Flattening or addressing complexity? The future role of GRI in light of the sustainability accounting (r)evolution

Purpose: This paper discusses the evolution of sustainability reporting and the role of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) in relation to the social and environmental accounting (SEA) literature calling for a revolution in the standardization of sustainability reporting and the inherent complexities. This paper focuses on the future role of GRI in light of the changes resulting from harmonization supported by the International Sustainability Standards Board and the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group’s draft European Sustainability Reporting Directive. Design/methodology/approach: Building on Bourdieu (1983, 1992) and SEA studies, the authors adopt a critical and qualitative approach to theorize power dynamics in the sustainability reporting field. After identifying the main issues arising from the complexity of the sustainability reporting standards and practices according to SEA scholars, the authors connect them with Bourdieu’s (1992, 1983) field theory to discuss the future role of GRI. Findings: The findings suggest two distinct but intertwined roles that GRI could play in the future, namely, power related and theoretical/technical, aimed at engendering revolutionary rather than evolutionary changes in sustainability reporting. Practical implications: This study offers practical implications for GRI to strengthen its future role in sustainability reporting standardization. Social implications: The limited time available to mitigate the disastrous consequences of non-sustainable business on society and the environment calls for urgently addressing the complexities of sustainability accounting to foster a positive impact on society and the environment. Originality/value: The authors’ reflections reclaim the SEA literature as central to identifying sustainability complexity and Bourdieu’s (1983, 1992) notions of power as key to understanding the role of GRI in the sustainability field. Furthermore, this paper emphasizes the intersection of different critical concepts, including power, complexity, value, capital and materiality.