Search results

This study aims to examine whether the sustainability committee, a specialized governance mechanism for environmental and social issues, is related to environmental performance. Specifically, the authors consider the presence and effectiveness of the sustainability committee.

Using a sample of Australian firms (2002–2016), the presence of a sustainability committee and sustainability committee effectiveness (consisting of 12 sustainability committee characteristics) are examined. Firms’ environmental performance is measured by Thomson Reuters Asset4 ratings.

The authors confirm prior findings of a positive relationship between the presence of a sustainability committee and the firm’s environmental performance. More importantly, sustainability committee effectiveness is found to be positively associated with environmental performance, indicating the active role that the composition and function of the sustainability committee plays in enhancing environmental performance.

The findings are of interest to directors and managers who are interested in improving firms’ environmental performance, in addition to investors and regulators who are concerned about environmental performance.

This study meaningfully expands the extant literature that studies the sustainability committee in at least three ways. First, the authors evidence the effect of an unexplored dimension of committee heterogeneity (sustainability committee effectiveness) by hand-collecting detailed information of sustainability committee members. Second, the authors distinguish from prior studies, in that the authors test the direct relationship between sustainability committee effectiveness and environmental performance. Third, by adopting different robustness tests of endogeneity along with sampling firms in various industries over 15 years, the authors offer more compelling and more comprehensive evidence in this regard. Broadly, the authors enrich the literature on corporate governance and environmental performance.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse how an influential supplier of electronics manufacturing services (i.e. Foxconn) discloses its labour practices.

The analysis is conducted through the theoretical lens of legitimacy and impression management. This particular firm is selected as it provides a rich case on labour practice disclosures in a setting where significant labour malpractice incidents occurred from 2009 to 2011. The sample period covers 12 years of the firm's labour practice disclosures (2008–2019) to match with publicly available information that is used to construct expert comparative accounts on the disclosures. The authors corroborate the comparative accounts with sociological studies and responsibility reports from the major customer (i.e. Apple).

The authors found that the disclosures become more detailed over successive years. Occupational health and safety issues are predominantly reported, followed by issues relating to vocational guidance and training and then employment policy. Regarding impression management strategies, defensive strategies embedded in the disclosures are rarely detected and assertive strategies are persistently used from 2008 to 2019 to maintain legitimacy. The comparative accounts show the persistent use of one defensive strategy (i.e. omission) to maintain and regain legitimacy. In other words, as an economic strategy, material labour practice issues are persistently omitted in the disclosures. The incidents discernibly affect how Foxconn discloses labour practices.

The authors’ study contributes to the limited extant research on suppliers' labour practice disclosures from the perspective of legitimacy theory and impression management. The results will be of great interest to researchers, investors, assurers and other stakeholders.

This paper aims to examine changes of non-financial voluntary reporting practices over time in response to episodes of employee-related distress. It investigates employee-related disclosures by the four largest electronic manufacturing services firms in China between 2008 and 2013 during a series of employment-related incidents, to investigate how the firms re-legitimate their reputation in response to the media coverage on those incidents.

A series of employee-related incidents that occurred in 2010-2012 is selected as the focus of this study, with total coverage of employee-related disclosures between 2008 and 2013. These incidents are directly linked to three of the four sample companies: Foxconn, Pegatron and Compal Electronics. Employee-related disclosures in corporate social responsibility (CSR) stand-alone reports are coded by a set of specifically designed instructions, and newspaper articles about employee-related incidents are coded for sentiment. Results are interpreted through two theoretical lenses: the media agenda setting theory and the legitimacy theory.

Newspapers reported the employee-related incidents in a way detrimental to the legitimacy of firms that directly involved in the selected industry. In the process of legitimation, firms switch between disclosing more employee-related information and reducing disclosures. The self-expectation on organizational legitimacy also affects how CSR reporting is used in legitimation. The employee-related disclosure analysed is closer to symbolic legitimation than substantive legitimation.

This study contributes to reporting practice by showing that employee-related disclosure is largely vacuous and to a greater extent is used as symbolic legitimation. The quality of disclosure requires significant improvement. This study contributes to the literature by using the legitimacy theory to interpret employee-related disclosure in China, addressing inadequate research efforts in the context of social and human rights dimensions of CSR reporting.