The Integration of Financial Auditing and Sustainability Assurance: Examining the Impact of Interdependence on Procedural Efficiency — An Empirical Study in the Libyan Context
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65405/2tdtjs52Keywords:
Financial auditing; Sustainability assurance; Mutual reliance; Procedural efficiency; Knowledge spillover; LibyaAbstract
This study examines the effect of integration between financial auditing and sustainability assurance on audit procedural efficiency, focusing on mutual reliance on evidence and procedures as an independent variable and procedural efficiency as a multidimensional dependent variable. Although prior research has largely examined the choice of sustainability assurance providers, empirical evidence on the actual integration between the two engagements and its efficiency consequences remains scarce, particularly in Arab and Libyan contexts.
The study employs a mixed factorial experimental design with a between-subjects factor (type of entity: banking vs. non-banking) and a within-subjects factor (level of mutual reliance: high vs. low).
A sample of 60 professional auditors will be randomly assigned, yielding 120 observations. Five hypotheses are tested concerning the direct effect of integration, the moderating role of mutual reliance, entity type, professional skepticism, and the mediating role of evidence quality.
Data will be analyzed using mixed ANOVA, moderated regression, and mediation analysis via PROCESS with bootstrapping.
The study is expected to show that integration improves procedural efficiency, especially under high mutual reliance, and that evidence quality partially mediates this relationship.
The findings are expected to contribute theoretically by extending knowledge spillover, economies of scope, and agency theory, and practically by informing regulators in Libya and the Arab region about the feasibility of allowing financial auditors to provide sustainability assurance.
Limitations related to sample size and experimental design are acknowledged.
Downloads
References
أبوساطة، ع.، & الباكير، م. (2026). المراجعة البيئية ودورها في الالتزام بممارسات المحاسبة البيئية. *مجلة الدراسات المحاسبية والمالية*.
الدرسي، م. (2017). واقع المراجعة في البيئة الليبية. *المجلة الليبية للدراسات المحاسبية*.
الزوي، ع. (2021). العلاقة بين استقلال المراجع وجودة المراجعة في البيئة الليبية. *مجلة البحوث المحاسبية*.
الشريف، م. (2020). حوكمة الشركات وجودة المراجعة في البيئة المصرية. *المجلة المصرية للدراسات المحاسبية*.
العبدلي، ع. (2018). التخصص القطاعي وجودة المراجعة في البيئة السعودية. *مجلة الإدارة والاقتصاد*.
عيسى، م. (2026). تطبيق معايير ESG في المؤسسات المالية والشركات الليبية. *مجلة التمويل والاستثمار*.
القحطاني، ع. (2023). تأكيد الاستدامة وجودة التقارير المالية في البيئة القطرية. *مجلة الدراسات المحاسبية*.
المطيري، ع. (2019). أثر حجم مكتب المراجعة على جودة المراجعة في البيئة الكويتية. *مجلة المحاسبة والمراجعة*.
الزهراني، م. (2021). العلاقة بين الإفصاح عن الاستدامة وأداء المنشأة في البيئة السعودية. *مجلة الدراسات المالية*.
الفيتوري، م. (2019). أثر المعايير الدولية على جودة المراجعة في البيئة الليبية. *المجلة الليبية للبحوث المحاسبية*.
### المراجع الأجنبية
Bell, T. B., Causholli, M., & Knechel, W. R. (2015). Audit firm tenure, non-audit services, and internal assessments of audit quality. *Journal of Accounting Research, 53*(3), 461–509.
Bills, K. L., Jeter, D. C., & Stein, S. E. (2015). Auditor industry specialization and evidence of cost efficiencies in homogenous industries. *The Accounting Review, 90*(5), 1721–1754.
Galam, R. (2019). The adequacy of international standards for auditing environmental activities: The case of the Libyan Audit Bureau. *Journal of Environmental Accounting and Auditing*.
Hurtt, R. K. (2007). Development of a scale to measure professional skepticism. *Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 29*(1), 149–171.
Knechel, W. R., Krishnan, G. V., Pevzner, M., Shefchik, L. B., & Velury, U. K. (2013). Audit quality: Insights from the academic literature. *Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 32*(Supplement 1), 385–421.
Knechel, W. R., Sharma, D. S., & Sharma, V. D. (2012). Non-audit services and knowledge spillovers: Evidence from New Zealand. *Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 39*(1–2), 1–38.
Michelon, G., Pilonato, S., & Ricceri, F. (2015). CSR reporting practices and the quality of disclosure: An empirical analysis. *Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 33*, 59–78.
Nelson, M. W. (2009). A model and literature review of professional skepticism in auditing. *Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 28*(2), 1–34.
Perego, P., & Kolk, A. (2012). Multinationals' accountability on sustainability: The evolution of third-party assurance of sustainability reports. *Journal of Business Ethics, 110*(2), 173–190.
Quadackers, L., Groot, T., & Wright, A. (2014). Auditors' professional skepticism: Neutrality versus presumptive doubt. *Contemporary Accounting Research, 31*(3), 639–657.
Ruiz-Barbadillo, E., & Martínez-Ferrero, J. (2020). Empirical analysis of the effect of the joint provision of audit and sustainability assurance services on assurance quality. *Journal of Cleaner Production, 266*, 121926.
Simnett, R., Vanstraelen, A., & Chua, W. F. (2009). Assurance on sustainability reports: An international comparison. *The Accounting Review, 84*(3), 937–967.
