Search results

The purpose of this paper is to provide a multidimensional model for assessing the quality of corporate environmental reporting (CER) incorporating both preparer- and user-based views.

As opposed to frequently used researcher-chosen proxies, the authors used an online questionnaire asking preparers and users how they assess the quality of a company’s environmental report.

The analysis of the responses of 177 users and 86 preparers shows that quantity was not perceived as the most significant element in determining quality. Besides quantity, the respondents also perceived information types, measures used, themes disclosed, adopting reporting guidelines, inclusion of assurance statement and the use of visual tools as significant dimensions/features of reporting quality.

The online questionnaire has some limitations, especially in terms of researcher being absent to clarify meanings and, hence, possibilities that respondents may misinterpret the questionnaire elements.

Considering that robust, reliable measurement of reporting quality is difficult, preparers, standard setters and policy makers need multidimensional quality models that incorporate both users’ perceptions of quality and preparers’ pragmatic understanding of the quality delivery process. These will make the preparers informed of whether their disclosure may be falling short of users’ expectations.

Amid, increasing complexity of CER, the research contributes to the growing body of literature on assessing the quality of CER by developing a less subjective, multidimensional, preparer–user-based quality model. This innovative quality model goes beyond the traditional quality models, subjective author-based quality measures. Focussing on the three dimensions of reporting quality – content, credibility and communication – it also offers a high-level resolution of meaning of CER quality.

The aim of this paper is to provide the state of the art in the academic and professional debate on the disclosure quality of NFI. This analysis is driven by the need to feature the dimensions of NFI quality that should be considered to improve the current regulatory framework towards a more transparent disclosure.

The research is an integrative literature review that assesses and synthesizes the scientific knowledge and the annexed documents collected during the public consultation for the Review of Non-financial Reporting Directive (NFRD) on the disclosure quality of non-financial information (NFI).

Findings show that there is a common consensus between scientific literature and the annexed documents of the consultation process on the Review of the NFRD on the need to enhance a double-materiality perspective, to provide specific contents on sustainability issues, to clarify the relevance of NFI, and to embed NFI into the management report in an integrated manner. Furthermore, there is an alignment related to timeliness in favour of a risk management procedure and a forward-looking approach.

The research engages the debate on the NFI disclosure quality, in light of the recent Review of NRFD and the new Proposal of Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive that extends and enhances the non-binding reporting guidelines of NFI.

The research provides a dashboard of the dimensions of NFI disclosure quality that aggregates the academics' and practitioners' knowledge systematically. It shows the interplay between the scholarly developments and the recent measures arisen in the consultation process to undertake NFI disclosure quality.

The research provides a lens to analyse, classify and interpret the insights emerged during the consultation process of the NFRD.

This paper is motivated by the absence of rules that govern the practice of corporate social responsibility disclosure (CSRD). The purpose of this paper is to investigate the corporate governance factors that impact the quality of CSRD. This study further examines the moderating role of family ownership and educational qualifications of female directors on the relation between board gender diversity and CSRD quality.

This study adopts a sample of 94 non-financial companies listed on the Amman Stock Exchange to collect data on CSRD based on a checklist of 41 items for seven years from 2010–2016. The quality of CSRD is measured using a four-dimensional method that encompasses relative quantity, disclosure intensity, degree of accuracy and management outlook.

This study finds that CSRD quality is far from satisfactory in Jordan. The results also suggest that board size, auditor type, company size and profitability are positively associated with CSRD quality. On the other hand, factors such as chief executive officer duality, board diversity, ownership concentration and financial leverage are negatively associated with CSRD quality. In addition, the results of the empirical analysis suggest that the negative relationship between the quality of CSRD and the presence of female board members is stronger for family-owned companies. By contrast, the negative relationship between the quality of CSRD and the presence of female board members is weakened when the company has more educated, skilled and qualified female directors.

The originality of this study is manifested in the development of a quantitative measurement of CSRD quality.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an understanding of the intellectual capital (IC) reporting practices of the Bangladeshi pharmaceutical industry, one of the most significant industries to the Bangladeshi economy. It investigates the extent and qualitative characteristics of IC disclosures made by listed pharmaceutical companies in Bangladesh.

Data are gathered through a content analysis of the 2006 annual reports of 16 pharmaceutical companies quoted on the Dhaka Stock Exchange. The content analysis is performed by IC topic (i.e. categories and subcategories) and three semantic properties of IC disclosure: first, format (i.e. discursive, numerical but non-monetary, numerical-monetary and visual); second, news-tenor (i.e. positive, neutral and negative); and three, time-orientation (i.e. forward-looking, non-time-specific and past-oriented).

Results suggest a clear awareness among the Bangladeshi pharmaceutical companies of the significance of IC in corporate value creation and a commitment to publicly communicating IC. Some evidence is found of the need to manage stakeholder relationships, and legitimacy and impression management motives underpinning the management's desire to disclose IC. Also, proprietary cost theory explains the variation in the disclosure of types of IC. The Bangladeshi pharmaceutical companies did not adopt a consistent framework for IC reporting. A lack of consistency in reporting IC was also evident as the extent and subcategories of IC disclosures varied among companies. The findings indicate the Bangladeshi pharmaceutical companies may not have properly measured and managed their IC.

There are two main limitations specific to this study. First, it only provides a snapshot of IC disclosure practices of Bangladeshi pharmaceutical companies in 2006. Changes may have taken place since then that would have affected the IC-intensity and IC utilisation of these entities. Second, the study's sample is limited due to its focus on one industry. However, it is representative of the population as it includes more than two-thirds of Bangladeshi pharmaceutical companies. This limitation affects the ability to conduct statistically meaningful analyses for testing any hypotheses relating to IC disclosure.

This is the first study on IC reporting practices of Bangladeshi pharmaceutical companies. Unlike most prior studies on IC disclosure practices, this study measures the quality of disclosures by analysing their semantic properties. The paper highlights the need for building organisational competencies in managing, measuring and reporting IC in Bangladesh.

Extending prior studies which suggest that the disclosure practice of developed economy entities tends to be more transparent than that of emerging economy entities, this study investigates whether such differences in the degree of disclosure transparency translate into different levels of value‐relevance of their accounting summary measures (i.e., book values and earnings). Consistent with theories that link disclosure quality with the impact of disclosure on investors' decisions, the evidence indicates that the accounting summary measures of developed economy entities are more value‐relevant than those of emerging economy entities in the U.S. stock market. This finding has some implications for the current policy debate in IASB regarding accounting for emerging economy entities.

This paper aims to examine the “quality” of narrative risk management disclosures (RMD) from a “quantity” and “richness” (width and depth) perspective, utilising a finer-grained approach. Evidence is then provided on the relationships between RMD quality and the corporate determinants driving that quality.

Within a multidimensional quality disclosure framework, annual report narrative RMD from the top 100 Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) listed companies precisely “matched” for the 2010 and 2012 years were examined using semantic content analysis. The relationship between the dimensions and sub-dimensions of RMD “quantity” and “richness”, and various corporate characteristics were explored using ordinary least squares (OLS) regression analysis.

The results indicate that RMD are considerably lacking in quality, from the “quantity”, “width” and particularly the “depth” dimension and sub-dimensions for both years. Many companies provide “boiler plate” RMD over consecutive years and many do not comply with the intent of the ASX Corporate Governance Principles and Recommendations under the “if not, why not” regime (ASX CGC, 2010). Company size and cross-listing were found to be the primary determinants of higher quality RMD and, to a lesser extent, firm risk. Some evidence was found that “quality” RMD were less likely where companies are more highly leveraged and when their shareholders are more concentrated.

Although two coders independently coded the RMD and specific decision rules were followed, the subjectivity inherent in conducting semantic content analysis into the dimensions and sub-dimensions of the framework cannot be completely eliminated. However, by adopting a finer-grained approach, this study contributes to the global literature on the quality of RMD. Previous studies are extended by analysing and testing the individual dimensions and sub-dimensions of “quantity” and “richness” which provides new empirical evidence and a more comprehensive portrayal of RMD quality and a greater understanding why some companies are more likely to disclose higher quality RMD than others.

These results provide useful and predominantly new empirical evidence on the quality of RMD for practitioners, regulators and researchers. As many companies are not complying with the “intent” of the “if not, why not” approach, these results support the argument for mandated narrative RMD regulations at an international level.

The multidimensional framework of RMD “quantity” and “richness” provides a basis for examining not only how much is disclosed, but what is disclosed and how. In adopting a finer-grained approach, this study analyses and tests the individual dimensions and sub-dimensions of the framework. This provides a deeper understanding of the overall quality of RMD and the determinants driving RMD quality for the sample companies.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of the emotional attachment strength of family members to their business on the quality of the voluntary disclosure of their key performance indicator (KPI). More specifically, the authors focused on the effect of two dimensions of the socio-emotional theory, i.e. “family influence and control” and “firm dynasty succession.”

The authors performed a content analysis of annual reports for a sample of 87 French families listed in CAC All-Tradable to calculate a disclosure quality index of KPI. The authors proxied the “family influence and control” by the proportion of family members appointed in the board. To identify the “firm dynasty succession” concern, the authors classified firms according to the generation they belonged to. The authors estimated a cross-sectional linear regression model to meet the research objective.

This study confirms the role of the family affective attachment in decreasing the quality of KPI disclosure in such a way to preserve its socio-emotional wealth. The family firms’ principals who desire to sustain their control on the firm, to perpetuate the business for future generations and to protect their emotional wealth tend to avoid the disclosure of credible and reliable KPI information.

The findings have meaningful practical implications. First, they provide relevant insights into the regulatory bodies of the financial reporting regarding the increasing appeal for making KPI disclosure mandatory. Second, as the family businesses are the most widespread proprietorship in the French context, the effect of the family agenda on the quality of the KPI should be of interest to various policymakers and financial statements’ users of such firms. Third, the results inform nonfamily shareholders regarding the importance of selecting representatives on the board that should share similar interest with regard to KPI disclosure.

From a societal perspective, this study is relevant in taking into account the critical role the family businesses have in the French economy. This study should help the minority shareholders to protect their interests and maximize their wealth within the family firm because it sheds light on the influence that family members have on hiding key information on the firm’s real performance.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no prior study in the family firms literature has examined the quality of voluntary disclosure of KPI. Although most previous studies merely compared family and nonfamily firms in terms of voluntary disclosure, the authors acknowledge and address the heterogeneity between family firms. The authors contribute to the few prior empirical validations of SEW implication on voluntary disclosure decisions by testing the effect of an additional dimension, which is family dynasty.

The purpose of this paper is to extend the applicability of stakeholder, legitimacy and signaling theories by examining to what extent proactive corporate social responsibility disclosures are interrelated to attempt to gain and maintain legitimacy, to gain support of the stakeholders and to reduce information asymmetry.

To test the theoretical arguments, a longitudinal approach over a five-year period of 145 companies’ sustainability reports and statistical analysis was applied to investigate the evolution of their quality.

The results show a significant increase in the quality of sustainability reporting, and the experience gained while writing these reports can contribute to this. Based on signaling and legitimacy theories, this paper suggests that improvement in sustainability reporting quality acts as an important signal to gain legitimacy in case of information asymmetry during the legitimacy process. Th disclosure for economic and social dimensions is better than that of the environmental dimension, and the improvement in quality over time is the because of synergies and interlinkages more between these two dimensions of sustainability, and to a lesser extent because of the environmental dimension.

Firms should view investing in sustainability reporting disclosure as a strategy for obtaining business legitimacy.

The results of this paper are of interest for several reasons: extend and broaden the use of signaling in studying its use on sustainability reporting; the use of three theories is an appropriate framework for empirical analysis of sustainability reporting disclosure quality in Brazil; and add to the scarce evidence of sustainability reporting in Brazil.

As more companies choose to disclose corporate social responsibility (CSR) information, it is important to gain an understanding of the quality of disclosures and factors that influence quality. The purpose of this study is to examine the role of culture as a determinant of the quality of voluntary carbon emission disclosures.

This study uses regression analysis to test the influence of culture on the quality of carbon disclosures. The sample of this study comes from companies who voluntarily report to the carbon disclosure project. The authors operationalize the quality of disclosure using the Carbon Disclosure Leadership Index. The authors operationalize cultural values using both Hofstede’s metrics (Hofstede, 1980) and Project GLOBE (House et al., 2004).

This study predicts and finds a negative relationship between quality of disclosure and high individualism scores. This study also finds that the quality of disclosure is lower for companies located in countries with high power distance scores. The authors find that the quality of disclosure is higher for companies located in countries with gender/assertiveness scores that indicate a higher value on the environment than on the importance of economic growth. While quality is marginally related to uncertainty avoidance using Hofstede's measure, quality is not related to uncertainty avoidance using the Project GLOBE metric. The authors did not find a hypothesized negative significant relationship between quality and long-term orientation.

Quality is a measure of importance to users and regulators of disclosures.

National culture is an important determinant of CSR disclosure quality.

This study extends the previous research by using a metric for quality based on an independent evaluation of disclosures and by the role of culture in a multi-country study.

The growing business complexity has caused many risks (e.g. operational, financial, reputational, cybersecurity, regulatory and compliance) that threaten companies' sustainability and have received attention from regulators, investors, and businesses. The authors present a model for assessing and reporting corporate risk by examining the indicators underlying corporate risk reporting.

A thorough review of the literature and semi-structured interviews with experts were conducted and the fuzzy Delphi technique was used to obtain consensus and screening of risks. The relationships between these risk indicators were recognized, weighted and prioritized by employing a hybrid Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory Model (DEMATEL) method integrated with Analytic Network Process (ANP) (DEMATEL-ANP [DANP]) approach. Finally, using the Iranian setting of corporate risk reporting, a model was developed to calculate the risk-reporting scores.

The results indicate that risk disclosure quality is more important than risk disclosures' textual properties and quantity. According to the experts, reporting the key risks that the company faces, management's approach to dealing with these risks and quantifying their impact are more important than the other indicators. The results also show that risk reporting in Iran lacks quantitative and specific information, and most risk disclosures are sticky.

The data have been prepared and analyzed according to the unique Iranian reporting environment, which should be considered when interpreting the results.

The results of this research can be used by the regulators of the Stock Exchange Organizations (SEO) to evaluate corporate risk reports and rank companies. Results are also relevant to investors and policymakers to identify companies with poor risk disclosure and to take necessary measures to improve their reporting practices.

This paper contributes to the social and governance literature by presenting the importance of risk reporting in corporate disclosures.

The unique Iranian setting of corporate risk reporting furthers the understanding of risk reporting and thus provides education, policy, practice and research implications for other emerging economies like Iran. Many prior studies focus mainly on the quality of risk disclosure, and other aspects of corporate risk disclosure presented in the study have remained largely overlooked. The corporate risk reporting attributes identified in the study are relevant to the rise of non-financial risks, the textual and qualitative nature of risk reporting and textual risk disclosures.