Rasmi Meqbel

This study investigates the effect of ethical business practices on a firm's decision to obtain sustainability assurance (SA) and on key SA attributes, namely assurance provider type, assurance level, and assurance scope. Using a sample of non‐financial European firms listed on the STOXX Europe 600 for the period 2012–2019 and applying panel logit regression models, we find that ethically responsible firms are significantly more likely to adopt SA, consistent with stakeholder theory, which emphasises transparency and trust‐building with stakeholders. Ethical practices are not significantly associated with the choice of assurance provider or the level of assurance but are positively related to a broader assurance scope, indicating a substantive commitment to credible and comprehensive reporting. Additional sub‐sample analyses reveal that while both more and less ethical firms, as well as higher and lower ESG performers, tend to adopt SA, the effect is stronger among less ethical and lower ESG firms. This pattern aligns with legitimacy theory, suggesting that SA may also serve as a symbolic tool to manage perceptions and mitigate legitimacy threats. The findings contribute to the literature by jointly drawing on stakeholder and legitimacy perspectives to explain heterogeneity in sustainability assurance adoption and design, and they offer practical insights for regulators, standard setters, and investors seeking to evaluate the credibility of sustainability disclosures.

This study investigates whether environmental innovation reduces environmental decoupling, defined as the mismatch between a company's environmental disclosures and its actual environmental performance. Drawing on legitimacy theory, we argue that environmental innovation represents a substantive organizational response that reduces companies' reliance on symbolic environmental communication and promotes alignment between reported claims and actual practices. Using a sample of 10,463 firm‐year observations of companies listed in the Bloomberg Global Large and Mid‐Cap Index from 2010 to 2020, we find that environmental innovation is negatively and statistically associated with environmental decoupling. This result remains robust across multiple model specifications, including two‐stage least squares and propensity score matching approaches. The study offers generalizable insights into the role of environmental innovation in enhancing the credibility of sustainability reporting and provides practical implications for managers, investors, and policymakers seeking to mitigate environmental misinformation and improve the integrity of disclosure.

Drawing on institutional theory, this study investigates the impact of national governance (i.e., voice and accountability, political stability, government effectiveness, regulatory quality, rule of law, and control of corruption) on companies' decisions to acquire sustainability assurance (SA) reports. The sample includes 6367 firm‐year observations from 21 European countries between 2010 and 2021. A panel regression analysis using a logistic model is applied to test the hypotheses. Our results show that voice and accountability, political stability, regulatory quality, and the rule of law have a significant and positive impact on SA. On the other hand, government effectiveness and control of corruption have no influence on SA. The results are robust after several sensitivity analyses. Overall, the findings highlight the importance of national‐level reforms to enhance governance features that augment the credibility of sustainability reporting. Stakeholders and investors can use governance indicators to identify companies most likely to adopt quality assurance. In addition, the study provides policy recommendations to support European sustainability goals through targeted governance improvements.

As global challenges linked to climate change intensify, the need for innovative and effective environmental strategies within corporate settings becomes ever more pressing. Despite growing scrutiny of corporate sustainability practices, the specific impact of dedicated CSR committees and their defining attributes on fostering environmental innovation remains insufficiently understood. This study addresses this gap by examining whether the existence of a CSR committee and its attributes (i.e., size, independence, chair independence, and meeting attendance) influence environmental innovation. Drawing on a global sample of non‐financial firms listed in the Bloomberg World Large and Mid‐Cap Index from 2013 to 2020, our analyses reveal that CSR committee presence accelerates environmental innovation. Furthermore, the size of the CSR committee, independence, and active participation in regular meetings demonstrate a positive and significant effect. By highlighting the critical contribution of well‐designed and proactive CSR committees, our findings offer invaluable insights for boards of directors, managerial leaders, and policymakers, guiding the development of governance structures that effectively drive environmental innovation.

This study examines the impact of corporate board attributes, namely, gender diversity, independence, size, tenure, and CEO duality, on environmental innovation (EI). The study utilised a large dataset of 13,278 firm‐year observations belonging to companies from 24 European countries and covered the period 2010–2021. Drawing from the agency and stakeholder theories, we find that all attributes addressed in this study have a positive impact on EI. These findings enhance our understanding of how businesses manage EI in the real world. Strategic focus is essential for achieving environmental sustainability and fostering innovation in business processes. This study expands our understanding of the role of diverse, long‐term, and independent board structures in fostering EI. We can use the insightful results it provides to plan future corporate strategies and policies.

This study examines the effect of earnings management on the decision to acquire sustainability assurance (SA) reports. It also offers insight into the moderating impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) committee over the earnings management‐SA nexus. To test the hypotheses, a logit regression for panel data is employed for a sample of 2972 firm‐year observations of non‐financial firms listed on the STOXX Europe 600 during the period 2012–2018. The findings reveal that firms that involve in earnings management, either accrual earnings management or real activities manipulation, tend to obtain SA reports to gain, repair, or maintain their legitimacy. Furthermore, the outcomes show that the existence of CSR committee alleviates the symbolic use of SA. Overall, this study highlights that the sustainability reporting assurance process can be used as a tool to deviate or shift stakeholders' attention from the earnings management techniques used in their reporting. The results, therefore, will benefit standard‐setters, policymakers, and stakeholders to be more cautious in differentiating between the substantial and symbolic SA reports.

This study aims to examine the link between sustainability reporting and information asymmetry in family- and non-family-controlled firms for a sample of 641 UK firms listed in the FTSE all-share index during the period 2010–2017. The findings show a negative and significant relationship between sustainability reporting and IA. The results also show that the sustainability reporting–information asymmetry nexus is weaker in family-controlled firms. The findings of this study should improve our understanding of sustainability reporting motivations, particularly in companies that are controlled by families. Moreover, an explanation of the role of family-controlled firms in mitigating or exacerbating this relationship will surely help the British regulators improve corporate governance rules related to various ownership structures. For policy makers, it is important to confirm that sustainability reporting is representative of actual corporate activities and is not only used to mislead stakeholders.