contextual differences and weaken relevance and faithful representation. Practical implications The proposed framework helps standard setters calibrate common requirements across disclosure topics by identifying when standardisation supports substantive comparability and when it must be complemented by contextual or entity-specific information. Originality/value The paper reconceptualises comparability as a condition-dependent attribute of sustainability reporting quality. It argues that ex post comparability is endogenous to the ex ante representational choices through which information is selected, delimited and measured and develops five conditions – boundary equivalence, construct equivalence, contextual interpretability, measurement equivalence and temporal articulation – for assessing substantive comparability.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1108/jaoc-12-2025-0548first seen 2026-10-10 05:16:11
🔔 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。