Search results

This paper aims to explore the relation between chief executive officer (CEO) tenure and the propensity to adopt the global reporting initiative (GRI) for corporate social responsibility reporting in Chinese firms.

This study used Chinese A-listed firms as sample during 2010–2020. Considering the binary nature of dependent variable, logistic regression model is applied. For robustness, lagged value of independent and control variables, additional control variables and two stage least square regression are used.

This paper finds that CEO tenure is negatively related to the adoption of GRI reporting standards. Furthermore, this paper finds that this association is less pronounced when CEOs are female and when CEOs have foreign experience. Furthermore, this paper finds that this association is not significant when CEOs are female and when CEOs have foreign experience. This paper also finds that the relationship between CEO tenure and GRI adoption is more pronounced in state-owned enterprises in China. The findings in this paper are robust after controlling for endogeneity.

The study results are important for understanding the development and implementation of GRI framework especially in China.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to deeply investigate how CEO tenure can affect adoption of GRI in Chinese firms.

The main objective of the study was to compare Business Responsibility and Sustainability Report (BRSR) norms with Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) standards, so as to establish whether BRSR norms match the global standards and best practices or not. Additionally, an effort was made to ascertain and highlight areas where BRSR norms are more comprehensive, just match, or require further refinement to be at par with the GRI standards. The study highlights the similarities and dissimilarities between the internationally accepted GRI standards and the BRSR framework; thereby suggesting areas of improvement for the BRSR framework.

Scrutinised all the 36 standards of the Global reporting initiative and BRSR format and guidelines of the Securities Exchange Board of India. The Content Analysis Technique was used to ascertain the percentages of similarities between the two frameworks.

The content analysis found that there are 52.30% similarities between BRSR norms and GRI standards. Further, this study shows the factors that led to the dissimilarities between BRSR and GRI standards. This study found 18 areas where BRSR is more informative than GRI, and 7 areas where BRSR could be further refined.

This study contributes to research in the sustainability reporting framework to be adopted by Indian listed companies. There are a few Indian listed companies who are already reporting as per the GRI framework and might perceive the BRSR as a separate reporting altogether. But as found in this study, more than half of the BRSR framework is similar to the GRI framework; thus, half the work is almost done. As such this study helps Indian firms in developing an understanding of the BRSR and puts in perspective its standing among global sustainability reporting standards. This study shall help institutional investors, rating agencies, and external assurers to better visualize an Indian entity, by referring to its Business Responsibility and Sustainability Reporting.

This paper aims to evaluate the outcome effectiveness of the global reporting initiatives (GRI) transitions by understanding how companies have responded to the changes from G3.1 to G4 and finally to the GRI Standards.

A quality disclosure score is developed that incorporates assessments of both the quality of disclosures and the materiality of Australian companies. To analyse materiality, survey data were collected from 187 companies. Disclosure scores are based on a content analysis of the sustainability reports of 12 mining and metals companies and 12 financial services companies that used the GRI Standards from 2011 to 2019 (a total of 213 reports).

The study found that the GRI transitions have not led to companies improving the quality of their disclosures on areas considered important for them to achieve their social and environmental goals. Instead, the companies tended to use a greenwashing strategy, where the quality of disclosure of material issues declined or fluctuated over time.

From a practical perspective, the disclosure score developed in this paper enables managers of companies to recognize a threshold of completeness and to summarize the areas that are not materially relevant to their business.

The results are potentially helpful for investors, shareholders and other stakeholders, enabling them to better understand sustainability reports.

This study contributes to the body of research in sustainability reporting by providing evidence on the outcome effectiveness of the latest updates in the GRI framework.

This study aims to contribute to the emerging debate about materiality with novel insights about the signaling effects related to the disclosure of environmental, social and governance (ESG) information using the guidelines released by the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB).

An empirical assessment using panel data analysis was built to evaluate the relationship between sustainability reporting standards and analysts’ forecast accuracy.

The analysis revealed that the proliferation of sustainability reports prepared on mandatory or voluntary basis mitigated the signaling effects related to the disclosure of ESG information by companies. Furthermore, the additional analysis conducted considering sustainability reporting quality and ESG performance revealed the existence of mixed effects on analysts’ forecasts accuracy. Therefore, the insights highlighted the need to consider a cautionary approach in evaluating the contribution of ESG data to financial evaluations.

The practical implications consist of identifying criticisms related to disclosing ESG information by listed companies. In detail, the analysis underlines the need to enhance reporting standards’ interoperability to support the development of more accurate analysis by investors and financial experts.

The analysis reveals increasing attention investors pay to socially responsible initiatives, confirming that financial markets consider sustainability reporting as a strategic driver to engage with stakeholders and investors.

This research represents one of the first attempts to explore differences between GRI and SASB using an empirical approach.

This paper aims to examine whether tax disclosure in Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)-based sustainability reporting mitigates aggressive tax avoidance.

This study uses a multiple regression method for 714 nonspecially taxed firms listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange in 2014–2018.

The findings demonstrate that disclosing tax payments in GRI-based sustainability reports reduces aggressive tax avoidance. Additional analysis indicates that the number of GRI-based sustainability reports positively affects aggressive tax avoidance. However, disclosing tax payments in multiple GRI-based sustainability reports negatively affects aggressive tax avoidance.

Recent prior studies demonstrate that aggressive tax avoidance does not indicate an organizational culture that devalues corporate social responsibility. This paper argues that firms cannot find the link between tax and corporate social responsibility when tax payments are not incorporated in sustainability reports. GRI considers tax a sustainability issue and seeks to institutionalize this concept by recommending that firms disclose taxes in their sustainability reports. This research analyses whether disclosing taxes in GRI-based sustainability reports may serve as a form of soft law by convincing firms that tax is a sustainability issue, thereby reducing their tax avoidance. This topic has received little attention in previous research.

This paper aims to contribute to the emerging debate on materiality with novel and original insights about the managerial and theoretical implications related to the adoption of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) as reporting standards. Furthermore, the paper will evaluate the main drivers that favor the combination of the two standards by companies to develop new knowledge about the hierarchical relationship between financial and sustainability materiality.

Building on a sample of 2,046 US listed companies observed during the period 2017–2020, the research is conducted using quantitative methods. Multinomial logistic regressions are used to evaluate the differences between GRI and SASB’s adoption.

The analysis highlights that financial and sustainability materiality are driven by different purposes. In detail, SASB’s adoption is driven by factors directly related to financial dynamics, while GRI’s adoption is influenced by the existence of corporate governance mechanisms inspired by sustainable and ethical principles. Furthermore, the last analysis reveals that the combination of the two standards is characterized by the predominance of sustainability materiality.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first empirical study on the relationship between financial and sustainability materiality.

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) reporting has been widely accepted as a vital tool for communicating with stakeholders on a range of social, environmental, and governance issues, but how companies define, interpret, apply, integrate, and communicate their CSR efforts and impacts in corporate reporting is anything but a straightforward task. The purpose of this chapter is to explore the concept of materiality in CSR reporting and demonstrate practical examples of good CSR and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) reporting practices. We chose the aviation industry because of its economic relevance, constant growth, and future expected changes in the aftermath of COVID-19. In addition, airlines affect many of the SDGs directly and indirectly with contending results. This chapter is timely because of the growing willingness by companies to integrate CSR and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) thinking into the corporate strategy and business operations using materiality assessment and enhancing their competitive advantage and ability to maintain long-term value and because ESG and ethical investing have become part of the mainstream investing. Thus, this chapter contributes to an understanding of the wide range of existing and new reporting frameworks and regulations and reinforces the importance of discussing how this diversity of approaches can affect the work toward worldwide comparability of CSR and sustainability reporting.

Integrated reporting enhances the meaningfulness of non-financial information, but whether this enhancement is progressive or regressive from a sustainability perspective is unknown. This study aims to examine the influence of the Integrated Reporting (<IR>) Framework on the disclosure of financial- and impact-material sustainability-related information in integrated reports.

Using a disclosure index constructed from the Global Reporting Initiative’s G4 Guidelines and UN Sustainable Development Goals, the authors content analysed integrated reports of 40 companies from the International Integrated Reporting Council’s Pilot Programme Business Network published between 2015 and 2017. The content analysis distinguished between financial- and impact-material sustainability-related information.

The extent of sustainability-related disclosures in integrated reports remained more or less constant over the study period. Impact-material disclosures were more prominent than financial material ones. Impact-material disclosures mainly related to environmental aspects, while labour practices-related disclosures were predominantly financially material. The balance between financially- and impact-material sustainability-related disclosures varied based on factors such as industry environmental sensitivity and country-specific characteristics, such as the country’s legal system and development status.

The paper presents a unique disclosure index to distinguish between financially- and impact-material sustainability-related disclosures. Researchers can use this disclosure index to critically examine the nature of sustainability-related disclosure in corporate reports.

This study offers an in-depth understanding of the influence of non-financial reporting frameworks, such as the <IR> Framework that uses a financial materiality perspective, on sustainability reporting. The findings reveal that the practical implementation of the <IR> Framework resulted in sustainability reporting outcomes that deviated from theoretical expectations. Exploring the materiality concept that underscores sustainability-related disclosures by companies using the <IR> Framework is useful for predicting the effects of adopting the Sustainability Disclosure Standards issued by the International Sustainability Standards Board, which also emphasises financial materiality.

Despite an emphasis on financial materiality in the <IR> Framework, companies continue to offer substantial impact-material information, implying the potential for companies to balance both financial and broader societal concerns in their reporting.

While prior research has delved into the practices of regulated integrated reporting, especially in the unique context of South Africa, this study focuses on voluntary adoption, attributing observed practices to intrinsic company motivations. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, it is the first study to explicitly explore the nature of materiality in sustainability-related disclosure. The research also introduces a nuanced understanding of contextual factors influencing sustainability reporting.

While in the past companies have voluntarily disclosed information beyond the financial bottom line, there is now a trend toward mandatory reporting in many countries. With the adoption of Directive 2014/95/EU, the European Union has taken a decisive step in this direction. However, research on the effects of these obligations is still at an early stage, particularly regarding Directive 2014/95/EU. Therefore, this paper aims to pursue the question of whether the directive has led to an improvement in reporting.

The authors analyzed the reporting of the EURO STOXX 50 companies before and after the directive entered into force. To evaluate the improvement, the authors assigned the individual Global Reporting Initiative indicators to the different information requirements of the directive.

Overall, the authors’ study revealed an improvement in reporting. However, this does not apply to all information categories. A significant improvement can be seen regarding the information on policies and due diligence, principal risk and non-financial key performance indicators. Institutional theory suggests that the observed improvements among these reporting-experienced companies can be understood as the result of coercive pressure triggered by the directive’s requirements.

The authors’ study contributes to the debate on the impact of non-financial reporting obligations by providing empirical insights into the effects of Directive 2014/95/EU. These insights can inform political and managerial decision-making, particularly in view of increasing reporting obligations.

Previous scholars have assumed that multinational enterprises (MNEs) can reduce the liability of foreignness and increase profitability by investing in corporate social responsibility (CSR). However, empirical validation of this assumption has rarely been attempted. This study aims to provide empirical evidence that the adoption of multi-stakeholder initiatives, which are globally recognized as signals of CSR, helps MNEs increase profits from internationalization.

Fixed effect models, which address model misspecification problems, and instrumental variable estimation, which controls for the endogeneity in firms’ choice of internationalization, offer empirical evidence supporting the moderating effects of global multi-stakeholder initiatives on the relationship between internationalization and firm performance.

This study examines the moderating role of multi-stakeholder initiatives in the relationship between internationalization and firm performance, drawing on signaling and stakeholder theories. The results suggest that the signaling effect of multi-stakeholder initiatives can help MNEs overcome the liability of foreignness and, therefore, profit from overseas markets.

Although the internationalization–firm performance relationship has been a subject of debate in the field of international business, the role of firms’ stakeholder engagement in this relationship has been largely overlooked in previous studies. In this study, the authors explore the impact of multi-stakeholder initiatives on the internationalization–firm performance relationship. Our primary contention is that multi-stakeholder initiatives have moderating effects on this relationship by reducing the liability of foreignness experienced by MNEs in host countries. Furthermore, the findings suggest that active engagement in multi-stakeholder initiatives significantly contributes to the financial success of MNEs as they internationalize.