Logo: to the web site of Uppsala University

This study empirically examines the role of enterprise risk management (ERM) in developing and maintaining resilience resources and capabilities that are necessary for an organisation’s strategic transformation towards sustainability. Data was collected through 25 semi-structured interviews, one non-participant observation, and secondary sources in the context of a Swedish mining company undergoing a high-risk strategic transformation towards full decarbonisation. Following the temporal bracketing approach (Langley in Academy of Management Review 24:691–70, 1999) and employing thematic analysis (Gioia in Organizational Research Methods 16:15–31), the data was structured and analysed according to three phases from 2012 to 2023. The findings show: first, different ERM practices, such as risk governance frameworks, risk culture, risk artefacts, and risk awareness, influence resilience resources and capabilities. Second, the evolution of risk management practices from traditional risk management to ERM is an ongoing developmental process to ensure that risk management continues to be aligned with the company’s strategy. Third, in tandem with strategic changes, resilience in terms of resources and capabilities emerges over time and develops through a series of events, gradually enhancing the company’s ability to manage risks and uncertainties associated with multidimensional sustainability challenges. These results contribute to the ERM literature that follows the dynamic capability approach and also focuses on the relationship between ERM and strategy by adding more detailed empirical evidence from the risk management literature in relation to resilience resources and capabilities. Additionally, the results contribute to the resilience literature that follows a developmental perspective.

Purpose – The study aims to explore the role of sustainability reporting in strategic management. It examineshow sustainability reporting affects strategy implementation (single-loop learning) and strategy formulation(double-loop learning).

Design/methodology/approach – Using a case-study methodology, 22 semi-structured interviews wereconducted at a large mining company. Additionally, secondary data, including the company’s sustainabilityreports from 2018 to 2023, were gathered. A thematic data analysis was used.

Findings – The study shows that sustainability reporting contributes to strategic management. Morespecifically, sustainability reporting facilitates strategy implementation (single-loop learning) by identifyingdeviations, prescribing actions and clarifying responsibilities. Moreover, it facilitates strategy formulation(double-loop learning) by supporting materiality analysis and external benchmarking, identifying strategicuncertainties and reassessing and adjusting the strategy.

Research limitations/implications – This case study is exploratory. While NordMine represents a unique case, it is possible that studying a different company would result in different insights. Therefore, future longitudinalcase studies are suggested to build on and further develop the findings presented in this paper.

Practical implications – The findings originate from a resource-intensive company that is at the forefront ofsustainability transition and has recently reformulated its strategy toward sustainability. The study providesdetailed insightsinto how sustainability reporting can be used by practitionersin different industriesto facilitatestrategic management, for example, by identifying sustainability key performance indicators and improvingtheir follow-up.

Originality/value – The study contributes to the literature by problematizing the link between sustainabilityreporting accounting and strategic management. It shows how sustainability reporting affects processes andactivities that are usually considered to be related to strategy formulation (interactive control) andimplementation (diagnostic control).

Purpose: This study empirically examines the facilitators and impediments to integrating sustainability risks into Enterprise Risk Management (ERM), specifically when a company aims to fulfill sustainability reporting requirements. 

Design / methodology / approach: Using a single case-study methodology, 10 semi-structured interviews were conducted at a large mining company. To complement the interview findings, secondary data were gathered from the company’s sustainability reports, as well as internal and external documents related to risk and sustainability, including the risk management handbook, risk and finance policy, and sustainability policy. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis (Gioia et al., 2013).

Findings: The study shows that interrelated social and technical factors influence the integration of sustainability risks into ERM. From a technical perspective, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), a company’s internal governance documents, and the risk assessment method (i.e., double materiality analysis) act as facilitators in the integration process. Conversely, the lack of organizational change capacity (i.e., mainly changing the traditional and effective financial systems), the inherent properties of sustainability risks, and the existence of separate risk cultures impede the integration process. From a social perspective, the company’s strategic orientation framework, its owners’ interest in sustainability risk and opportunity management and reporting, together with senior management support, facilitate the integration process. However, the lack of coordination mechanisms at lower organizational levels, and as a result, limited employee involvement and a silo-based organizational climate, acts as a social impediment to the integration. Finally, the lack of knowledge integration capability and limited awareness of sustainability risks constitute cognitive impediments to incorporating sustainability risks into ERM in order to meet sustainability reporting requirements. 

Originality: The study contributes to the literature by examining the link between sustainability reporting and ERM. It shows that sustainability risks, in line with sustainability reporting requirements, differ from traditional financial risks and thus are not always included in a company’s integrated risk management (i.e., ERM).  

Digitalisation and sustainability have been described as interrelated drivers of change. Audit firms are adopting advanced digital technologies (ADTs) to improve audit quality, and the demand for sustainability assurance is set to increase dramatically as the European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) comes into effect. However, little is known about the actual use of these technologies in sustainability assurance. To help fill this gap, this chapter investigates the use of ADTs in sustainability assurance in Sweden and provides an outlook on how this may evolve in the future. The data includes interviews with regulatory bodies, audit firms, and institutional investors, as well as secondary materials. The chapter finds that ADTs currently play a minor to non-existent role in sustainability assurance engagements performed by large accounting firms in Sweden. The reasons fall within three broader themes: sustainability reporting and assurance regulation, auditor-client dynamics and embedding ADTs, and the emergence of alternative solution providers. In light of the aforementioned developments, this chapter makes a timely and important contribution by identifying and discussing the tensions that exist at the intersection of the inside-out and outside-in approaches to ESG information provision to capital markets and how ADTs are implicated in these tensions.