The Carnegie and Napier framework is used to provide a
format for comparison. The evolution of CSR reporting
may not follow a linear path to that of financial reporting,
but there is still much to be learned from a comparison. As
future issues relating to the convergence, harmonization,
evolution, and diffusion of CSR reporting standards grow
in importance, a comparison to how those issues played out
in financial reporting can be useful.
The Current State of CSR Reporting Standards
Currently, the three most widely recognized CSR reporting
standards are the Global Reporting Initiative’s (GRI) G3
standards, AccountAbility’s AA1000 Series, and the United
Nations (UN) Global Compact’s Communication on
Progress (COP). There are hundreds of domestic CSR
reporting guidelines, principles, regulations, and standards,
and several other global initiatives, such as Organization
for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
Guidelines, International Labour Organization (ILO)
Conventions, and International Organization for Standardization
(ISO) Standards. However, the GRI’s G3,
AA1000 Series, and UN’s COP represent the most widely
recognized international standards that involve external
reporting on both social and environmental issues (Koerber
2009). These are the only three reporting standards listed
on CorporateRegister.com, a global CSR resources website,
which advertises itself as the world’s largest online
directory of CSR reports.
The Global Reporting Initiative’s G3 Standards
The GRI first issued guidelines in a 1999 exposure draft.
These guidelines were revised in the 2000 launch, revised
in 2002, and then the current G3 guidelines were published
in 2006. New G4 standards are due to be launched in 2013.
The GRI uses a multi-stakeholder consensus-seeking
approach to develop its guidelines. First, a multi-stakeholder
working group of about twenty individuals,
including representatives from business, civil society,
labor, investors, and accountants, develop a new or updated
component to the guidelines. This process may take up to
1 year, after which the draft is exposed to the public for
comments for at least 90 days. After addressing these
comments, the working group then submits the proposal to
the GRI’s Technical Advisory Committee for review. Once
approved, it is used as a pilot version for at least 1 year.
Organizations participating in the pilot project give feedback
to the Technical Advisory Committee. The Technical
Advisory Committee then makes a recommendation to the
Board of Directors that it either be reworked or released as
a final version (GRI 2013).