Search results

The purpose of this study is to clarify what is really needed to attract Muslim tourists by comparing the two main approaches to serving food with halal certification or with ingredient disclosure.

This research adopted a comparative analysis of a Group promoting “halal certification” and a Group promoting “ingredient disclosure” mainly from the tourists’ perspective. Taito Ward, Tokyo, encourages restaurants to obtain halal certification, while the approach of Takayama City is to disclose the ingredients. The study compares the advantages and disadvantages of these two approaches and also investigates factors influencing them.

This study revealed that Muslim tourists would like to see both halal certification and ingredient disclosure. The reason why Taito Ward and Takayama City pursue different strategies can be summarized in three points: the types of food offered in the two areas, the vastly different scales of the two areas as tourist destinations and the different perspectives of their respective advisors.

The limitations of this study include the small sample size and the low diversity of the origins of Muslim tourists. However, this research is still significant because few academic studies on halal certification have been done from the tourists’ perspective.

There are many things that could be done to attract Muslim tourists. Even without halal certification, there are many restaurants that can cater to Muslims in Japan. A little consideration and thoughtfulness on the part of restaurants can enhance the probability of attracting Muslim tourists.

This paper aims to examine consumers’ opinions and behavioral intentions toward foods labeled as containing genetically modified (GM) (transgenic) ingredients across plant and animal-based categories. In light of marketplace changes (i.e. labeling requirements), we explore behavioral measures based on labeling options.

Three studies, one online projective survey using a convenience sample of consumers and two experiments conducted with Amazon mTurk adult US participants, are included.

Consumers have negative associations with GM products vs non-GM and are more likely to purchase unlabeled GM products. GM products may offer positive economic, societal and environmental benefits. However, the need for labeling overshadows these benefits and presence of GM labeling increased avoidance. Furthermore, changes in product opinion mediate consumers’ purchase intention and willingness to pay.

GM labeling negatively influences consumers’ opinions and behavioral intentions. This is important for legislators and marketers concerned with counter-labeling effects (e.g. Non-GMO Project Verified).

Debates on efficacy of labeling, inclusion disclosure of ingredients, short-term risks and long-term implications are ongoing globally. Consumer reception and purchase intention can only be changed through governmental and corporate transparency.

Widespread misinformation about GM foods, presence in our food supply, impact on health, economy, environment and the marketplace still exists. The findings reflect consumers’ responses to changes proposed by the 2016 National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard legislation.

With the paucity of research on consumer response to the release of a GM animal product into the food supply, this work breaks new ground as the first to examine the impact of disclosure of GM animal-based food type.

The regulations for qualitative genetically modified (GM) food labeling do not effectively eliminate the information asymmetries pertaining to the consumption of GM products. China's GM food labeling law requires the presentation of certain categories of GM products on GMO labels on packages. Such information is invaluable for understanding whether the disclosure of more information on GM foods can help alleviate information asymmetry while reducing consumer fear and risk perceptions of GM foods, and thus cause changes in their behaviors. The purpose of this paper is to explore the heterogeneity of consumer preferences for enhanced GM food labeling, how consumer preferences are influenced by labeling information, and how these preferences vary in different consumers.

Both descriptive statistics and econometric techniques, including the multivariate ordered Probit model, were applied to a sample of 566 urban consumers in the Yangtze River Delta region of China. All respondents were divided into two groups: people who would definitely not buy GM foods before selecting enhanced labeling information (“consumer group 1”, sample size 282) and people who would definitely not object to buying GM foods before selecting enhanced labeling information (“consumer group 2”, sample size 274).

The findings suggest that urban consumers have a preference for different types of enhanced labeling information about GM foods, that such a preference significantly influences their willingness to pay for GM foods, that there exists a large difference in the preferences of different consumer groups, and that enhanced GM food labeling information has a greater impact on those consumers who would not accept GM foods.

This research identifies the GM information disclosures that most affect consumer preferences and how these preferences vary across different segments of consumers, which is a current gap in the literature. The study has demonstrated that enhanced labels of GM foods with diverse information would not alter a consumer's WTP for GM foods who does not perceive the value of information from the enhanced labels, but change positively consumers with uncertainty willingness to pay before disclosure.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of different levels of environmental information on key consumer metrics. More specifically, it aims to evaluate environmentally benign products against those that have negative environmental impacts.

Multiple product categories and messages that varied from strongly negative to strongly positive were used to test whether the accuracy/completeness of the information changes consumers' view of green products.

The results show that consumer perception of product quality, value, and purchase intentions does not differ significantly between products with positive environmental messages and those without any message. Products with positive environmental messages are viewed better than products with negative environmental messages. It is also found that the impact of environmental information is greater for consumable products.

Clearly presented information can make a significant difference in consumer evaluation of products. If green products highlighted the reasons why products free of harmful ingredients did not have a negative impact on the environment, and if non‐green products were required to disclose the harmful impact of their ingredients, green products would be favorably perceived over the non‐green alternative.

The paper conjectures that if “fair” and clear explanations of environmental impact, both good and bad, are required, consumer evaluations of green products will improve and, ultimately, a larger percentage of consumers will purchase green products. The findings suggest that policy makers should require manufacturers to disclose key product ingredients and their environmental impact.

This project adds to the growing body of literature on environmental labeling, and investigates the effects of different levels of environmental information on key consumer metrics.

This study aims to examine the nonidentical impacts of identical panel information that discloses cosmetic ingredients by their English (i.e. low jargon; e.g. vitamin E) versus scientific names (i.e. high jargon; tocopherol instead) presented in short versus crowded panel on young consumers’ confidence in processing ingredients information and product judgements. In the same context, this study also explores the effects of declarative aids provided within the ingredients panel.

This study conducted four experiments by using a 2 (jargon: high, low) × 2 (ingredients list: short, long) between-subjects analysis of variance design.

Young consumers’ processing-confidence and product evaluations increase (decrease) when the panel is brief (crowded) and presents cosmetic ingredients in low (high) jargon (Experiments 1, 2). However, when it discloses a factual aid [i.e. ingredient functions; e.g. tocopherol (antioxidant)], confidence in processing even the high-jargon information, as well as product judgements, increases irrespective of the panel’s length (Experiment 3). Moreover, a fictitious aid (e.g. dryness-fighting “atomic robots”) stimulates the same effect and bolsters processing confidence and product evaluations irrespective of both jargon and panel’s length (Experiment 4).

Despite their heavy use of over-the-counter beauty/cosmetic products, little do we know how young consumers consult and use on-pack ingredients information provided in one format versus the other. To the best of the author’s knowledge, this study is the first experimental work investigating the cosmetics-consuming youth’s reactions to panel format and aids to processing.

The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, to outline a framework for corporate philanthropy (CP) reporting that could help differentiate between symbolic and substantive reporting; and second, to test whether the reporting practices of large corporate donors are symbolic or substantive.

First, to construct a framework for CP reporting, the authors draw from research on corporate social responsibility communication, CP and reputational capital-building. Second, the philanthropy disclosures found in non-financial reports of the largest donors from the list of Fortune 100 corporations were examined using content analysis.

The theoretical framework identifies key ingredients of disclosure quality such as goals, causes, support, partners and impacts. The empirical findings show that disclosures regarding CP are more symbolic than meaningful. The largest donors provide descriptive information regarding the CP plan that primarily focuses on projects and causes. However, they fail to provide an explicit account of their decisions and the results of their philanthropic activities.

The framework could also be applied with small changes to other communication outlets including social media and corporate websites.

This paper addresses an important gap in non-financial reporting research: the lack of a CP accounting model. To the authors’ knowledge, the framework developed in this paper represents the first conceptualization of the quality of CP disclosure that may enable scholars to differentiate symbolic from substantive CP and in this way advances the debate on CP communication. This framework can also help companies sincerely engaged in philanthropy to benefit from these activities.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the biodiversity and threatened species reporting of the top 150 Fortune Global companies. The paper has two main objectives: to explore the extent to which the top 150 Fortune Global companies disclose information about their biodiversity and species conservation practices, and to explore the effects of biodiversity partners and industry on companies’ biodiversity and threatened species reporting.

The study’s sample is the top 150 Fortune Global companies. Each company’s fiscal year ending 2014 annual report, its 2014 sustainability report, and its company website were content analyzed for evidence of biodiversity and threatened species reporting. This content analysis is supplemented by a detailed analysis that focusses on the sample’s top five reporters, including a phone interview with a senior sustainability manager working at one of these companies. Finally, a regression analysis was conducted to examine the associations between companies’ biodiversity and threatened species reporting and the presence/absence of biodiversity partners and a company’s industry F&C Asset Management industry category.

The reporting on biodiversity and threatened species by the top 150 Fortune Global companies is quite limited. Few companies (less than 15) are providing any substantial reporting. It was further observed that even among the high scoring companies there is a lack of consistent reporting across all index items. A subsequent empirical examination of these companies’ disclosures on biodiversity and threatened species showed a statistically positive association between the amount of reporting and companies’ holding of biodiversity partnerships. It was also observed that firms categorized as red- and green-zone companies made more disclosures on biodiversity and threatened species than amber-zone companies.

This is the first study to systematically analyze corporate disclosures related to threatened species and habitats. While some prior studies have included the concept of biodiversity when analyzing organizations’ environmental disclosures, they have done so by examining it as one general category out of many further categories for investigating organizations’ environmental reporting. In the present study, the focus is on the specific contents of biodiversity disclosures. As such, this study has the twin research objectives of seeking to illuminate the current state of biodiversity and threatened species reporting by the world’s largest multinationals and provide an appreciation for how certain organizational and industry variables serve to influence these reporting practices. These multiple insights offer companies, and potentially regulators, understanding about how to include (or extend) disclosures on biodiversity loss and species under threat of extinction.

The purpose of this research is to investigate how companies in the reinforcing bar industry and the construction industry operate and implement brand alliances.

This research uses a qualitative interview survey and the grounded theory method to extract key factors of brand alliance development and management in the targeted industries. The interview survey included six managers from different construction companies in Taiwan.

This research identifies four common firm-level operational process stages (core categories) of brand alliances including different multidimensional factors, and proposes a conceptual model based on these identified core process stages. The four common core process stages include selection of brand alliance partners, communication with brand alliance partners, enforcement of brand alliances and assessment of brand alliances.

The proposed model offers a tentative explanation of the development and management of brand alliances between the reinforcing bar industry and the construction industry. This study represents an initial research attempt in this field and explains how reinforcing bar and construction companies operate and implement brand alliances.

The aim of this study is to measure the risk disclosure level and to determine the relationship between ownership structure dimensions (institutional ownership, foreign ownership and family ownership) and corporate risk disclosure in Jordan.

This study used a sample of 94 Jordanian listed firms from the Amman Stock Exchange for the period from 2014 to 2017. This study measured risk disclosure using the number of risk-related sentences in the annual report, while random effects regression was used for hypotheses testing.

The results revealed that family ownership has a negative effect on risk disclosure practices, but institutional ownership, foreign ownership, firm size and leverage have no significant effect on the risk disclosure level.

The finding of this study is more likely be useful for many concerned parties, researchers, authorities, investors and financial analysts alike in understanding the current practices of the risk disclosure in Jordan, thus helping them in reconsidering and reviewing the accounting standards and improving the credibility and transparency of the financial reports in the Jordanian capital market.

This study offers novel evidence detailing the impact of ownership structure toward corporate risk disclosure, its implementation in emerging markets following the minimal amount of scholarly efforts on the topic. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first examination of the impact of ownership structure on corporate risk disclosure. Thus, this study has important implications for the decisions of executives, policymakers, shareholders and lenders, as it enables them to better understand the linkage between ownership structure on corporate risk disclosure.

This study aims to examine whether, and which type of, busy audit committee (AC) directors affect the quality and quantity of forward-looking disclosure (FLD).

The authors use content analysis to measure the quality and quantity of FLD. The authors use a sample of Omani financial institutions listed on the Muscat Securities Market for the period 2014–2018.

The authors find that overlapped AC chairs and total overlapped AC directors negatively (positively) affect disclosure quantity (quality). The authors also find that overlapped AC directors with financial expertise and those with multiple directorships positively affect disclosure quantity and quality.

This study offers new insights to policymakers (and managers) as it informs them about the benefits of overlapping AC directorship. It suggests that corporate governance codes should not limit overlapped AC direcotorship.