Search results

The purpose of this study is to assess how higher education anchor institutions (HEIs) voluntarily report their non-economic impacts. Its goals are to quantify the ease of public access to this information; strengthen the conceptual foundation for HEI impact reporting; and provide guidance for making HEI voluntary disclosures more accessible, comparable and systematic.

Using an exploratory mixed methods design and purposeful sampling, this study analyzed voluntary public disclosures of 41 anchor institution universities in the USA to assess how they communicate their public value creation to stakeholders. Data sources included impact reports, donor reports, annual reports and sustainability reports. The study also analyzed the accessibility of this information by timing how long it took to locate.

The sampled US anchor institutions communicate their non-economic impact to stakeholders in myriad ways using a variety of formats. Time required to find the reports ranged from 37 to 50 min, with an average of 42.30 min. Disparate reporting formats inhibit comparability.

Only 41 anchor institutions were examined. The small sample may not be representative of the broader landscape of higher education institutions.

Findings offer guidance for improving voluntary nonfinancial disclosures to increase public confidence in higher education institutions while advancing community and global resilience. To strengthen voluntary disclosure practices, the study recommends using a standardized reporting format, framing HEI impact through socio-ecological resilience indicators, integrating reports and obtaining some form of assurance. These changes would enhance the credibility and comparability of the disclosures.

This research provides some of the first empirical insight into how US higher education anchor institutions report their value creation to the public. Its application of socio-ecological systems theory outlines an actionable conceptual foundation for HEI reporting by linking organizational, community and global resilience.

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.

This paper aims to examine the influence of sustainability reporting on bank performance. Furthermore, this study investigates the impact of the country’s economic development, financial system and crisis in moderating sustainability reporting and bank performance relationship.

The sample consists of 400 listed banks from 19 countries over the 2009–2022 period. Panel fixed-effect regression is applied, and System Generalized Method of Moments is used as robustness to address endogeneity concerns. The results are robust and survive several sensitivity tests.

The results, aligning with legitimacy and agency theories, suggest a negative relationship between sustainability reporting and bank performance. Based on further classifications, results suggest the negative (positive) impact of country’s financial system (economic development) in moderating the sustainability reporting and bank performance nexus. Finally, this study documents the positive influence of sustainability reporting on bank performance during the crisis period. Overall, the findings fail to support the reduced information asymmetry accruing from higher sustainability disclosures in developing and bank-based economies.

This study has important implications for regulators, policymakers and other stakeholders, especially in light of recent banking scandals that have deteriorated stakeholders' faith in financial institutions' reporting quality.

This study extends the scant literature on sustainability reporting in banking from a cost-benefit vantage point. Furthermore, to the best of the author’s knowledge, no previous research has examined the moderating role of the country’s financial structure and crisis in sustainability reporting and bank performance relationship.

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.

The purpose of this study is to analyse the impact of corporate attributes like a company’s profitability, size, age, leverage and board size on companies’ sustainability reporting as measured through India’s new business responsibility and sustainability reporting (BRSR) framework.

A random sample of 130 companies was taken from the top 1,000 listed companies on the National Stock Exchange. Sequential mixed methods research approach was used to prepare a sustainability quality index. Then, a hierarchical multiple regression analysis was performed to examine the impact on the quality of reporting by Indian companies.

Interestingly, the analysis revealed that traditional metrics like age, profitability, board size and leverage did not have significant associations with reporting quality. Rather, the size of a company in terms of market capitalisation was found to have a strong positive impact on sustainability reporting.

This was a cross-sectional study, as time series data for BRSR reporting is not yet available. Also, only five parameters were taken for analysis. Lastly, subjective judgment in content analysis may be involved.

This suggests that only larger companies in India are prioritising sustainability reporting over smaller ones. It affirms the legitimacy and stakeholder theory in the Indian context.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is one of the first endeavours to assess the efficacy of the new Indian BRSR framework and test its primary objectives. Furthermore, significant implications have been given for managers to catalyse and reinforce the sustainability momentum down the lane across companies of all sizes in India.

The study aims to promote the use of qualitative methods in service research by investigating how these methods are reported in service journals, how the level of reporting has evolved and whether methodological reporting influences the downloads or citations received by qualitative articles.

Methodological reporting practices were identified through content analysis of 318 qualitative articles published in three major service research journals and comparison with prior methodological literature. Regression analysis was used to test how the level of methodological reporting influences article downloads and citations.

The study identifies 29 reporting practices related to 9 key methodological reporting areas. The overall level of methodological reporting in published qualitative articles has increased over time. While differences in the level of reporting between service journals persist, they are narrowing. The level of methodological reporting did not influence downloads or citations of qualitative articles.

Service scholars using qualitative methods should pay attention to methodological reporting as it can improve the chances of being published. Factors such as theoretical contributions are likely to have a greater influence on article impact than methodological reporting.

No prior study has explored methodological reporting practices across different qualitative methodologies or how reporting influences article impact. For authors, reviewers and editors, the study provides an inventory of reporting practices relevant for evaluating qualitative articles, which should lower barriers for qualitative methods in service research by providing practical guidelines on what to focus on when reporting and assessing qualitative research.

This paper aims to examine the extent to which performance indicators (PIs) reported by New Zealand (NZ) higher education institutions (HEIs) correspond with accounting standards and guidance and the effects issuance of principles-based authoritative guidance and early adoption of Public Benefit Entity Financial Reporting Standard 48 (PBE FRS 48) have on the PIs disclosed.

Using a content analysis index derived from accounting standards and guidance, we conduct a longitudinal assessment of the 2016 and 2019 statements of service performance published by 22 NZ HEIs.

The PIs reported extend beyond the service performance elements proposed by standard-setters. Despite few indicators on intermediate and broader outcomes, the measures disclosed by HEIs are reflective of their role in the NZ economy and the national Tertiary Education Strategy. The results show that principles-based authoritative guidance and early adoption of PBE FRS 48 influence the focus and type of measures disclosed, while there is no evidence of improvements in the reporting of impacts, outcomes and information useful for performance evaluation.

This paper provides timely insights for standard-setters and regulators on the influence principles-based accounting standards and guidance have on non-financial reporting practices.

This study contributes to the scant literature on HEIs’ service performance reporting. It presents a model for conceptualising HEIs’ PIs that can be used as a basis for future research on non-financial reporting. It also reflects on the tension between accountability and “accountingisation”, suggesting that, although the PIs reported support formal accountability, they do not communicate whether HEIs’ activities and outputs meet their social purpose.

This paper aims to investigate how integrated reporting quality (IRQ), as well as comprehensive disclosure score (CDS) (i.e. incorporating integrated and sustainable reporting quality), impacts value creation differently between companies operating under mandatory versus voluntary adoption of these reporting frameworks.

The sample comprises 1,195 firm-year observations (international data set) from 2018 to 2022, which are divided into groups based on mandatory vs voluntary adoption of the international integrated reporting framework (IIRF) and Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB). Furthermore, regression analysis is used in the analyses.

The findings revealed a significant and positive relationship between IRQ and value creation on a global scale. In addition, unlike voluntary adoption of the IIRF, mandatory adoption of it showed a significant and positive relationship between IRQ and value creation. Furthermore, an increase in the CDS had a greater impact on value creation compared to IRQ. Finally, in contrast to companies with voluntary adoption of both IIRF and SASB, companies with mandatory adoption of them exhibited a significant and positive relationship between these reports and value creation.

The findings have practical implications for various stakeholders. First, by enhancing the awareness and understanding of integrated reporting and sustainability reporting among users, these results can facilitate more informed economic decision-making and enable a more accurate assessment of a company's potential for value creation. Second, these findings can contribute to the development of more effective and tailored reporting guidelines that align with the nuances of value creation dynamics in different contexts. Ultimately, this research can lead to improvements in reporting practices and regulatory frameworks, benefiting both companies and their stakeholders.

The study's social implications are significant as it offers insights into the global debate surrounding the adoption of the IIRF and the objectives of the merger involving the Value Reporting Foundation and the International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation. The findings provide a concrete basis for evaluating the value of adopting the IIRF and inform discussions on the future of reporting standards and practices.

Furthermore, it stands as one of the pioneering endeavors to investigate the value creation aspects of CDS. These unique aspects make a substantive contribution by expanding the frontiers of knowledge in the realm of corporate reporting and financial implications, offering novel insights and opportunities for further research in this crucial domain.

The purpose of this paper is to test if building reputation capital through environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing can mitigate the negative effect of economic policy uncertainty (EPU) on firms’ valuation.

This study uses an unbalanced panel of 591 financial firms between 2005 and 2021 from Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom (UK) and the USA. Ordinary least square method is used in the empirical tests. To alleviate a potential endogeneity problem, robustness tests are performed using the two-stage least square approach with instrumental variables.

The results of this paper show that sustainable reporting can offset the negative effect of EPU on the valuation of financial firms. Consistent with the stakeholder-based reputation-building hypothesis, sustainability performance may have an insurance-like impact on firms’ valuation during periods of high uncertainty.

According to the findings, during high policy uncertainty periods, investors accept to pay a premium for the stocks of the firms which built social capital through environmental and social investments. Accordingly, it is suggested that regulatory bodies and governments motivate firms to increase their stakeholder orientation to attain higher reputation capital.

Managers can mitigate the negative impact of policy uncertainty on the value of their firms via building social capital, which will increase financial market stability in return, and portfolio investors may use such firms for portfolio optimization decisions.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is one of the first to examine the mitigating role of ESG investing on EPU and firm valuation relationships for financial firms. Thus, this study provides new insights related to the impact of ESG performance on valuation during uncertain times.

This study aims to investigate the impact of ethical accounting practices on financial reporting quality by using the extended theory of planned behaviour (ETPB) and integrating religiosity as a moderating variable.

Using a survey method, data was obtained from 371 chartered accountants who were in good standing as of April 2023. The collected data were then analysed using partial least squares structural equation modelling.

The results revealed that there is a significant positive relationship between ethical accounting practices (attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavioural control and ethical judgement) and financial reporting quality of accounting practitioners. Furthermore, a moderation test was conducted, which demonstrated that religiosity enhances the positive correlation between ethical accounting constructs (attitude, subjective norm and ethical judgement) and financial reporting.

Leading by example, top-level management should actively promote a culture of religiosity that prioritises integrity and adherence to financial reporting requirements.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is one of the very few ethics studies in accounting that demonstrates that the application of the ETPB improves financial reporting quality in a context fraught with allegations of moral breaches by accountants.