From non-financial disclosure to sustainability reporting: new challenges for financial analysts and auditors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the context of recurrent ecological and societal crises, the European institutions are committed to fostering sustainable development that meets the needs of present and future generations, while providing new opportunities for employment, investment and economic growth. These commitments are the guiding principle of European policies and strategies in terms of financing sustainable growth, green transition, and building an economy at the service of citizens. They have been gradually transposed into a large number of European regulations 1 , including those related to sustainability disclosure by certain categories of economic and financial actors. The significance of the paradigm shift fuels the reflection on the relationship between these new regulations and the social reality, in which and upon which they must act. As part of the European and international sustainability concerns, this article is a reflection paper on the developments, notably conceptual, axiological and substantive, generated by the Directive (EU) 2022/2464, and their translation into legal and practical innovations. Based on an extensive review of the relevant literature and European legislation, as well as on content analysis and secondary analysis of numerous scientific studies in the field, our contribution focuses on the meaning and implications of the switch from 'non-financial information' to 'sustainability information', as well as on the new relationship between the law and the social reality created by Directive (EU) 2022/2464. The authors assume that such clarifications are a prerequisite for the successful transformation of certain professions significantly affected by this Directive, including those of financial analysts and auditors. This requires, at the same time, upstream changes of university curricula and continuing education in this area, as well as in research programs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".