Search results

Previous research has highlighted a contradiction in regard to environmental reporting in South Africa. Managers, who can influence decisions regarding disclosure, express the view that more environmental reporting is needed, yet very little such reporting is done. A questionnaire was sent to every company listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) with the request that the financial director should complete it. The questionnaire set out to establish whether managers are still as positive about environmental reporting as reported in previous research findings and, furthermore, to determine the reasons for the dearth of environmental reporting. Managers are still as positive as before about environmental reporting. The reasons for not reporting range from the contention that data is not available, that there are no legal requirements and that there is no demand for the data to the contention that it is not applicable to the particular industry and that costs exceed benefits. Most respondents do not regard the fear of liability to be a very important reason for non‐disclosure. The most important reason for non‐disclosure is that there is no legal requirement in respect of disclosure. This reason, together with the positive attitude of directors towards environmental reporting in general and towards reporting on a compulsory basis in particular, makes a strong case for the introduction of legislation in this regard. The introduction of legislation could be achieved by amending the Fourth Schedule of the Companies’ Act or the introduction by The South African Institute of Chartered Accountants (SAICA) of a statement of Generally Accepted Accounting Practice (GAAP) on environmental disclosure.

There is a growing concern over the need for greater transparency of quality information by companies about modern slavery to contribute toward elimination of the practice. Hence, this paper aims to examine factors behind the quality of voluntary modern slavery disclosures and major sources of pressure on Australian company disclosures in a premodern slavery legislated environment.

Content analysis and cross- sectional regression modeling are conducted to analyze factors determining the quality of voluntary modern slavery disclosures of the top 100 firms listed on the Australian Stock Exchange and their implications for institutional pressures.

Results indicate that size, assurance by Big-4 firms and publication of stand-alone modern slavery statements are significant drivers of disclosure quality in the sample. Profitability, listing status and the degree of internationalization are found to be unrelated to the quality of voluntary modern slavery disclosures. Industry classification is significant but only partly supports the prediction, and further investigation is recommended.

This paper provides a foundation for regulators and companies toward improving the quality of their modern slavery risk disclosures with a particular focus on prior experience, assurance and size. In practice, contrary to suggestions in the literature, results indicate that monetary penalties are unlikely to be an effective means for improving the quality of modern slavery disclosure. Results of the study provide evidence of poor quality of disclosures and the need for improvement, prior to introduction of modern slavery legislation in Australia in 2018. It also confirms that regulation to improve transparency, through the required publication of a modern slavery statement, is significant but not enough on its own to increase disclosure quality.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first research examining company level factors with an impact on voluntary modern slavery disclosure quality and the links to institutional pressures, prior to the introduction of the Commonwealth Modern Slavery Act 2018.

The aim of the paper is to consider the efficacy of requiring a public interest test to be satisfied before protection is afforded to workers who blow the whistle under Part IVA of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996).

Not all definitions of whistleblowing require there to be a public interest in the disclosure of information. To illustrate how the expression “public interest” has been used in this context, the common law defence to an action for breach of confidence is outlined. The paper then explains how the concept of “public interest whistleblowing” evolved in other jurisdictions. It also examines the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights to see if it helps us to apply the public interest test. Finally, this test is considered in the context of UK legislation.

Several sources of uncertainty are identified. These include the fact that personal and public interest matters may be intertwined and that an organization may encourage the internal reporting of concerns about wrongdoing that do not have a public dimension to further its private interests. One obvious result of uncertainty is that those who are not legally required to report wrongdoing may choose not to do so and society may be denied important information; for example, about serious health and safety risks or financial scandals.

It is suggested that the public interest test should be removed from Part IVA ERA 1996. However, this test is likely to remain for a while, so nine recommendations about how it should be interpreted are made.

This paper examines the relationship between environmental performance, legislation and annual report disclosure using the case of Falconbridge and sulphur dioxide emissions over a period from 1964 to 1991. Legitimacy theory and political economy theory are used to evaluate the disclosure. Two key questions are addressed: How did the corporation respond to changing government regulations for sulphur dioxide abatement? and How did the corporation choose to present these abatement activities in its annual reports? These questions are examined through the methodologies of historiography, interviews and content analysis. Falconbridge has always been in compliance with SO₂ regulations (albeit with a government extension in the late 1970s) and has consistently provided disclosure discussing the technological aspects of sulphur dioxide abatement. While political economy theory has explanatory power, legitimacy theory offers a more compelling explanation.

Sustainability Declarations were introduced by the Queensland State Government on 1 January 2010 as a mandatory disclosure measure for all dwelling sales in the State. The purpose of this paper is to assess the impact this policy decision has had in the homebuyer decision‐making process in the first year since its introduction and to consider the effectiveness of the legislation in meeting its policy objectives.

This quantitative research comprised a two‐part process: the first stage surveyed the level of compliance by the real estate industry with the legislative requirements. Stage two comprised an online survey of Real Estate Institute of Queensland members to determine what impact the Sustainability Declaration has had on home buyer decision making and how effective the legislative mechanisms have been in achieving the policy objectives.

This paper assesses the initial impact of this initiative over its first year in operation. These preliminary findings indicate a high level of compliance from the real estate industry, however results confirm that sustainability is yet to become a criterion of relevance to the majority of homebuyers in Queensland.

These quantitative findings support anecdotal evidence that the objectives of the legislation to increase homebuyer awareness and relevance of sustainability issues in the home are not being achieved.

Sustainability Declarations are a first step in raising homebuyer awareness of the importance of sustainability in housing. Further monitoring of this impact will be carried out over time.

This is the first research undertaken to assess the impact of this new mandatory disclosure legislation in Queensland, Australia. The findings will inform policy makers and assist them to assess the effectiveness of the current legislation in achieving its policy objectives.

Supporting the international fight against drug trafficking and serious crime is hard to contest; it is like being in favour of family values. Likewise, therefore, the fight against money laundering, ie burying or disguising the financial proceeds of those activities, including helping someone else to do so. The real and potential long‐term damage to societies, honest government, the rule of law and sound economies is now well recognised. But, on closer inspection, the route mapped out by the international community to achieve the laudable goal of putting serious criminals (and those who assist them) out of business by attacking the financial jugular causes a number of political, economic and legal tensions.

Public-interest entities – among which are listed companies – are obliged to publish nonfinancial disclosure in some countries and regions. The European Commission established mandatory nonfinancial disclosure by Directive 2014/95/EU. While a large body of literature was developed on sustainability reporting quality (SRQ) in voluntary context, evidence about the effect of mandatory nonfinancial disclosure on SRQ is controversial and previous experiences worldwide did not make clear if obligatoriness improves SRQ. This chapter aims to bridge the gap of empirical evidence about this phenomenon in European countries, focusing on first implementation of new legislation by Italian and German companies. The research has an explorative character and it adopts content analysis methods performed on sustainability reporting practices of companies listed in FTSE-MIB and DAX 30. The analysis aims to understand if obligatoriness affects SRQ, causes some changes in reporting practices such as harmonizing Italian and German ones by performing a cross-country comparison. The findings suggest that obligatoriness improves reporting quality and, above all, it fills the gap between different countries by fostering the adoption of international guidelines and the consequent introduction of some content, such as materiality analysis and quantitative measures of social and environmental performance.

The purpose of this paper is twofold: to identify legislators’ policy on the mandatory, online proactive disclosure of information; and to identify environmental influences on behaviour in this respect. To implement these proactive policies on transparency included in the legislative frameworks, internet websites are being used as a means of disseminating this proactive information.

To achieve these goals, by application of the theories used to analyse the causes of information disclosure, the authors first developed an index of online proactive disclosure; then, by means of a regression analysis, the authors examined and tested eight hypotheses related to environmental variables.

The results obtained show that legislators have chosen to require scant online proactive information on which to base institutional legitimacy, and that in this respect they are influenced by how long the previous laws have been in force, by the level of public sector borrowing and by the degree of political commitment among the population.

The results obtained from this study will provide valuable information for future legislators and for civil society about information policies, clarifying the amount and nature of information that, according to the authorities, should be disclosed without the need for prior request. The paper is also intended to stimulate the development of further research in this area, by showing how different economic, political, social, cultural and institutional contexts influence the decisions taken regarding the public information that must be reported proactively to stakeholders.

This paper assesses the significance and impact of the Criminal Justice Act 1993 and the Money Laundering Regulations in the context of previous legislation and examines the extent to which the law has been strengthened by the new legislation. It also highlights the major international initiatives which have been responsible for exposing the extent of the money‐laundering phenomenon and which have helped shape the present legislative framework. The banking and financial system is finding itself in the front line of the war being waged internationally against money launderers. Traditional concepts of banking secrecy are being undermined as governments struggle to preserve the integrity of the banking system. The war is on a vast scale. The Financial Action Task Force (created in 1989 by the seven major industrial nations and the President of the European Commission) estimated that the amount of money being laundered through the financial system was US$85bn per year. The extent of the problem was recognised in the International Narcotics Control Strategy Report for 1993 which found that eight of the world's major money‐Iaundering states are located in Europe. Europe has responded to the growing crisis in the financial sector with the Money Laundering Directive which was due to be fully implemented across the Community by 1st January, 1993. The directive, which applies to credit institutions and financial institutions, including Community‐based branches of non‐Community institutions, reflects a number of key international initiatives and attempts to harmonise the anti‐laundering legislation of the Member States, though with varied success. This paper outlines the directive and its antecedents, before tracing the considerable developments within the UK since the Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986, which marked the beginning of the Government's campaign to deprive criminals of the fruits of their crime, culminating in the Criminal Justice Act 1993 (CJA 1993). The secondary legislation is also analysed, in the form of the Money Laundering Regulations (the ‘Regulations’), which came into effect on 1st April, 1994. The CJA 1993 introduces and defines the ambit of the new money‐laundering offences, whilst the Regulations clarify the procedures which must be adopted by anyone carrying on ‘relevant financial business’. For the sake of brevity the focus has been only on the position in England and Wales, since Scotland and Northern Ireland are governed by different statutes.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the underlying drivers for the development and subsequent discontinuation of stand-alone corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting in a multinational subsidiary in Bangladesh.

The research approach employed for this purpose is a case study using evidence from a series of in-depth interviews conducted during the period 2002-2010. Interview data are supplemented by examining other sources of information including annual reports, stand-alone social reports and relevant newspaper articles during the study period.

It appears that the stand-alone CSR reporting process was initiated to give the subsidiary a formal space in which to legitimise its activities in Bangladesh where both tobacco control regulation and a strong anti-tobacco movement were gaining momentum. At the start of the process in 2002 corporate interviewees were very receptive of this initiative and strongly believed that it would not be a one off exercise. However, in the face of subsequent significant national policy shifts concerning tobacco control, irreconcilable stakeholder demands and increasing criticism of the CSR activities of the organisation at home and abroad the process was brought to an abrupt end in 2009.

The paper has a number of implications for policy makers concerning the future prospects for stand-alone social/sustainability reporting as a means of enhancing organisational transparency and accountability. In addition the paper discusses a number of theoretical implications for the development of legitimacy theory.

Using the lens of legitimacy the paper theorises the circumstances leading to the initiation and subsequent cessation of CSR reporting in the organisation concerned. As far as the authors know this is the first study which theorises and provides significant fieldwork-based empirical evidence regarding the discontinuation of stand-alone social reporting by a multinational company operating in a developing country. Thus, it extends previous desk-based attempts at using legitimacy theory to explain a decrease (or discontinuity) in CSR disclosures by de Villiers and van Staden (2006) and Tilling and Tilt (2010).