Search results

There are growing concerns about the environmental activities of firms and their accountability towards reporting on such activities against the background of the voluntary reporting regimes. As a result, the motivation for this study is to investigate the role of NGOs' (nongovernmental organisations) engagement in influencing firms' environmental accounting disclosures using data of listed firms in Ghana. Environmental disclosure scores were constructed through content analyses from 422 annual reports of the listed firms with NGO engagements surrogated with dummy variables, capturing firms' acknowledgement of their engagements with NGOs and the data analysed using the two-step generalised method of moments. The results provided evidence to show that NGOs' engagement is positive and significantly influence firms' environmental reporting practices. Further analyses confirming profitability, leverage and market share prices among others are significant for explaining environmental disclosures. This is regarded as the first study to investigate the relationship between NGOs as stakeholders and the quality of environmental accounting disclosures. The findings provided comprehensive implications for policies that could further strengthen pressure groups to deal with environmental degradation through firms' activities.

The purpose of this paper is to reflect upon the contributions made to the social and environmental accounting literature by papers that comprised a 2002 Special Issue of Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal (AAAJ) entitled social and environmental reporting and its role in maintaining or creating organisational legitimacy. This paper will also provide insights into the origins of legitimacy theory as used in the social and environmental accounting literature as well as providing reflections about the strengths, and shortcomings, of the theory. Suggestions are made with respect to the ongoing application, and development, of legitimacy theory.

As a commentary, this paper utilises a review of the social and environmental accounting and institutional literature across a number of decades to reveal insights about the development and use of legitimacy theory as a basis to explain social and environmental reporting practices. Citation data are also used to indicate the potential impact that the papers in the 2002 Special Issue had upon subsequent research.

This commentary shows that the 2002 Special Issue is the most highly cited issue in the history of AAAJ. It also shows that individually, some of the papers in the Special Issue represent some of the most highly cited papers in the social and environmental accounting literature. The commentary provides arguments to suggest that the development of legitimacy theory is in need of further refinement, and suggests a way in which this refinement might take place.

This paper is largely based on the opinions of one researcher, and the evidence presented in the paper is selected on the basis that it is deemed sufficient to support the opinions being projected. The paper also relies on citation data as an indicator of “impact”. The implication of the research is that it identifies a “way forward” for the development of theory applicable to the understanding of organisational social and environmental reporting practices.

The study provides evidence to show that the 2002 Special Issue was significant within the context of AAAJ, and also within the context of the evolution of the social and environmental accounting literature. The description of the history of the development of legitimacy theory, and of the theory’s subsequent application, provides a solid impetus for future refinements to the theory.

This paper aims to respond to recent calls by Jones (2014) and Jones and Solomon (Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 2013) for more studies on biodiversity accounting and reporting. In particular, this paper explores biodiversity reporting of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority (MDBA), an Australian public sector enterprise.

The paper uses content analysis of MDBA’s published annual reports over the period of 15 years (1998-2012). Archival data (from different government departments) are also used to prepare natural inventory model.

The paper finds that although specific species, such as flora and fauna, and habitats-related disclosures have increased over the time, such information still allows only a partial construction of an inventory of natural assets, using Jones’ (1996, 2003) model. However, unlike prior studies that find lack of data availability to be the main impediment for operationalising biodiversity accounting, the abundance of biodiversity data in Australia makes it comparatively easier to produce such a statement.

Informed by the environmental stewardship framework, the results of this paper suggest that the disclosures made by MDBA are constrained potentially due to its use of traditional accounting mechanisms of reporting that only allow tradable items to be reported to stakeholders. An alternative reporting format would be more relevant to stakeholder groups who are more interested in information regarding quality and availability of water, and loss of biodiversity in the basin area rather than the financial performance of the MDBA.

Although there are a growing number of studies exploring biodiversity reporting in Australia, this paper is one of the earlier attempts to operationalise biodiversity (particularly habitats, flora and fauna) within the context of an Australian public sector enterprise.

The objective of this study is to provide insights into insiders' perspectives on environmental accounting disclosures, which is relatively under-investigated. Based on insights from key managers, we provide information on company decisions and practices related to the data disclosed in annual reports. More specifically, we explore how regulation guidance affects and shapes disclosure strategies.

Drawing on the normativity framework, our research design involves a multiple-case study focusing on eight French listed firms in sensitive industries. We primarily build our investigation on the analysis of annual reports. Semi-structured interviews with 20 key managers belonging to these same firms provide interpretative explanations of the disclosed (and un-disclosed) figures.

Our main findings show that the disclosure of environmental accounting information (EAI) is still in its infancy. Weak definitions and poor guidance in regulations explain the limitations in disclosure and induce interpretative strategies depending on the type of data to be disclosed in the companies' annual reports. We document that separate logics drive environmental expenditure and environmental liability disclosures in many respects.

This study should be useful for regulators because environmental accounting standards are currently subject to change and helpful for users because of the careful consideration of disclosures.

Our research is timely and adds to the growing body of research on regulation. We document how a common regulation may lead to interpretative strategies by different actors and networks of actors, thereby contributing to shaping EAI norms.

The objective of this chapter is to analyse the impact of France’s ‘Grenelle 2’ law of 2010, which applies to environmental accounting disclosures (EADs). More specifically, it seeks to observe whether the ‘Anglo-Saxon’ ‘comply or explain’ model, transposed into the French regulatory framework, influences the disclosure strategies of firms that are listed on a regulated market.

Drawing on the theoretical framework of legitimacy and the concept of normativity, an empirical study is conducted on a sample of 96 French firms listed on the SBF index between 2009 and 2014. The effect of regulation is assessed by a content analysis of EAD in annual reports, examining changes in disclosure practices and the contents of disclosures.

The main results show that explanations for the absence of EAD showed a significant increase after the introduction of the law. We also observe that the new rules had no effect on the number of firms making EADs, although the quality of the disclosures declined. Finally, the results also concern practices of non-disclosure without any accompanying explanation.

The limitations of this study relate to the choices underlying the classifications and observations made during the content analysis.

This study has social relevance in that it supplies information for assessing the transposition of European directives into French law.

This study extends research concerning environmental disclosures by examining a recent accounting object. It also continues the debate on normativity, with its analysis of disclosures subject to a changing regulatory framework.

We review research on corporate social responsibility (CSR) published in 13 top accounting journals over the last decade. We begin with a brief discussion of the data that archival researchers have used to measure CSR. Next, we conduct our review in four parts: (1) determinants of CSR; (2) the relation between CSR and financial performance; (3) consequences of CSR; and (4) the roles of CSR disclosure and assurance. We summarize the accounting literature in these areas and comment on how accounting researchers can use their skill sets with regard to specific issues. Within each area, we present some suggestions for future CSR research in accounting.

The last years have witnessed a growth in interest in social and environmental questions. Many companies have developed environmental management and auditing systems and altered their social and environmental disclosure practices. These developments resulted in the growth of research focusing on the analysis of information disclosed by companies. The purpose of this study is to contribute a reflection on the papers that have been published on social and environmental accounting from 2000 to 2006.

A literature review of the papers examining social and environmental matters published in selected accounting journals allows the identification of the key content issues, methodologies and research questions which have been predominant in the social environmental accounting research (SEAR) area. It also enables one to pin‐point areas for future research.

The content was examined and classified in four groups: social and environmental accounting systems; social and environmental disclosures; regulation impact; and relations among environmental disclosure and environmental performance. For each group, the research method; data origins and type of data; industry and country were identified. Almost all the studies are based on content analysis and interviews. Data are collected not only from the financial statements but also from other types of information disclosed by companies. In many cases, industry activities are selected carefully and most of the studies used data from the UK, Australia, and the USA.

The paper provides a contribution to the development of the SEAR area, exploring different views. It also helps schools to identify areas for future research.

This paper serves as an introduction to this special issue of Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal; an issue which embraces themes associated with social and environmental reporting (SAR) and its role in maintaining or creating organisational legitimacy. In an effort to place this research in context the paper begins by making reference to contemporary trends occurring in social and environmental accounting research generally, and this is then followed by an overview of some of the many research questions which are currently being addressed in the area. Understanding motivations for disclosure is shown to be one of the issues attracting considerable research attention, and the desire to legitimise an organisation’s operations is in turn shown to be one of the many possible motivations. The role of legitimacy theory in explaining managers’ decisions is then discussed and it is emphasised that legitimacy theory, as it is currently used, must still be considered to be a relatively under‐developed theory of managerial behaviour. Nevertheless, it is argued that the theory provides useful insights. Finally, the paper indicates how the other papers in this issue of AAAJ contribute to the ongoing development of legitimacy theory in SAR research.

The purpose of this paper is to survey the research methods employed in the extant environmental accounting literature, finding few experimental studies. The need for more experimentation in the literature is discussed, as well as how experiments' unique methodological advantages can help address important environmental accounting issues. These issues culminate in a proposed model for conducting experimental environmental accounting research.

A synthesis of the environmental accounting literature emphasizes the research methods, and, advantages and disadvantages of each method, as well as why and how experimental designs can contribute to the environmental accounting literature. Finally, the paper proposes and analyzes a framework for conducting environmental accounting experiments.

Experiments can provide unique contributions to the environmental accounting literature. Relative to traditional accounting information, environmental accounting information comprises lower levels of user familiarity which may hinder effective processing of these non‐traditional data. These characteristics make the organizational display of these data, and their combination with non‐environmental metrics, a particular and unique concern. The proposed model considers the impact of environmental strategy on the implementation of environmental information systems, which in turn influences evaluation effectiveness of decisions based on environmental accounting information. Stakeholder influences, management communication of environmental issues, and evaluation scales also influence these relationships.

The model assumes environmental information generates from within the entity (i.e. private firms, public agencies, etc.). Future research can enhance and/or modify the framework to include information design and capture from non‐entity end‐users (e.g. stakeholders), as well as empirically test the model's relationships.

The framework provides factors to consider to design more effective environmental accounting information systems. Also, the model's factors should aid researchers in developing robust experimental designs for environmental accounting studies.

This is the first paper to propose a framework for conducting experimental environmental accounting research.

The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between mandatory environmental performance disclosure and subsequent environmental regulatory performance.

Using legitimacy theory as the interpretive lens, regulatory non‐compliance disclosures threaten organizational legitimacy and non‐compliant firms are expected to respond to these threats. The potential effectiveness of different legitimation strategies for reducing these threats is evaluated.

Regression analysis shows a negative correlation between the mandatory disclosure of environmental legal sanctions and subsequent regulatory violations using firms in the US oil refining industry. These results are interpreted as demonstrating that subsequent regulatory compliance is a tactic employed by managers to minimize the delegitimizing effect of organizational impropriety revealed by mandatory accounting disclosures.

Implications for practice include linking financial reporting to environmental performance. This link gains greater importance as concern about the environmental effects of business operations becomes more acute within the investor, regulatory, and public interest arenas.

The paper makes original contributions to research on mandatory environmental disclosures that are embedded in US financial reporting. In addition, a conception of legitimacy theory that is broader than previously relied upon in accounting research literature is reviewed. The study examines a single industry within a single country. Further research may determine whether similar relationships are observed in other industries, and whether equivalent relationships can be examined in international settings. In addition, the possibilities and limits of regulatory compliance as a measure of environmental performance, and of environmental accounting as a policy tool in the governance of the commons are discussed.