永續報告核證國際標準之研究

Abstract

越來越多國家的企業、社會大眾、政府與非政府組織認同永續報告的價值，同時也開始重視永續報告的可靠性與內容。 由於企業和企業的利害關係人逐漸接受永續報告的健全的外部核證是增加永續報告的可靠性和有效性的關鍵方法，而且核證執業者的專業與公信力以及使用一般被接受的、專業的國際核證標準進行永續報告的核證是確保健全的外部核證的關鍵，為了增加永續報告的可靠性與有效性企業除了找專業、具公信力與獨立於企業的外部第三者進行永續報告的核證之外，也應該要求核證執業者使用一般被接受的、專業的國際核證標準進行永續報告的核證。 目前有三種國際的核證標準，核證執業者在規劃與執行核證程序的時候以及國家的核證標準的制定者在制定國家的核證標準的時候都會面臨「應該使用或參考哪些現有國際核證標準？」的問題，報告組織與它的利害關係人也有「應用不同的現有國際核證標準產生的結果與報告有何差異？」的疑問，所以本篇論文希望研究這三種國際核證標準的內容並且進一步分析比較來解決以上的問題，並且為了國際核證標準的發展提出建議。 本研究獲得的結論是同時採用ISAE3000與AA1000AS 2008 (draft)執行為了永續報告核證的核證參與可以提供核證執業者更完整的實施核證的要求與引導、獲得最好的核證結果、使核證執業者提供更能滿足報告組織與報告組織的利害關係人的需求的核證結論，所以核證執業者與國家的核證標準的制定者應該同時使用或參考ISAE3000與AA1000AS 2008 (draft)。

More companies, citizens, governments, and NGOs recognize the value of sustainability reports and pay attention to the credibility and content of the sustainability reports they read. Companies have to publish sustainability reports with robust external assurance that depends on the ethics, reputation, and competencies of assurance practitioners and the use of an international assurance standard in order to increase the credibility and effectiveness of their sustainability reports. There are three kinds of international assurance standards now. Assurance practitioners, the enactors of national assurance standards, reporting organizations and their stakeholders have the problem that what the differences between the three international assurance standards are. The thesis therefore wants to research, analyze, and compare the contents of the three kinds of international assurance standards to solve the problems mentioned above and provide suggestions for the development of international assurance standards. One conclusion of the research is that the use of both ISAE3000 and AA1000AS 2008 (draft) can provide more complete requirements and guidance, best conclusions that can fulfill the need of the users of sustainability reports. Another is that assurance practitioners, the enactors of national assurance standards have to use and refer both ISAE3000 and AA1000AS 2008 (draft).