The Role of Auditors in Limiting Greenwashing in ESG Reporting: An Exploratory Study

Section: Research Paper
Issue
Vol. 20 No. 70 (2026): Regional Studies Journal
Pages
467-496

Abstract

Research Idea: The research is motivated by the growing global and local adoption of ESG standards and sustainability reporting, accompanied by the emergence of greenwashing and the misleading of stakeholders through inaccurate disclosures. This development highlights the importance of the auditor’s oversight role as an essential safeguard for the assurance of non-financial information and the quality of corporate disclosure.


Objective: The research aims to examine auditors’ perceptions of their professional and oversight role in detecting and mitigating greenwashing in ESG reporting and to identify the main obstacles they face in performing this role.


Methodology: The research adopts a descriptive-analytical approach using a questionnaire administered to practicing auditors in licensed audit offices and the Federal Board of Supreme Audit. Of the 60 questionnaires distributed, 51 valid responses were obtained, representing an 85% response rate.


Results: The findings indicate that auditors play a pivotal role in mitigating greenwashing by verifying non-financial information. However, this role is constrained by the absence of mandatory local standards and gaps in technical competencies, while respondents show strong support for adopting international assurance standards, particularly ISAE 3000.


Conclusion: The research concludes that there is a need to move from traditional auditing toward sustainability assurance to strengthen economic protection and the quality of ESG disclosure. It recommends updating Iraq’s professional frameworks to incorporate ESG reporting assurance requirements and providing specialized training programs to enhance auditors’ capacity to detect and mitigate greenwashing.

Keywords:

Statutory Auditor ; Greenwashing; Sustainability Reports (ESG).

References

  1. المصادر والمراجع
  2. 1. المصادر العربية
  3. الاتحاد الدولي للمحاسبين (IFAC). (2020). المعايير الدولية لعمليات التأكيد: المعيار الدولي رقم 3000: عمليات التأكيد غير المتعلقة بمراجعة أو فحص معلومات مالية تاريخية. ترجمة: المجمع الدولي العربي للمحاسبين القانونيين.
  4. الخطيب، خ. (2022). التدقيق البيئي وأثره على جودة التقارير المالية والغير مالية. دار الفكر الجامعي الإسكندرية. مصر.
  5. الزبيدي، ح. (2021). التدقيق المعاصر: الإطار النظري والتطبيقي. دار الكتب العلمية للنشر والتوزيع. بغداد. العراق.
  6. القحطاني، م. (2021). المحاسبة عن الاستدامة والإفصاح البيئي والاجتماعي. دار المناهج للنشر والتوزيع. عمان. الأردن.
  7. المشهداني. س. (2022). منهجية البحث العلمي في العلوم الإدارية والمحاسبية. دار اليازوري العلمية للنشر والتوزيع. عمان. الأردن.
  8. 2. ترجمة المصادر العربية إلى الإنكليزية
  9. Al-Khatib, K. (2022). Environmental auditing and its impact on the quality of financial and non-financial reports. Alexandria: Dar Al-Fikr Al-Jami’i.
  10. Al-Mashhadani, S. (2022). Research methodology in administrative and accounting sciences. Amman: Dar Al-Yazouri Scientific Publishing.
  11. Al-Qahhtani, M. (2021). Accounting for sustainability and environmental and social disclosure. Amman: Dar Al-Manahij Publishing and Distribution.
  12. Al-Zubaidi, H. (2021). Contemporary auditing: Theoretical and applied framework. Baghdad: Dar Al-Kutub Al-Ilmiyya Publishing and Distribution.
  13. International Federation of Accountants (IFAC). (2020). International standards on assurance engagements: ISAE 3000 – Assurance engagements other than audits or reviews of historical financial information. Translated by Arab International Society of Certified Accountants.
  14. 3. English References
  15. Accountability. (2020). AA1000 Assurance Standard (AA1000AS V3). Accountability, New York, USA.
  16. Adams, C. A. (2020). Sustainability reporting and value creation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 33(1), 1–21.
  17. Amel-Zadeh, A., & Serafeim, G. (2018). Why and how investors use ESG information: Evidence from a global survey. Financial Analysts Journal, 74(3), 87–103.
  18. https://doi.org/10.2469/faj.v74.n3.2
  19. Bansal, P., & Clelland, I. (2004). Talking Trash: Legitimacy, Impression Management and Unsystematic Risk in the Context of the Natural Environment. Academy of Management Journal, 47(1), 93–103. https://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/20159562?utm_source=chatgpt.com
  20. Boffo, R., & Patalano, R. (2020). ESG management and fiduciary duty in institutional investment. OECD, Paris, France. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=3745502
  21. Boiral, O. (2013). Sustainability reports as simulacra? A counter-account of GRI performance. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 26(7), 1036–1071.
  22. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2012-00998
  23. Cheng, B., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014). Corporate social responsibility and access to finance. Strategic Management Journal, 35(1), 1–23. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24037207
  24. CorporateRegister.com. (2008). Assure View: The CSR Assurance Statement Report. London, UK
  25. https://www.corporateregister.com/pdf/AssureView.pdf
  26. Deegan, C. M. (2019). Legitimacy theory: Despite its enduring popularity and contribution, time is right for a necessary makeover. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 32(8), 2307–2329. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2018-3638
  27. Delmas, M. A., & Burbano, V. C. (2011). The drivers of greenwashing. California Management Review, 54(1), 64–87. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2011.54.1.64
  28. Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2010). Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 8–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00276.x
  29. Eccles, R. G., Krzus, M. P., & Ribot, S. (2015). Meaning and Momentum in the Integrated Reporting Movement. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 27(2), 8–17.
  30. https://doi.org/10.1111/jacf.12113
  31. Gatti, L., Seele, P., & Rademacher, L. (2021). Grey zone in greenwashing: Definitional ambiguities and new institutionalism. Journal of Business Ethics, 172(1), 1–16.
  32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40991-019-0044-9
  33. Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). (2020). Consolidated set of GRI sustainability reporting standards. GRI Publishing. https://eddirection.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/GRI-Standards-Consolidated.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com
  34. Gray, R., Kouhy, R., & Lavers, S. (1995). Corporate social and environmental reporting: A review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 8(2), 47–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09513579510146996
  35. Gürtürk, A., & Hahn, R. (2016). An empirical assessment of assurance statements in sustainability reports: Smoke screens or enlightening information? Journal of Cleaner
  36. Production, 136(Part A), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.089
  37. Hodge, K., Subramaniam, N., & Stewart, J. (2009). Assurance of sustainability reports: Impact on report users’ confidence and perceptions of information credibility. Australian Accounting Review, 19(3), 178–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1835-2561.2009.00056.x
  38. Hummel, K., & Schlick, C. (2016). The relationship between sustainability performance and sustainability disclosure: Reconciling voluntary disclosure theory and legitimacy theory. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 35(5), 455–476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2016.06.001
  39. International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). (2012). International Standard on Assurance Engagements (ISAE) 3410: Assurance engagements on greenhouse gas statements. IFAC.
  40. International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). (2013). International Standard on Assurance Engagements (ISAE) 3000 (Revised): Assurance engagements other than audits or reviews of historical financial information. IFAC.
  41. International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). (2024). International Standard on Sustainability Assurance (ISSA) 5000: General requirements for sustainability assurance engagements. IFAC.
  42. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.
  43. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
  44. Jones, P., Hillier, D., & Comfort, D. (2014). Assurance of the leading UK food retailers' corporate social responsibility/sustainability reports. Corporate Governance, 14(1), 130–138. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-03-2011-0027
  45. Lyon, T., & Montgomery, A. W. (2015). The means and end of greenwashing. Organization & Environment, 28(2), 223–249.
  46. Marquis, C., Toffel, M. W., & Zhou, Y. (2016). Scrutiny, Norms, and Selective Disclosure: A Global Study of Greenwashing. Organization Science, 27(2), 483–500.
  47. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2015.1039
  48. O’Dwyer, B., Owen, D., & Unerman, J. (2011). Seeking legitimacy for new assurance practices: The case of sustainability assurance. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 36(1), 31–52.
  49. Parguel, B., Benoît-Moreau, F., & Russell, C. A. (2015). Can evoking nature in advertising mislead consumers? The power of “executional greenwashing”. International Journal of Advertising, 34(1), 107–134. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02650487.2014.996116?utm_source=chatgpt.com
  50. Pflugrath, G., Roebuck, P., & Simnett, R. (2011). Impact of assurance and assurer’s professional affiliation on financial analysts’ assessment of credibility of corporate social responsibility information. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 30(3), 239–254. DOI: 10.2308/ajpt-10047. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-10047?utm_source=chatgpt.com
  51. Schaltegger, S., & Burritt, R. (2018). Contemporary environmental accounting: Issues and concepts. Routledge, London, UK.
  52. Simnett, R., Vanstraelen, A., & Chua, W. F. (2009). Assurance on sustainability reports: An international comparison. The Accounting Review, 84(3), 937–967.
  53. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2009.84.3.937
  54. Terrachoice. (2010). The sins of greenwashing: Home and family edition. Underwriters Laboratories.https://www.twosides.info/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Terrachoice_The_Sins_of_Greenwashing_-_Home_and_Family_Edition_2010.pdf
  55. Velte, P. (2021). Archival research on ESG reporting and assurance: Key drivers and consequences. Journal of Management and Governance, 26, 997–1061.
  56. https://doi.org/10.1108/SBR-05-2020-0077
  57. Assurance statement practice in environmental, social and sustainability reporting: A critical evaluation. The British Accounting Review, 37(2), 205–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2005.01.005
  58. Assurance on sustainability reports: An international comparison. The Accounting Review, 84(3), 937–967. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2009.84.3.937

Author

Waad H. Shlash Hamad

a:1:{s:2:"ar";s:23:"جامعة الموصل";}

Identifiers

DOI: 10.33899/rsj.v20i70.64264

Download this PDF file
pdf (Arabic)

Statistics

How to Cite

The Role of Auditors in Limiting Greenwashing in ESG Reporting: An Exploratory Study. (2026). مجلة دراسات إقلیمیة, 20(70), 467-496. https://doi.org/10.33899/rsj.v20i70.64264
Copyright and Licensing
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

The Role of Auditors in Limiting Greenwashing in ESG Reporting: An Exploratory Study. (2026). مجلة دراسات إقلیمیة, 20(70), 467-496. https://doi.org/10.33899/rsj.v20i70.64264