BUACC2606 Corporate Accounting – Research Essay on Stigler, Friedman, GRI and CSR (2026-style brief)

---

Unit and Assessment Context

School: The Business School, Australian undergraduate business program

Unit: BUACC2606 – Corporate Accounting

Assessment Title: Research Assignment – Regulation, CSR and Climate Change

Assessment Type: Group research essay, two students per group

Weighting: 25 percent of total unit mark

Length: 2,000 words plus or minus 10 percent, excluding abstract, tables, figures and reference list

Due Date: Week 10, exact submission time and date to be advised in class and on the learning management system

Assessment Description

The assignment develops your capacity to critically evaluate competing theories of regulation and corporate social responsibility and to apply contemporary reporting frameworks to real world corporate practice. You will work in pairs to analyse how Stigler’s private interest theory and Friedman’s view of the firm’s social responsibilities interact with modern sustainability reporting standards, particularly the Global Reporting Initiative, and with ASX listed companies’ climate related and broader CSR disclosures.

Theoretical Background

Stigler’s private interest theory of regulation argues that regulatory bodies, including accounting standard setters, are composed of self-interested individuals and are often captured by organised interest groups that seek rules favouring their own economic positions rather than the public interest. In contrast, Milton Friedman’s classical shareholder primacy position asserts that the primary social responsibility of business is to increase its profits within the rules of the game, leaving redistribution and broader social objectives to governments. At the same time, global initiatives such as the GRI Standards require companies to report on their economic, environmental and social impacts, including climate change, and are increasingly aligned with emerging mandatory sustainability disclosure frameworks.

Task Requirements

You must prepare a 2,000 word research essay that addresses the four parts below. The essay must be written as a coherent piece of academic work rather than as four disconnected short answers.

Part (a): Stigler versus Friedman on Regulation and Social Responsibility

Approximately 500 words, 10 marks

Compare Milton Friedman’s view on the social responsibilities of business with Stigler’s private interest theory of regulation.

1. Summarise Friedman’s argument about the role of corporations, managers and profit maximisation, including his position on environmental or social regulation.

2. Explain Stigler’s private interest theory, focusing on the notion of regulatory capture and the idea that regulators, including accounting standard setters, respond to organised private interests rather than the public interest.

3. Discuss how these positions would predict regulators’ behaviour when considering climate change regulation that is opposed by powerful business groups.

Part (b): Global Reporting Initiative Standards

Approximately 500 words, 10 marks

Discuss the main features and inherent standards of the Global Reporting Initiative framework.

1. Describe the overall architecture of the GRI Standards, including Universal Standards and topic specific standards for environmental, social and governance issues.

2. Explain how GRI requires companies to disclose material impacts on climate, energy, emissions, workers and communities, and note recent developments such as the strengthening of climate related requirements and alignment with IFRS and ISSB climate disclosure standards.

3. Comment on how the GRI emphasis on transparency and stakeholder interests fits with, or challenges, the assumptions of Stigler’s and Friedman’s views.

Part (c): CSR and Climate Related Disclosure by an ASX Listed Company

Approximately 500 words, 10 marks

Select a company listed on the ASX. No two groups may analyse the same company and your choice must be confirmed with your tutor. Using the most recent annual report and sustainability or ESG report:

1. Identify how the company discloses Corporate Social Responsibility and sustainability issues, with emphasis on climate change, emissions, energy transition and broader social impacts.

2. Indicate whether, and how explicitly, the company reports with reference to or in accordance with the GRI Standards or other frameworks such as TCFD, IFRS S2 or ISSB and summarise the scope of the disclosures.

3. Provide concrete examples of climate related or environmental performance indicators, targets and governance arrangements disclosed by the company.

Part (d): Evaluation Against GRI and Reflection on Stigler’s Theory

Approximately 500 words, 10 marks

Evaluate your chosen company’s performance in relation to GRI Standards and comment on the implications for Stigler’s theory.

1. Assess the extent to which the company’s disclosures align with key GRI requirements on climate related and broader sustainability disclosures, including completeness, balance, materiality and stakeholder inclusiveness.

2. Discuss whether the pattern and quality of disclosure supports the idea that regulation and reporting frameworks are driven mainly by private interests, for example reputation management, investor pressure and strategic positioning, or whether they reflect a broader public interest or stakeholder oriented logic.

3. Reflect on the likelihood, under Stigler’s framework, that regulators would introduce and enforce strong climate change related accounting or reporting requirements in the face of sustained business opposition and compare this with observed developments in GRI and climate disclosure regimes.

---

Instructions and Format

• Group size: Two students per group. Group size cannot be altered. Each student must contribute substantively and may be asked to discuss elements of the assignment to verify authorship.

• Company selection: Each group must analyse a different ASX listed company. Confirm your choice with your lecturer or tutor to avoid duplication.

• Word limit: Maximum 2,000 words. Over length assignments may be penalised.

• Structure: Include an abstract or synopsis of 150 to 200 words, an introduction, a logically structured body addressing parts (a) to (d), clear recommendations or reflections where relevant, and a concise conclusion.

• Referencing: Use Harvard or APA consistently. Provide in-text citations and a properly formatted reference list. Evidence of substantial reading beyond the prescribed text is required, including recent peer reviewed journal articles and authoritative professional sources.

• Academic integrity: Follow the university policy on plagiarism and collusion. All group members are responsible for ensuring the integrity of the submission.

• Late penalties: Assignments submitted after the due date without approved extension will attract a penalty of 10 percent of the available marks per day, in line with faculty policy.

Marking Rubric Summary

Stigler’s private interest theory implies that when powerful industry groups face costly climate related regulation they have strong incentives to influence standard setters and shape disclosure rules so that the most burdensome requirements are delayed or diluted. Friedman’s position on corporate social responsibility reinforces this scepticism because he treats environmental protections mainly as external legal constraints rather than intrinsic managerial duties. In contrast, the GRI Standards attempt to centre the informational needs of a broad set of stakeholders by requiring companies to report on material impacts across climate, labour, human rights and governance. An ASX listed company that reports in accordance with GRI and provides detailed metrics for emissions, climate targets and board oversight illustrates how voluntary reporting regimes can go beyond minimal compliance. Evaluating such a company against core GRI principles often reveals gaps, particularly where firms highlight positive achievements but provide limited data on risks or lobbying activities, which supports a nuanced reading of Stigler in which private interests shape not only whether rules are adopted but also how they are applied. Emerging alignment between GRI, ISSB climate standards and national regulatory initiatives suggests that societal expectations about corporate responsibility for climate change are increasingly being translated into more robust disclosure regimes.

Perspective on Regulation and CSR

Recent developments in global sustainability reporting indicate that corporate disclosure practices are influenced by a complex interaction of voluntary initiatives, stakeholder expectations and evolving regulatory pressure. Even where formal regulation remains limited, the growing demand from investors, communities and international institutions for credible climate information has encouraged many firms to adopt more transparent reporting frameworks. This demonstrates that corporate accountability can expand through social and market mechanisms as well as through direct legal mandates (Deegan 2019).

 Academic and Professional References

1. Andrew, J & Baker, M 2020, The climate change accounting nexus: Insights for policy and practice, Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 1045–1069.

2. Crifo, P & Forget, V 2019, The economics of corporate social responsibility: A firm level perspective survey, Journal of Economic Surveys, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 119–148.

3. Haack, P & Rasche, A 2021, The politics of corporate responsibility and the future of global governance, Organization Studies, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 623–645.

4. Global Reporting Initiative 2024, GRI Standards, Global Reporting Initiative, Amsterdam.

5. Nyberg, D, Spence, C & Wright, C 2018, Climate change and corporate power, Organization Studies, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 1–20.