臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

近年來永續發展和企業社會責任已成為全球各地關注之重要議題。本研究提出一種新的企業社會責任報告書確信風險評估決策模式，並透過案例研究說明此種模式的實際應用，此模式首先應用決策實驗室分析法（DEMATEL）應對確信工作的方向與編製企業社會責任報告書主要準則間存在之相互依存關係，然後結合分析網路程序法（ANP）和0-1目標規劃法（ZOGP），選擇對企業社會責任報告書進行確信時，最適之風險評估組合，此種模式使會計師獲得確信風險評估時最適組合，以得到預期的確信價值。
本文之研究方法主要包括：文獻蒐集企業社會責任報告書的發展，包括編製報告書的目的與效益，編製綱領與原則之介紹，企業社會責任報告書確信之發展，以DEMTEL釐清企業社會責任報告書確信與編製之相關性，並辨認會計師在考量確信工作時，應關注於哪些編製準則之替代方案。為了計算編製CSR之各項替代方案之重要性，以ANP方法計算其相對重要性之權重，結合ZOGP方法使用ANP方法所得到之權重，並考慮不同的目標優先順序，與資源之強制性和彈性的目標，使會計師能優化其人力資源限制，以四個案件研究來說明所提出的方法如何於實務上運作。
本研究之實證結果與價值係提供會計師一種整合決策模式，幫助其更有效的方式，以不同的企業社會責任編製替代方案分配其有限的人力資源，所提出的方法不僅能考慮人力資源配置及預期想優先滿足之目標，而且能顯現不同目標下最適替代方案差異性，故讓會計師進行企業社會責任報告書確信工作時，能在人力資源限制下，優化其確信風險評估模式。

In recent years, sustainable development and social responsibility have become important issues around the globe. This paper proposes a novel integrated model for risk assessment model of assurance on corporate social responsibility reporting (CSR) and illustrates the practical application of such a model through a case study. This model first applied the decision making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) approach to deal with the interdependencies existing among the criteria of organization requires, and then integrated the DEMATEL, the analytic network process (ANP), and the zero-one goal programming (ZOGP) method to select an optimal portfolio of risk assessment of assurance on CSR. This integrated model enables the auditors to obtain the fitting assurance portfolio and achieves the desired spiritual value.
The research methodology of this paper mainly involves: reviewing the relevant literature on CSR development, including reporting benefit, guideline introduction, and assurance development; clarifying the interrelated relationships of CSR assurance and preparation guideline; identifying the CSR preparation alternatives in which auditors may consider to focus when they perform assurance work; constructing an ANP model in order to calculate the importance weights of the different CSR preparation alternatives; formulating a ZOGP model, which uses the weights obtained from the ANP model and considers the obligatory and flexible goals with different priorities, interdependencies and constraints on resources, that enables auditors to optimize their scarce human resources; and conducting four case studies in order to illustrate how the proposed methodology works.
This paper provides auditors with an integrated decision-support methodology, which will assist them in allocating their limited human resources for different CSR preparation alternatives in a more efficient way. The proposed methodology does not only consider the constraints on human resources and priorities of the goals that need to be satisfied but also show the deviations from the desired goals.
Therefore, this paper is of benefit to auditors as it offers an efficient and convenient tool that allows auditors to optimise scarce human resources.

第一章　緒論 1
第一節　研究背景 1
第二節　研究動機及目的 4
第三節　研究範圍及限制 6
第四節　研究流程 6
第二章　文獻探討 8
第一節　企業社會責任報告書編製之趨勢 8
一、 企業社會責任/企業永續發展 8
二、 企業社會責任揭露之目的 10
三、 企業社會責任報告書編製之效益 11
四、 企業社會責任報告書編製網領之發展進程 12
五、 台灣企業社會責任報告書編製之規範 18
第二節　企業社會責任報告書查證之規範與趨勢 20
一、 企業社會責任報告書查證之目的及效益 20
二、 企業社會責任報告書查證之現況 21
三、 企業社會責任報告書查證準則 23
四、 台灣企業社會責任報告書查證之規範 25
第三節　企業社會責任報告書編製之準則 26
一、 全球CSR揭露之規範 26
二、 全球永續報告指南第4版 31
第四節　確信與風險評估之探討 33
一、 企業社會責任報告書確信 33
二、 確信工作之方向及重大不實表達之風險 34

第三章　研究方法 37
第一節　確信風險評估準則之建立 37
第二節　模糊理論 51
第三節　決策實驗室分析法 52
第四節　DEMATAL為基礎之分析網路程序法 55
第五節　0-1目標規劃法 60
第六節　研究架構及專家問卷之設計 61
一、 研究架構 61
二、 專家問卷之設計 63
第四章　實證結果與分析 64
第一節　專家問卷施測結果 64
第二節　DEMATEL分析 64
第三節　ANP分析 69
第四節　ZOGP法模擬最適決策 78
第五節　實證結果與分析 87
第五章　結論與建議 90
第一節　結論 90
第二節　建議 92
第三節　研究限制與未來研究 93
參考文獻 94
附錄－研究問卷範例 100
DEMATAL問卷 100
ANP問卷 104

張紹勳，2012，《模糊多準則評估法及統計》，初版，臺北市：五南。
樊秉鑫，2013，《結合企業永續與卓越經營模式之研究》，臺北科技大學環境工程與管理研究所碩士學位論文
AccountAbility, A. 2008. AA1000 Assurance Standard 2008: London. From:
http://www.accountability.org/about-us/publications/guidance-for.html
AccountAbility, A. 2008. AA1000 AccountAbility Principles Standard 2008: London.
AICPA. 2015a. THE CPA’s ROLE IN SUSTAINABILITY ASSURANCE.
AICPA. 2015b. The State of Sustainability Assurance and Related Advisory Services in the U.S.: Two Market Assessments.
Alon, A., and M. Vidovic. 2015. Sustainability Performance and Assurance: Influence on Reputation. Corporate Reputation Review 18 (4):337-352.
Arens Alvin, A., J. Elder Randal, and S. Beasley Mark. 2005. Auditing and Assurance Services: An Integrated Approach: New Jersey: Pearson Education International.
Ball, A., D. L. Owen, and R. Gray. 2000. External transparency or internal capture? The role of third‐party statements in adding value to corporate environmental reports11. Business strategy and the environment 9 (1):1-23.
Bellman, R. E., and L. A. Zadeh. 1970. Decision-making in a fuzzy environment. Management science 17 (4):B-141-B-164.
Borglund, T., M. Frostenson, and K. Windell. 2010. Increasing responsibility through transparency. A study of the consequences of new guidelines for sustainability reporting by Swedish state-owned companies, Stockholm.
Brown, H. S., M. de Jong, and D. L. Levy. 2009. Building institutions based on information disclosure: lessons from GRI's sustainability reporting. Journal of cleaner production 17 (6):571-580.
Carroll, A. B. 1979. A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of management review 4 (4):497-505.
CorporateRegister. 2008. Assure view: The CSR assurance statement report. Corporate Register.
CorporateRegister. 2013. CR perspectives 2013: Global CR reporting trends and stakeholder views. Retrieved May 14:2014.
Cushing, B. E., L. Graham Jr, Z. Palmrose, R. Roussey, and I. Solomon. 1995. Risk orientation. Auditing, Practice, Research, and Education A Productive Collaboration.
Dahlsrud, A. 2008. How corporate social responsibility is defined: an analysis of 37 definitions. Corporate social responsibility and environmental management 15 (1):1.
Dando, N., and T. Swift. 2003. Transparency and assurance minding the credibility gap. Journal of Business Ethics 44 (2-3):195-200.
Deegan, C., B. J. Cooper, and M. Shelly. 2006. An investigation of TBL report assurance statements: UK and European evidence. Managerial Auditing Journal 21 (4):329-371.
Elkington, J. 1997. Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of the 21st century, Capstone: Oxford.
Ernst &Young. 2016. Value of sustainability reporting: A study by EY and Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship.
Fontela, E., and A. Gabus. 1976. The dematel observer: DEMATEL.
Goel, R., and W. Cragg. 2005. Guide to instruments of corporate responsibility: an overview of 16 key tools for labour fund trustees: Schulich School of Business.
GRI. 2013. G4 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines Part 1: Reporting Principles and Standard Disclosures: Amsterdam: GRI. Online. From:
https://www.globalreporting.org/resourcelibrary/GRIG4-Part1-Reporting-Principles-and-Standard-Disclosures. pdf
Helliar, C., B. Lyon, G. S. Monroe, J. Ng, and D. R. Woodliff. 1996. UK AUDITORS'PERCEPTIONS OF INHERENT RISK. The British Accounting Review 28 (1):45-72.
Hodge, K., N. Subramaniam, and J. Stewart. 2009. Assurance of sustainability reports: impact on report users' confidence and perceptions of information credibility. Australian accounting review 19 (3):178-194.
IFAC. 2004. ISAE 3000, Assurance engagements other than audits or reviews of historical financial information.
International Labour Organization. From:
http://www.ilo.org/global/lang--en/index.htm
ISO 14000. From:
http://www.iso.org/iso/home/standards/management-standards/iso14000.htm
ISO 26000. From:
http://www.iso.org/iso/home/standards/iso26000.htm
Jan Burck, Franziska Marten, and C. Bals. 2016. Climate Change Performance Index Results 2016.
Jones, M. J., and J. F. Solomon. 2010. Social and environmental report assurance: Some interview evidence. Paper read at Accounting Forum.
Junior, R. M., P. J. Best, and J. Cotter. 2014. Sustainability reporting and assurance: a historical analysis on a world-wide phenomenon. Journal of Business Ethics 120 (1):1-11.
Khurana, I. K., and K. Raman. 2004. Litigation risk and the financial reporting credibility of Big 4 versus non-Big 4 audits: Evidence from Anglo-American countries. The Accounting Review 79 (2):473-495.
Kolk, A., and P. Perego. 2010. Determinants of the adoption of sustainability assurance statements: An international investigation. Business strategy and the environment 19 (3):182-198.
Kolk, A., S. Peters, and C. Extercatte. 2005. KPMG international survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2005: KPMG Global Sustainability Services.
KPMG, C., and U. GRI. 2013. Carrots and Sticks: Sustainability Reporting Policies Worldwide–Today’s Best Practice, Tomorrow’s Trends. KPMG, Amsterdam.
KPMG, T. 2008. KPMG International survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2008. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: KPMG.
KPMG. 2015. Currents of change: The KPMG Survey of Corporate Responsibility Reporting 2015.
Kuruppu, S., and M. J. Milne. 2010. Dolphin deaths, organizational legitimacy and potential employees’ reactions to assured environmental disclosures. Paper read at Accounting Forum.
Laufer, W. S. 2003. Social accountability and corporate greenwashing. Journal of Business Ethics 43 (3):253-261.
Lin, C.-J., and W.-W. Wu. 2008. A causal analytical method for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Expert systems with applications 34 (1):205-213.
Low, K.-Y. 2004. The effects of industry specialization on audit risk assessments and audit-planning decisions. The Accounting Review 79 (1):201-219.
Manetti, G., and L. Becatti. 2009. Assurance services for sustainability reports: Standards and empirical evidence. Journal of Business Ethics 87 (1):289-298.
McIntosh, M., D. Leipziger, and G. Coleman. 2003. Analysis: International standards for corporate responsibility. EC Newsdesk 30.
Merkl-Davies, D. M., and N. M. Brennan. 2007. Discretionary disclosure strategies in corporate narratives: incremental information or impression management? Journal of accounting literature 27:116-196.
Messier Jr, W. F., and L. A. Austen. 2000. Inherent risk and control risk assessments: Evidence on the effect of pervasive and specific risk factors. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 19 (2):119-131.
Montiel, I. 2008. Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Sustainability: Seperate Pasts, Common Futures. Organization & Environment 21 (3):245.
Nanayo, F., and T. Toshiaki. 2002. A new method of paired comparison by improved DEMATEL method: Application to the integrated evaluation of a medical information which has multiple factors. Japan Journal of Medical Informatics 22 (2):211-216.
Oelschlaegel, J. 2005. Comparing Sustainability Reporting Assurance Standards. Business and the Environment 16 (6):1-3.
Opricovic, S. 1998. Multicriteria optimization of civil engineering systems. Faculty of Civil Engineering, Belgrade 2 (1):5-21.
Owen, D. L., W. Chapple, and A. P. Urzola. 2009. Key issues in sustainability assurance: ACCA London.
Park, J., and T. Brorson. 2005. Experiences of and views on third-party assurance of corporate environmental and sustainability reports. Journal of cleaner production 13 (10):1095-1106.
Perego, P., and A. Kolk. 2012. Multinationals’ accountability on sustainability: The evolution of third-party assurance of sustainability reports. Journal of Business Ethics 110 (2):173-190.
Putrus, R. S. 1992. Outsourcing analysis and justification using AHP. Information Strategy 9 (1):31-36.
Simnett, R. 2012. Assurance of sustainability reports: Revision of ISAE 3000 and associated research opportunities. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal 3 (1):89-98.
Simnett, R., A. Vanstraelen, and W. F. Chua. 2009. Assurance on sustainability reports: An international comparison. The Accounting Review 84 (3):937-967.
Smith, J., R. Haniffa, and J. Fairbrass. 2011. A conceptual framework for investigating ‘capture’in corporate sustainability reporting assurance. Journal of Business Ethics 99 (3):425-439.
Social Accountability International. 2014. SA8000 Standard. From:
http://sa-intl.org/_data/n_0001/resources/live/SA8000%20Standard%202014.pdf
Tamura, H., H. Okanishi, and K. Akazawa. 2006. Decision support for extracting and dissolving consumers' uneasiness over foods using stochastic DEMATEL. Journal of Telecommunications and Information Technology:91-95.
Taylor, M. H. 2000. The Effects of Industry Specialization on Auditors' Inherent Risk Assessments and Confidence Judgements. Contemporary Accounting Research 17 (4):693-712.
United Nations Global Compact. From:
https://www.unglobalcompact.org/
Votaw, D., and S. P. Sethi. 1973. The corporate dilemma: traditional values versus contemporary problems.
Wilkinson, A., and D. Mangalagiu. 2012. Learning with futures to realise progress towards sustainability: The WBCSD Vision 2050 Initiative. Futures 44 (4):372-384.
Wu, W.-W., and Y.-T. Lee. 2007. Developing global managers’ competencies using the fuzzy DEMATEL method. Expert systems with applications 32 (2):499-507.
Wüstemann, J. 2004. Evaluation and response to risk in international accounting and audit systems: framework and German experiences. Journal of Corporation Law 29 (2):449-466.
Zadeh, L. A. 1965. Fuzzy sets. Information and control 8 (3):338-353.
Žavbi, R., and J. Duhovnik. 1996. The analytic hierarchy process and functional appropriateness of components of technical systems. Journal of Engeering Design 7 (3):313-327.