<![CDATA[The growing emphasis on sustainability has encouraged companies to communicate their commitment to environmental and social responsibility through sustainability reports. At the same time, greenwashing has become a concern because sustainability disclosures may not always portray actual environmental performance. This concern is particularly relevant to the mining industry, which is associated with substantial environmental impacts. This study investigates whether sustainability report readability and external assurance are associated with indications of greenwashing in Indonesian mining companies. A quantitative approach was applied to secondary data drawn from sustainability reports of mining companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange for 2022–2024, producing 90 firm-year observations. Readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) and Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), while external assurance was identified from the presence of independent verification. Greenwashing was represented by the gap between the Environmental Disclosure Score and Environmental Performance Score. Panel regression was estimated using the Random Effects Model (REM). The results show that readability does not have a significant relationship with greenwashing indications, whereas external assurance has a positive and significant relationship. Thus, a less readable sustainability report should not automatically be interpreted as evidence of greenwashing. Conversely, the positive association between assurance and greenwashing indications suggests that assurance may, in some circumstances, operate as a symbolic legitimacy mechanism rather than solely as a means of strengthening substantive reporting credibility. The findings underscore the need for stronger standards and more consistent assurance practices to support the transparency and credibility of sustainability reporting.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
