Risk Disclosure as a Way to Increase the Informative Value of Corporate Reporting for Stakeholders

Irina V. Zenkina

Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia

Cite: Zenkina I. Risk Disclosure as a Way to Increase the Informative Value of Corporate Reporting for Stakeholders. J. Digit. Sci. 4(2), 51 – 63 (2022). https://doi.org/10.33847/2686-8296.4.2_5

Abstract. The article is devoted to the study of risk as a category of accounting and reporting and substantiation of directions for comprehensive disclosure of risks in order to increase the informative value of corporate reporting for stakeholders. The article shows the development of approaches to the definition of risk and provides an updated definition of risk in accordance with modern concepts. A classification of risks is proposed in the context of the concept of multiple capitals and the concept of sustainable development, which is relevant to the task of adequate disclosure of information about risks. It is demonstrated that the modern legal regulation of accounting, standards and guidelines in the field of corporate reporting assigns an important role to risks. Based on an empirical study, the recommended limits for the disclosure of information about risks by organizations in the framework of ensuring the transparency of reporting are determined. The factors stimulating economic entities to disclose information on the risks of sustainable development in corporate reporting are considered. An assessment is made of the impact of digital tools and technologies on the ability to predict, assess and disclose risks in corporate reporting, as well as on the effectiveness of decisions of organizations’ stakeholders.
Keywords: risk classification, ESG risks, risk disclosure, corporate reporting.

Acknowledgments

The author is grateful to the reviewers and the editor for their contribution to preparing the paper for publication.

References
  1. Damodaran A. Strategic Risk Management: Principles and Methods. Moscow, Vil’yams Publ (2017).  
  2. Crouhy M., Galai D., Minasyan V.B., Mark R.M. The Essentials of Risk Management. Moscow, Yurait Publ (2023).
  3. Pike R., Neale B., Linsley Ph. Corporate Finance and Investment: Decisions and Strategies. St. Petersburg, Piter Publ (2006).
  4. Blank I.A. Financial Security Management of the Enterprise. Kiev, El’ga Publ (2013). 
  5. Kogdenko V.G. Investigating Company Risks within the Framework of the Stakeholder Approach to Analysis. Economic Analysis: Theory and Practice, vol. 17, iss. 6, pp. 1051–1072 (2018). URL: https://doi.org/10.24891/ea.17.6.1051 
  6. Efimova O.V. Analytical Aspects of Disclosure of Financial Statements Explanatory Information. Auditor’s Journal,  no. 7, pp. 38–50 (2015).
  7. Analytical Capabilities of Integrated Reporting and their Use for Strategic Decisions. Moscow: KnoRus (2020).
  8. Zenkina I.V. Methodical approaches and tools of company’s sustainable development analysis. Economic Analysis: Theory and Practice, vol. 18, no. 9, pp. 1667–1686 (2019). URL: https://doi.org/10.24891/ ea. 18. 9.1667
  9. Bauer R., Khan D. Environmental Management and Credit Risks. ECCE Working Paper, University Maastricht, The European Centre for Corporate Engagement (2010).
  10. Goss A., Roberts G.S.  Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on the Cost of Bank Loans. Journal of Banking and Finance, No. 35, pp. 1794 -1810 (2011).
  11. Attig N., Gul S.E., Gedami O., Su D. Corporate Social Responsibility and Credit Ratings. Business Ethics Journal, No. 117, pp. 679 – 694 (2013).
  12. Chava S.  External Environmental Factors and the Cost of Capital. Management Science, No. 60 (9), p. 2223 – 2247 (2014).
  13. Giraporn P., Giraporn N., Beprasert A., Chang K.  Does Social Responsibility Improve Credit Ratings? Place of origin of goods. Financial management, No. 43 (3), p. 505 – 531 (2014).
  14. Zenkina I.V. The Impact of Regulatory Risks of ESG Integration on the Sustainable Development of Power Companies. National Interests: Priorities and Security, vol. 17, iss. 4, pp. 624–648 (2021). URL: https://doi.org/10.24891/ ni.17.4.624 
  15. ISO 31000:2018 – Risk management — Guidelines. URL: https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html
  16. Business Analysis Body of Knowledge (BABOK v.3).
  17. COSO Enterprise Risk Management – Integrating with Strategy and Performance (2017).
  18. Krepysheva A.M., Sergievskaya A.A., Storchevoy M.A. Definition and Measurement of Risk in Compliance Management. Strategic Decisions and Risk Management, no. 2, pp.150-159 (2020). URL: https://doi.org/10.17747/2618-947X-2020-2-150-159
  19. Bank of Russia Letter No. IN-06-28/49, dated July 12, 2021, “On Recommendations for Disclosing Non-Financial Information by Public Joint Stock Companies Related to the Activities of Such Companies”. URL: https://www.cbr.ru/StaticHtml/File/117620/20210712_in-06-28_49.pdf
  20. ESG disclosure: theory and practice of implementing new recommendations of the Central Bank. Joint stock company (2021). URL: https://group.interfax.ru/interfax/about/smi/esg-raskrytie-teoriya-i-praktika-vypolneniya-novykh-rekomendatsiy-tsb/
  21. RUIE Indexes in the Field of Sustainable Development, Corporate Responsibilities and Reporting (ESG-indexes) “Responsibility and Openness” and “Vector of Sustainable Development”. URL:https://rspp.ru/upload/iblock/e07/efghhr37sx3rkf35uznh3pd9t1ihq4tz/Prezentatsiya_ESG_indeksy-RSPP-2022.pdf

Published online 28.12.2022