Stakeholder influence in shaping the role of accountants in sustainability reporting in Romania

Albu, Nadia; Almășan, Alina Carmen; Dinu, Andreea; Dumitru, Mădălina; Jinga, Gabriel Article Stakeholder influence in shaping the role of accountants in sustainability reporting in Romania Amfiteatru Economic Provided in Cooperation with: The Bucharest University of Economic Studies Suggested Citation: Albu, Nadia; Almășan, Alina Carmen; Dinu, Andreea; Dumitru, Mădălina; Jinga, Gabriel (2025) : Stakeholder influence in shaping the role of accountants in sustainability reporting in Romania, Amfiteatru Economic, ISSN 2247-9104, The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Vol. 27, Iss. 70, pp. 750-770, https://doi.org/10.24818/EA/2025/70/750 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/328019 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ AE Stakeholder Influence in Shaping the Role of Accountants in Sustainability Reporting in Romania 750 Amfiteatru Economic STAKEHOLDER INFLUENCE IN SHAPING THE ROLE OF ACCOUNTANTS IN SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING IN ROMANIA Nadia Albu1, Alina Carmen Almășan2, Andreea Dinu3, Mădălina Dumitru4 and Gabriel Jinga5 * 1)3)4)5) Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Romania 2) West University of Timisoara, Timisoara, Romania Please cite this article as: Albu, N., Almășan, A.C., Dinu, A., Dumitru, M. and Jinga, G., 2025. Stakeholder Influence in Shaping the Role of Accountants in Sustainability Reporting in Romania. Amfiteatru Economic, 27(70), pp. 750-770. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24818/EA/2025/70/750 Article History Received: 30 March 2025 Revised: 26 April 2025 Accepted: 18 May 2025 Abstract Mandatory non-financial reporting (subsequently replaced by sustainability reporting (SR)) appeared in the European Union in 2017, as part of the Accounting Directive. Therefore, SR represents a relatively recent and evolving challenge for the accounting profession. In this context, the aim of the study was to explore the influence of various stakeholders in shaping the role of accountants in SR in Romania. The research was framed within the concept of a field, capturing the interaction of different forces. The research methodology was exploratory. Data was collected from 18 semi-structured interviews carried out between January and February 2025 with 20 professionals with direct experience in SR and in the accounting profession. The coding and analysis were contextualised and triangulated with our understanding (researchers and practitioners) of the field, both deductively and inductively. The results showed the low effective interaction and receptivity to SR of the state (as legitimacy provider), and the higher involvement of universities and professional accounting organisations (as awareness providers) and consultants, Big 4 firms, and, in some cases, employers (as resource providers). The study is important as it provides relevant and fresh insights for practice and regulation. Keywords: sustainability reporting; accounting professionals; field theory; legitimacy providers; sustainability reporting actors; legitimacy; awareness. JEL Classification: M14, Q56 * Corresponding author, Gabriel Jinga – e-mail: gabriel.ji[email protected]se.ro This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. © 2025 The Author(s). Sustainability Reporting: Catalyst for Organisational and Professional Change AE Vol. 27 • No. 70 • August 2025 751 Introduction Sustainable development is one of the biggest challenges in recent times, and companies, regulators, professions, and society in general are expected to address it. The attitude towards sustainable development and sustainability reporting (RS) has changed over the years, in regulations and companies, from neglection to experimentation and integration (Lai and Stacchezzini, 2021). Companies dealt with sustainability voluntarily or, more recently, as a result of regulatory initiatives intended to increase sustainability-related awareness and action through the obligation to engage in sustainability reporting (SR). The European Union is probably the geographic setting under the most significant changes in this respect, with mandatory non-financial reporting by large companies since 2017. The Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD) (European Union, 2014) was replaced by the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) in 2022 (European Union, 2022), which is intended to apply to more companies. Recently, the regulatory field is in progress, with multiple regulatory initiatives besides the Directives (Giner and Luque-Vílchez, 2022), but also with ongoing discussions to reduce the regulatory pressure. Emerging topics of sustainability and SR significantly influence professions, being estimated that globally half of the workforce is impacted (Brès et al., 2019). New professions emerged (e.g., sustainability manager), but traditional ones (e.g., accounting profession) are also undergoing massive transformations. To many, the European Directives call for elevated involvement from the accounting profession in SR (Krasodomska, Michalak and Świetla, 2020; Kunz, Oltmann and Weinhart, 2025). This opportunity is taken up by international professional accounting organisations (PAOs), calling for accountants’ engagement (IFAC, 2023). While SR is a global movement, the accounting profession, and professions in general (Brès et al., 2019), have tasks localised within nation states, with national professional associations, governments and other local actors playing important roles in establishing the expectations from and responsibilities of local professionals (Wolf et al., 2020). Therefore, we explore how various actors may influence the shaping of accountants’ role in SR. Our research question is how the field of relations contributes to accountants’ involvement in SR in Romania. Our context is relevant for investigation, given, on the one hand, the important role of the stakeholders, and, on the other hand, the modest but increasing adherence to sustainability and SR in Romania (Albu et al., 2021; Guşe et al., 2016). We respond to calls to investigate the role of various stakeholders in driving the evolution of SR and of accountants’ involvement therein (Lai and Stacchezzini, 2021) and to conduct contextualised SR investigations (Albu et al., 2024) to provide relevant and fresh insights for practice and policy. The methodology used was exploratory. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews conducted between January and February 2025. The main findings revealed limited interaction and responsiveness from the state (as a provider of legitimacy), greater involvement from universities and professional accounting organisations (as providers of awareness), and, in some cases, the engagement of consultants, Big 4 firms, and employers (as providers of resources). The study is split into the following parts: first, we present the theoretical background of the research; then, the research method is described; the main results are presented. The study ends with discussion and conclusions. AE Stakeholder Influence in Shaping the Role of Accountants in Sustainability Reporting in Romania 752 Amfiteatru Economic 1. Theoretical background 1.1. Theoretical frames to map the field of sustainability reporting Organisational practices and professionals’ behaviour do not take place in a vacuum, but are the result of interactions with and pressures from regulatory actors, external stakeholders, and other professionals. Social sciences propose the concept of field to capture the influence of the relevant stakeholders, and a field theory as an approach “whose essence is the explanation of regularities in individual action by recourse to position vis-àvis others” (Martin, 2003, p. 1). We mobilise this theoretical approach in our analysis, given its “attention to the concrete” (ibid.) and therefore its potential to illuminate practice while remaining close to it. For Bourdieu, one of the important contributors to field theory (Martin, 2003), the field provides a social typology, with people acting and reacting due to the structuring of the space. Fields are “structured spaces of positions (or posts) whose properties depend on their position within these spaces, and which can be analysed independently of the characteristics of their occupants (which are partly determined by them)” (Bourdieu, 1993, p.72). As such, the concept of the field conceptualises social structures located at distinct levels on a societal arena, in interaction with each other, and featuring their own hierarchies and power struggles (Bourdieu, 1995). It is in relation to its theoretical power, and also given the recognised importance of various actors in shaping the role of the accounting profession (Brouard et al., 2017; Wolf et al., 2020), that we mobilise in this paper the concept of field and the mapping the field approach to gain a practical understanding of the accountants’ involvement with SR. Reflecting on the work of Bourdieu and the importance of the concept of field, Anesa et al. (2019, p. 18) highlight that “A comprehensive analysis of field dynamics, underlying shared beliefs, their emergence, and their reinforcement through power is key to understand how practices are legitimised, changed and maintained”. In this study, the field relates to the professional space that has been opened up in the accounting profession by SR and is broadened by emerging regulations. The field is territorially bounded (Romania), yet, inevitably, in connection to the dynamics of European and international developments. The field is the space in which rules are created, recreated, interpreted, and transformed into practices through the interaction of various actors, and where the powerful actors decide what is important and what gets disregarded. This is because “every position in the field induces a set of motivations that are subjectively experienced as ‘what should be done” (Martin, 2003, p. 42). The field is relational, pointing to the relationship (e.g., support, competition) between various actors. Mapping the field implies therefore not only inferring field composition (actors), but also determining the field dynamics (Anesa et al., 2019). This approach is highly relevant when investigating professions (Nicklich, Braun and Fortwengel, 2020), as they are a place in the interaction with stakeholders, or in a field of relations (Anteby, Chan and DiBenigno, 2016). These dynamics may be analysed in terms of thickness (Nicklich, Braun and Fortwengel, 2020) and receptivity (Faulconbridge and Muzio, 2016). Thickness refers to the degree of interaction between actors in a field (Nicklich, Braun and Fortwengel, 2020), while receptivity (Faulconbridge and Muzio, 2016) reflects the openness to new, alternative, concepts, and ideas. It is expected that a high degree of thickness and receptivity enables a shared understanding (Nicklich, Braun and Fortwengel, 2020) and favours the introduction of novelties in professions. Sustainability Reporting: Catalyst for Organisational and Professional Change AE Vol. 27 • No. 70 • August 2025 753 1.2. Relevant institutional actors in shaping a role in sustainability reporting for the accounting profession Although first adopting a gatekeeping role between sustainability managers and higher management, rather than actively participating in the direct management of sustainability information (Schaltegger and Zvezdov, 2015), accountants started to play an important role in the companies’ sustainability discourse in 2000 (Lai and Stacchezzini, 2021). Additionally, accountants may play a role in setting socio-environmental strategies and key performance indicators and explaining the results, assurance, accountability, and evaluating environmental risks (Lai and Stacchezzini, 2021). However, accountants face jurisdictional competition with other experts, given that multinational corporations (MNCs), as drivers of voluntary SR, rather relied on sustainability managers and other specialists, leaving routinely a low role for accountants. Most of the studies conducted in voluntary reporting settings reveal modest or no involvement of the accounting profession in SR (Ascani, Ciccola and Chiucchi, 2021). Moreover, accounting professionals’ willingness to expand beyond their traditional boundaries cannot be assumed, as historically they resisted such an action (Lai and Stacchezzini, 2021). But the role accountants play in companies and society is constructed through the influence of various factors (Brouard et al., 2017). Starting from the literature on the role of accountants, Wolf et al. (2020) propose a framework regrouping the main factors with an impact on accountants’ identity. This framework includes external, organisational and individual aspects. Previous studies on the role of accountants in SR significantly addressed the individual and organisational aspects (e.g., Egan and Tweedie, 2018; Kunz, Oltmann and Weinhart, 2025), while the investigation of field-level influences is scattered. As corporate social responsibility (CSR) and its reporting are born as a global practice (Brès et al., 2019), a first group of significant institutional actors consists into global actors – regulators and standard setters, global PAOs, large accounting firms, and MNCs. These are globalising actors (Malsch, 2013) creating and spreading a global idea of sustainability and SR in national settings. Regulators and standard setters (Giner and Luque-Vílchez, 2022) such as the EU’s ones call for comparability, transparency, materiality in SR, which inevitably, but rather covertly, creates a role for the accounting profession, since this profession traditionally instils these features into the corporate reporting. The strong and overt call for involvement comes from global PAOs (e.g., IFAC, 2023), that provide arguments for engagement, thus socially lobbying for an augmented role for the profession. Historically, PAOs have been advocates for the regulation and formalisation of practices and they played a significant role in this respect. The underlying objective that legitimises their existence revolves around fulfilling the ‘public interest’ (Gîrbină, Albu and Albu, 2011). Global PAOs, alongside large accounting firms (Big 4), offer the necessary knowledge resources for SR, as they produce studies, certifications, and tools to assist their members. Moreover, they serve as a role model for local associations and firms. Besides working to ensure expanded jurisdictional boundaries for the accounting profession, these actors also play a political role, as they promote a sustainability approach based “on a rational and instrumental market logic” (Malsch, 2013, p. 165). On the other hand, MNCs might have mixed influences – in many cases, accountants are rather marginalised in SR (Ascani, AE Stakeholder Influence in Shaping the Role of Accountants in Sustainability Reporting in Romania 754 Amfiteatru Economic Ciccola and Chiucchi, 2021), as other professional experts took the lead and considered accountants unprepared for sustainability. However, these companies actively promote international qualifications with their employees by covering the costs of courses and exams, as well as providing free time for trainings, and thus they may equip accountants with necessary skills in case they are involved in SR. Kuasirikun and Constable (2024) note a common theme in the accounting and globalisation literature: accounting knowledge and CSR practices in developing economies and emerging markets are frequently influenced by international institutions that often rely on the Big 4 and other consulting firms to translate in practice the technical standards, particularly in areas like SR. The dual role of Big 4, advancing professional expertise and implementing global standards, highlights their critical influence on shaping accounting practices and accountants’ identities (Cooper and Robson, 2006). In addition, these global influences, traditional professions such as accounting are orchestrated by local actors – state (government), local PAOs, universities, employers, and relevant local users of their work product. States influence SR and can legitimise the accountants’ role, especially in developing economies, where governments partner with companies, offer incentives, and regulate CSR through national governance norms (Jamali et al., 2017). These regulatory developments are expected to change the accountants’ tasks (Wolf et al., 2020). As such, Krasodomska, Michalak and Świetla (2020) suggest that in contexts (such as Poland, their case) where the NFRD has been transposed through an accounting act, the accounting profession started to consider non-financial reporting as part of its responsibilities. Users may also indirectly impact accountants’ role, as their demand for high-quality SR may trigger accountants’ involvement. This is due to accountants’ expertise in identifying relevant information, as well as in organising and analysing data (Schaltegger and Zvezdov, 2015). Moreover, SR is often expected to be used as an accounting instrument that includes measures and numbers, rather than as a communication tool (Frostenson and Helin, 2017). If the mindset of accountants is considered an important factor in understanding accountants’ involvement with SR (e.g., Ascani, Ciccola and Chiucchi, 2021; Egan and Tweedie, 2018; Kunz, Oltmann and Weinhart, 2025), then it is particularly the role of local PAOs and universities to change this mindset (Wolf et al., 2020). PAOs may play an important role, as they shape the body of knowledge, creating a sense of community, shaping professional identities, improving the status of the profession, and thus having the power of structuring the field (Nicklich, Braun and Fortwengel, 2020). Moreover, the inclusion of sustainability in education legitimises the professional actions of accountants in this field (Kunz, Oltmann and Weinhart, 2025). The sustainability education provided by PAOs to their members, in the form of continuing professional development courses, has a significant impact on shaping accountants' competencies in this area. Krasodomska, Zarzycka and Zieniuk (2024) highlight the increased need of national accounting organisations and regulatory bodies to involve, support, and encourage accountants to adopt the new responsibilities driven from SR. Sustainability education provided by the PAOs to their members in the form of continuous development lectures has an important impact on shaping the accountants’ competences in this regard. Moreover, universities are the starting point of creating an awareness regarding sustainability and SR. However, it appears that in many settings, education in universities lags behind societal trends (Ascani, Ciccola and Chiucchi, 2021). As such, Boulianne, Keddie and Postaire (2018) finds that in some Sustainability Reporting: Catalyst for Organisational and Professional Change AE Vol. 27 • No. 70 • August 2025 755 settings (as in France, their case) the state-funded education programmes marginally include sustainability, while SR is state-mandated. As such, prior research calls for a stronger involvement of these local actors in the accountants’ preparation for SR (Krasodomska, Zarzycka and Zieniuk, 2024; Kunz, Oltmann and Weinhart, 2025). Employers might influence the accountants’ role in SR, through the job requirements. Accountants enjoying a good image identify themselves to a higher degree with the values and norms of their employer (Wolf et al., 2020). These include the attitude toward sustainability, in general, and SR, in particular, for which the governance of the company is a strong predictor. Prior studies emphasise the importance of the ‘tone from the top’, as the management perspective on reporting in general, and SR in particular, is crucial in shaping the role of the accounting profession (Egan and Tweedie, 2018; Kurki and Järvenpää, 2024). Moreover, companies (and their management) influence SR and professionals’ involvement through the resources available for reporting (budget, time, access to expertise) (Egan and Tweedie, 2018). Ultimately, the SR is a result of internal negotiations regarding the purpose of SR and various organisational and external expectations (Frostenson and Helin, 2017). Few studies refer directly to the relationship between actors. For example, Kunz, Oltmann and Weinhart (2025) call for a deeper coordination between PAOs and universities. On the same note, Krasodomska, Zarzycka and Zieniuk (2024) emphasise that a collaborative approach involving regulatory bodies and accounting organisations, accentuating information sharing and educational initiatives, is the most effective way to define the accountants’ role. Moreover, other studies (e.g., Boulianne, Keddie and Postaire, 2018; Krasodomska, Michalak and Świetla, 2020) emphasise the need for universities to incorporate the most recent regulatory developments in the curriculum. It is therefore this gap in how the field of relations between institutional actors impacts the role of accountants in SR that we would like to address in this paper, by providing a contextualised, comprehensive analysis of the field. 2. The context of accountants’ involvement in sustainability reporting in Romania The relations between institutional actors and their attitude and actions towards accountants’ involvement in SR are embedded in particular field conditions (Nicklich, Braun and Fortwengel, 2020). This is why it is important to shed light on the national conditions under which the accounting profession and the relevant institutional actors for the profession function. Romania is a post-communist country undergoing massive economic and political reforms in the last decades. The post-communist period, characterised by legislative instability, hesitant reforms, and low pressure from civil society for transparency, created an institutional context unfavorable for the implementation of SR practices (Albu et al., 2021). Interest in implementing CSR/SR practices in Romania increased in the event of the EU accession in 2007 and with the establishment of MNCs’ subsidiaries. The state plays a significant role in accounting in Romania. In the accounting field, the state is an important actor, as it issues the accounting regulations and shapes reporting practices, including those incorporating international standards, through tax rules and tax inspectors (Albu et al., 2023). The accounting profession is deeply influenced in its AE Stakeholder Influence in Shaping the Role of Accountants in Sustainability Reporting in Romania 756 Amfiteatru Economic activities by the state’s guidelines and training activities. In relation to international developments and standards, the state had an obedient attitude in accepting and including them in national regulations, but this is not deemed enough to ensure their transposition into practices. The State signaled through guidelines and tax inspectors the acceptable practices (Albu et al., 2023). In relation to SR, the state had various West-inspired actions. In 2011, the ‘National Strategy for the Promotion of Social Responsibility 2011-2016’ was adopted. It aimed at increasing awareness of social responsibility, integrating social responsibility objectives into organisational strategies and promoting transparency. Later, it transposed the EU Directives requiring the extension of corporate reporting beyond the financial one. Moreover, similarly to Poland (Krasodomska, Michalak and Świetla, 2020), SR regulations were issued by the Ministry of Finance (MF) as a complement to financial reporting, thus placing accountants in a favourable position for SR. In 2022 the Romanian Government adopted the National Strategy for Sustainable Development 2030 and created as part of it, for reporting purposes, the Romanian Code of Sustainability. Apart from this actions, little is known about the actual role of the state and of interactions with other actors on the accountants’ involvement in SR. Guşe et al. (2016) and Albu et al. (2024) emphasise the strong role played by local and foreign (EU) regulators and MNCs (being initially engaged in voluntary reporting) play in creating awareness in the local context about SR. Both the offer and the demand for sustainability information were low, but increased over time (Albu et al., 2021, 2024), with coercive (regulatory) factors playing an important role (Dumitru et al., 2017). In this context, accountants started to be slowly involved in SR (Albu et al., 2011; 2024). This involvement seems to have been timidly supported by local actors, as the academic environment and local PAOs started quite late, after the NFRD, to provide education in this area (Guşe et al., 2016). More recently, the academics teaching accounting increasingly included sustainability topics in the lists of themes for bachelor and master dissertations. They worked with international professional bodies (such as the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA)) to organise workshops on the role of accountants for sustainability or to support students to access sustainability certificates (such as ACCA Sustainability for finance). After 2020, the efforts made by the universities have been supported by the Romanian professional bodies that have adapted their training programs accordingly. Starting in 2022, the Chamber of Financial Auditors of Romania (CAFR) started organising webinars on SR and assurance (https://www.cafr.ro/). In 2023 the Body of Expert and Licensed Accountants of Romania (CECCAR) included a specific lecture on SR for the first-year interns, in 2024 it adapted the Management Accounting syllabus to include sustainability aspects, and in 2025 created a new lecture for IFRS S1 and S2. Additionally, CECCAR updated the professional accounting education programs for continuous development of its members as well (Sova, 2022). Moreover, the Big 4 firms, NGOs, and users of the corporate information are recognised as promoters of CSR and SR (Albu et al., 2024; Guşe et al., 2016), but their role as actors in the field require further investigation. Additionally, the relationship between actors and how the field dynamics impact the accounting profession needs further scrutiny. Guşe et al. (2016) underline the lack of coordination among stakeholders in the pre-NFRD period, and a more recent analysis is warranted. Sustainability Reporting: Catalyst for Organisational and Professional Change AE Vol. 27 • No. 70 • August 2025 757 3. Research methodology This study adopts an exploratory approach, as SR represents a relatively recent and evolving challenge for the accounting profession. Consequently, discussions surrounding the role, activities, and competencies of accountants in this domain are still emerging. To investigate these issues, interviews were selected as a suitable methodological approach, as they allow for in-depth investigation of the relational field and stakeholders’ role (Nicklich, Braun and Fortwengel, 2020). Accordingly, 18 semi-structured interviews with 20 interviewees were conducted in February and early March 2025. The targeted participants included professionals with direct experience in SR and in the accounting profession, either through practical engagement or academic and training, such as accountants, auditors, CFOs, sustainability managers, representatives of professional bodies, and lecturers teaching SR courses. Some interviewees also had international experience in SR, having worked with companies operating in Western countries such as Germany, Belgium, and the Netherlands due to the global nature of their employers. This diverse sample ensures a broader perspective on the evolving role of the accounting profession in SR. Many interviewees have broad experience, from multiple positions. For example, some interviewees are academics, but also closely engaged with PAOs in SR training. Others are academics, but also consultants, and therefore they have a deep understanding of the profession and its challenges in accepting SR. Others are practitioners, eventually experiencing various professional roles, while some are also recent graduates, thus able to interpret the universities’ reactions to SR. Interviews are conducted in the early-stage applicability of the CSRD in Romania, therefore, results should be interpreted considering the transition from NFRD to CSRD, but also the recent discussions about reducing the regulatory burden. Even though there is experience with non-financial reporting, the response in Romania was varied and slow (Albu et al., 2021, 2024), and therefore there are few knowledgeable people. To address this challenge, we employed a snowball sampling technique to identify potential participants, starting from an initial group of five professionals—selected for their excellent knowledge of the field and of the relevant actors, and representing different categories of stakeholders (thus mitigating the limitations of various sampling methods). The interviews were conducted using a mix of online (10 interviews), in-person (seven interviews), and telephonic (one interview) methods to accommodate the availability of the interviewees, and to mitigate advantages and limitations of various communication channels in conducting interviews (de Villiers, Farooq and Molinari, 2022). All but one of the interviews were conducted in Romanian, the native language of most participants, with the exception being held in English. The interviews, which lasted between 20 and 55 minutes (average 33 minutes), followed a semi-structured format and focused on key topics such as the main institutional actors influencing accountants' involvement in SR and their actions in the field. All interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded in Romanian. A detailed overview of the interviews, including anonymised participant characteristics and contexts, is provided in Table no. 1. AE Stakeholder Influence in Shaping the Role of Accountants in Sustainability Reporting in Romania 764 Amfiteatru Economic et al., 2023), the state maintains a low pressure in relation to SR and leaves it to other actors to decide the course of action. However, indirectly, through its prior field interactions, the state inevitably influences SR and the role of accountants in the process. For example, e-Transport reporting looks like sustainability. I mean, it’s not sustainability related, e-Transport has nothing to do with accounting, it has to do with procurement. But, somehow, they all [those in charge] still come to the accountant to vent their bitterness and say, hey, help us [...] In accounting the circle closes because if one hasn’t reported and the invoice appeared in accounting, you see it. And then, although at the beginning, when eTransport appeared, the accountant said, ‘we are not interested in it’, they ended up involved (I3). The interviewee refers to the accountants’ ultimate role of supervising all reporting towards the state, and this is much in line with state’s opinion, that this reporting comes from legislation and through changes in accounting legislation it is pushed to accountants [...] The accountant must be present in that reporting (I17). But in this approach, the receptivity towards SR, as the ultimate step in ensuring a company’s sustainable development, is very low. SR becomes a reporting exercise, and it is localised as another reporting obligation towards the state. The state transfers the importance of changing the meaning or quality of reporting to companies and users. The accountant is loaded with a lot of things, but alongside the accountant the administrator signs. He has to understand that if the accountant is overloaded with certain things, CO2 or whatever other environmental indicators there are, the administrator has to call in a service provider. After that comes the pressure from institutions - banks, investors who will put reporting-related conditions in their future contracts (I17). In this approach, the state appears to be a neutral actor for SR and is not necessarily interested, by conditionality, in the existence and quality of reporting. In fact, the interviewee expects the pressure to come from other users (e.g. banks, investors, the public – the final consumer). In practice, the state regulates this reporting, from the legislation point of view, but does not seem interested in the results of this reporting. The users, as legitimators, along with companies and consultants as resource providers, influence SR in general, and indirectly they influence the role of accountants. However, even so, the overall environment is strongly dominated by the state. While the state is almost absent in SR effective interaction, it is the source of high thickness in reporting in general, and in guiding the profession and the economic life. As such, other actors expect state action, since: And then I think that in the field of sustainability, in order to be able to evolve, to grow, professionals should be required to train, because you can’t do that without training, that is, without studying that standard. […] Because they [accountants] are not curious. […] I think I did not see any other way [of doing something new] than fear [of state] (I3). Then, if there are legislative requirements in this sense, the companies will certainly comply with them, because we never go beyond legislative requirements. I mean, whatever happens, that’s it. Whether we agree or not, we implement them. So first would be the government, then business (I8). With this understanding of the local context, it becomes clearer why it is expected that state should be more involved in creating a role for accountants, given that if the state got more Sustainability Reporting: Catalyst for Organisational and Professional Change AE Vol. 27 • No. 70 • August 2025 765 involved [...] people would know that accounting can be more than what it was 20-30 years ago (I4), and also raise awareness [about SR] among companies, stakeholders, investors (I5). For some, this mentality is so strong that even awareness should start after the signal from the state is received and not before. As such, the academic environment is futureoriented... it was premature to include it [SR] in the curriculum of universities before the regulations (I17). This point of view highlights the importance of the state and local mindset, aligning with research conducted in other countries (Krasodomska, Zarzycka and Zieniuk, 2024; Kunz, Oltmann and Weinhart, 2025), however, in contrast to the situation in Romania, in other countries stakeholders expect strong academic involvement in SR. We contribute to two streams of literature: the one investigating the role of the accounting profession in SR (e.g., Ascani, Ciccola and Chiucchi, 2021; Egan and Tweedie, 2018; Krasodomska, Michalak and Świetla, 2020; Kunz, Oltmann and Weinhart, 2025; Schaltegger and Zvezdov, 2015) and the one looking at the hierarchy and influence of various actors in fields in general (e.g., Bourdieu, 1995; Martin, 2003; Nicklich, Braun and Fortwengel, 2020) and in the accounting profession and SR in particular (e.g., Boulianne, Keddie and Postaire, 2018; Brouard et al., 2017; Krasodomska, Michalak and Świetla, 2020; Wolf et al., 2020). We find that this role is shaped by various global and notably local actors, but the central actor is the state, as a regulator in the field of SR, but also as a long-standing form of authority and source of ideology in the profession in general (Albu et al., 2023). In its first capacity, the state may be considered as a source of legitimacy for a role for accountants in SR. However, given its second capacity, this legitimacy becomes threatened by the everlasting association of accountants with state-directed reporting. This is because with other forms of reporting, the state always backed up the legitimacy function with awareness creation and provision of resources, providing detailed information, additional guidelines, and training. The lack of additional reactions from the MF in relation to SR resumes its function only to legitimacy, which is much in line with other settings (e.g., Krasodomska, Michalak and Świetla, 2020), but insufficient to result locally in deep actions. As such, the state as a powerful actor signals what is essential, what gets ignored, and what should be done (Martin, 2003). The state’s view is that the business environment, not only the regulation, should drive action. The drivers of change in the profession (Nicklich, Braun and Fortwengel, 2020) are represented by users as a market form of legitimacy, and by the awareness creators and resource providers. Globally, the accounting profession seems to be highly influenced by global actors, such as global PAOs, large consulting firms (including Big 4) and regulatory actors, and these actors influence their local counterparts. However, the local field, in terms of relations and efficiency of interactions, moves away from the international field general structure and dynamics, given the long-standing position of the state, which created over the years a high degree of thickness in the accounting field in general. A high degree of thickness results in a shared understanding (Nicklich, Braun and Fortwengel, 2020), and this is how MF governed the field of financial reporting after the fall of communism (Albu et al., 2023). However, given that there is little receptivity to SR in the traditional field, the existing relationships between factors constitute a constraining effect. Moreover, when strictly considering the field of SR, we observe that the groups of actors have a low degree of interaction. Even so, given the state’s legitimacy role (through regulation) and the backup of PAOs, which are the pillars of traditional professions, one would expect that this is enough for establishing a position for accountants. However, SR AE Stakeholder Influence in Shaping the Role of Accountants in Sustainability Reporting in Romania 766 Amfiteatru Economic being perceived as an area outside traditional accounting and being mandatorily applied by only a limited number of companies, the meanings and the roles are yet to be constructed, and this is why there is limited success in introducing this practice in general and creating a role for the accounting profession in particular. Finally, we confirm prior findings (Gușe et al., 2016; Krasodomska, Zarzycka and Zieniuk, 2024; Kunz, Oltmann and Weinhart, 2025) about the need for coordination between groups of actors. This is much in line with our idea that field thickness and receptivity will result in a shared understanding and acceptance of innovations. But more than this idealised situation, we accept that actors in the field have diverse interests and positions, which will influence and transform western models and their local acceptability. We thus illustrate how a global movement and regulation such as SR is localised, considering the important roles played by the local institutional actors (Martin, 2003; Wolf et al., 2020). We observe that the reactions in the field are in line with the actors’ positions (Bourdieu, 1995). This is why the hierarchy in the field deserves further investigation, to explore the role of powerful and marginalised actors (Anesa et al., 2019). Moreover, while we agree with Kuasirikun and Constable (2024) that international actors play an important role in emerging settings, given that SR is introduced in Romania as a result of their actions, we also observe how the local network of relations and the local powerful actors significantly influence the implementation of Western models and rules. Conclusions We analyse the composition and dynamics of the field to explain how the role of accountants in sustainability reporting (SR) is constructed in the Romanian context. Although our study focuses on a specific setting, our findings are relevant in the broader EU context, particularly in relation to the transposition of directives. Moreover, the insights are applicable to other contexts where the state plays a significant role – both in the economy at large and specifically in the field of accounting. Sustainability has not historically been an end in itself in Romania; rather, it was promoted as a means of survival, as basic resources could not be otherwise secured. Today, due to economic growth, we are witnessing the first generation that must change this mindset – moving away from personal self-interest and taking actions to improve sustainability for the benefit of their communities. A similar pattern can be observed in Romanian-owned companies: until they emerged from the 2008 crisis, their focus was solely on survival. In the meantime, capital has accumulated that can now be directed toward projects aligned with sustainable economic growth. Therefore, the efforts of professional accounting organisations (PAOs) and universities to raise awareness of SR and instill a Western understanding of sustainability and SR have not been easy, but they have been achieved to a considerable extent. Under these circumstances, companies can display varying degrees of receptiveness to SR and effectiveness in their interactions with other actors in the field. Some companies may respond only to the state's requirements and may engage (even significantly) with the accounting profession, but this may result in superficial reporting. Other companies – especially those under legitimacy pressure from users and multinational corporations (MNCs) – may allocate more resources, involve consultants, and commit to a more substantial reporting process, in which the accounting profession plays a meaningful role. Sustainability Reporting: Catalyst for Organisational and Professional Change AE Vol. 27 • No. 70 • August 2025 767 However, resource providers (companies, consultants, and the Big Four) do not ensure a consistent approach to reporting or to the professional development of accountants, and reporting entities do not have equal access to information. The only actor capable of balancing this system is the state, which should act not only as a provider of legitimacy but also as a provider of resources. Even if widely investigated, the global-local dichotomy and blending deserves further investigation. Our study has limitations related to the approach employed to access the field (interviews) and the period in which the study is conducted (prior to the release of the first reports complying with the CSRD requirements and the regulatory changes introduced by the Omnibus package).While interviews offer an in-depth insight into the field issues, the insights come from a rather small sample size and the sampling techniques used may influence the perception of the field through the selection of interviewees. Future studies may employ different research approaches (e.g., data collection through surveys or case studies) and cover different time periods. Alternative methodologies could also allow future research to be grounded in different theoretical frameworks (e.g., institutional theory, actor – network theory). References Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA), 2018. The ACCA global forum for sustainability. https://www.accaglobal.com/us/en/technical-activities/global-forums/ sustainability.html. Albu, C., Albu, N., Gîrbină, M.M. and Sandu, M.I., 2011. The Implications of Corporate Social Responsibility on the Accounting Profession: The Case of Romania. Amfiteatru Economic, 13(29), pp.221-234. Albu, N., Albu, C.N., Apostol, O. and Cho, C.H., 2021. The past is never dead: the role of imprints in shaping social and environmental reporting in a post-communist context. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 34(5), pp.1109-1136. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2019-4131. Albu, N., Albu, C.N., Cho, C.H. and Pesci, C., 2023. Not on the ruins, but with the ruins of the past – Inertia and change in the financial reporting field in a transitioning country. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, art. no. 102535. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.cpa.2022.102535. Albu, C., Albu, N., Dumitru, M., Guşe, R.G. and Săndulescu, M.S., 2024. Sustainability reporting in Central and Eastern European countries. In G. Rimmel, G. Aras, D. Baboukardos, J. Krasodomska, C. Nielsen, and F. Schiemann (Eds.). 2024. Research Handbook on Sustainability Reporting, Edward Elgar Publishing. pp.400-417. https://doi.org/10.4337/ 9781035316267.00034. Anesa, M., Gillespie, N., Spee, A.P. and Sadiq, K., 2019. The legitimation of corporate tax minimization. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 75, pp.17-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2018.10.004. Anteby, M., Chan, C.K. and DiBenigno, J., 2016. Three lenses on occupations and professions in organizations: becoming, doing, and relating. Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), pp.183-244. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2016.1120962. AE Stakeholder Influence in Shaping the Role of Accountants in Sustainability Reporting in Romania 768 Amfiteatru Economic Ascani, I., Ciccola, R. and Chiucchi, M.S., 2021. A structured literature review about the role of management accountants in sustainability accounting and reporting. Sustainability, 13(4), art. no. 2357. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042357. Berends, H. and Deken, F., 2021. Composing qualitative process research. Strategic Organization, 19(1), pp.134-146. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127018824838. Boulianne, E., Keddie, L.S. and Postaire, M., 2018. (Non)coverage of sustainability within the French professional accounting education program. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 9(3), pp.313-335. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-092017-0119. Bourdieu, P., 1993. Some properties of fields. In eds. Sociology in Question (pp.72-77). Sage Bourdieu, P., 1995. Sociology in question. Sage Publications. Brès, L., Mosonyi, S., Gond, J.-P., Muzio, D., Mitra, R., Werr, A. and Wickert, C., 2019. Rethinking professionalization: A generative dialogue on CSR practitioners. Journal of Professions and Organization, 6(2), pp.246-264. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joz009. Brouard, F., Bujaki, M., Durocher, S. and Neilson, L.C., 2017. Professional accountants’ identity formation: An integrative framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 142, pp.225238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3157-z. Cooper, D.J. and Robson, K., 2006. Accounting, professions and regulation: Locating the sites of professionalization. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(4-5), pp.415-444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2006.03.003. De Villiers, C., Farooq, M.B. and Molinari, M., 2022. Qualitative research interviews using online video technology - challenges and opportunities. Meditari Accountancy Research, 30(6), pp.1764-1782. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-03-2021-1252. Dragomir, V.D., Dumitru, M., Chersan, I.C., Gorgan, C., and Păunescu, M., 2024. Double materiality disclosure as an emerging practice: The assessment process, impacts, risks, and opportunities. Accounting in Europe, 22(1), pp.103-140. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 17449480.2024.2339264 European Union, 2014. Directive 2014/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2013/34/EU as regards disclosure of non-financial and diversity information by certain large undertakings and groups. Official Journal L330, pp.1-9. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/95/oj. European Union, 2022. Directive (EU) 2022/2464 of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 537/2014, Directive 2004/109/EC, Directive 2006/43/EC and Directive 2013/34/EU, as regards corporate sustainability reporting. Official Journal L322, pp.15-80. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/ 2022/2464/oj. Dumitru, M., Dyduch, J., Gușe, R.G. and Krasodomska, J., 2017. Corporate reporting practices in Poland and Romania – An ex-ante study to the new Non-financial Reporting European Directive. Accounting in Europe, 14(3), pp.279-304. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2017.1378427. Egan, M. and Tweedie, D., 2018. A “green” accountant is difficult to find: Can accountants contribute to sustainability management initiatives?. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 31(6), pp.1749-1773. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-03-20172891. Sustainability Reporting: Catalyst for Organisational and Professional Change AE Vol. 27 • No. 70 • August 2025 769 Faulconbridge, J. and Muzio, D., 2016. Global professional service firms and the challenge of institutional complexity: ‘Field relocation’ as a response strategy. Management Studies, 53, pp.89-124. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12122. Fota, M.S., Cristea, N.E., Ureche, A. and Albu, N., 2024. Accountants’ competencies for sustainability reporting: An exploratory study. Journal of Accounting and Management Information Systems, 23(2), pp.446-460. https://doi.org/10.24818/jamis.2024.02007. Frostenson, M. and Helin, S., 2017. Ideas in conflict: a case study on tensions in the process of preparing sustainability reports. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 8(2), pp.166-190. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-02-2015-0015. Giner, B. and Luque-Vílchez, M., 2022. A commentary on the ‘new’ institutional actors in sustainability reporting standard-setting: a European perspective. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 13(6), pp.1284-1309. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-06-2021-0222. Guşe, R.G., Almăşan, A., Circa, C. and Dumitru, M., 2016. The role of the stakeholders in the institutionalization of the CSR reporting in Romania. Accounting and Management Information Systems, 15(2), pp.304-340. Heinzelmann, R., Dobroszek, J. and Zarzycka, E., 2024. Accounting professionalization: The case of Poland. Accounting in Europe, pp.1-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 17449480.2024.2432865. International Federation of Accountants (IFAC), 2023. IFAC Announces Plan to Revise International Education Standards for Sustainability Reporting and Assurance. New York: IFAC. https://www.ifac.org/news-events/2023-12/ifac-announces-plan-reviseinternational-education-standards-sustainability-reporting-and-assurance>. Jamali, D., Karam, C.M., Yin, J. and Soundararajan, V., 2017. CSR logics in developing countries: Translation, adaptation and stalled development. Journal of World Business, 52(3), pp.343-359. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JWB.2017.02.001. Jinga, G., Dumitru, M., Glăvan, E.M. and Radu, G., 2024. Eco-efficiency measures in the leather industry. An educational case. Accounting and Management Information Systems, 23(2), pp.365-380. http://dx.doi.org/10.24818/jamis.2024.02004. Krasodomska, J., Michalak, J. and Świetla, K., 2020. Directive 2014/95/EU Accountants’ understanding and attitude towards mandatory non-financial disclosures incorporate reporting. Meditari Accountancy Research, 28(5), pp.751-779. https://doi.org/10.1108/ medar-06-2019-0504. Krasodomska, J., Zarzycka, E. and Zieniuk, P., 2024. Exploring multi-level drivers of accountants’ opinions on the changes introduced by the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive. Accounting in Europe, pp.1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 17449480.2024.2382205. Kuasirikun, N. and Constable, P., 2024. Boats need water and tigers need jungle - Locally constructed corporate social responsibility in Thailand. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 38(2), pp.730-759. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-06-20236526. Kunz, J., Oltmann, J. and Weinhart, F., 2025. Breaking the institutional logic or going under - Controllers and sustainability. Accounting. Auditing & Accountability Journal, 38(1), pp.115-142. https://doi.org/10.1108/aaaj-11-2022-6116. AE Stakeholder Influence in Shaping the Role of Accountants in Sustainability Reporting in Romania 770 Amfiteatru Economic Kurki, M. and Järvenpää, M., 2024. Engaging management accountants in corporate sustainability. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 37(9), pp.100-127. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-02-2023-6292 Lai, A. and Stacchezzini, R., 2021. Organisational and professional challenges amid the evolution of sustainability reporting: a theoretical framework and an agenda for future research. Meditari Accountancy Research, 29(3), pp.405-429. https://doi.org/10.1108/ MEDAR-02-2021-1199. Mahama, H. and Khalifa, R., 2017. Field interviews: Process and analysis. In Hoque, Z., Parker, L., Covaleski, M.A. and Haynes, K. (Eds.) The Routledge Companion to Qualitative Accounting Research Methods, New York: Routledge. pp.321-338. Malsch, B., 2013. Politicizing the expertise of the accounting industry in the realm of corporate social responsibility. Accounting Organizations and Society, 38(2), pp.149168. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AOS.2012.09.003. Martin, J.L., 2003. What is field theory?. American Journal of Sociology, 109(1), pp.1-49. https://doi.org/10.1086/375201. Messner, M., Moll, J. and Strömsten, T., 2017. Credibility and authenticity in qualitative accounting research. In Hoque, Z., Parker, L., Covaleski, M.A. and Haynes, K. (Eds.) The Routledge Companion to Qualitative Accounting Research Methods, New York: Routledge. pp.432-443. Nicklich, M., Braun, T. and Fortwengel, J., 2020. Forever a profession in the making? The intermediate status of project managers in Germany. Journal of Professions and Organization, 7(3), pp.374-394. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joaa020. Schaltegger, S. and Zvezdov, D., 2015. Gatekeepers of sustainability information: exploring the roles of accountants. Journal of Accounting and Organizational Change, 11(3), pp.333-361. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAOC-10-2013-0083. Șova, R.A., 2022. Embracing the New: The Sustainability Reporting Landscape in Romania. https://www.ifac.org/knowledge-gateway/discussion/embracing-newsustainability-reporting-landscape-romania. Wolf, T., Kuttner, M., Feldbauer-Durstmüller, B. and Mitter, C., 2020. What we know about management accountants’ changing identities and roles – a systematic literature review. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 16(3), pp.311-347. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAOC-02-2019-0025.