Search results

With corporate social responsibility (CSR) becoming mandatory, several firms in India have been compelled into spending resources on CSR while their business strategy and processes were unprepared to take up CSR activities, effectively. In this light, the CSR relationship with other business functions would be altered. Using Thomson Reuters data from 2010 to 2018 (pre-mandate to post-mandate) this study aims to re-examine the relationship between CSR and financial performance.

The current study is rooted in the bandwagon-bias effect theory and uses a long-term data (2010–2018) of Indian firms. It uses Refinitiv Thomson Reuters ESG rating to measure CSR and accounting measures for financial performance (FP) to make a pre-post analysis of the impact that mandatory CSR regime has had on firms performance. The study uses the weighted panel regression method.

The relationship between CSR and FP is different when CSR was voluntary than when it has been mandated by Law. CSR has a positive effect over the FP during the voluntary phase but this positive relationship weakens during the mandatory phase. The waning effect of CSR over FP substantiates the presence of bandwagon bias effect which can be explained by the crowding-in of several companies engaged in CSR activities because of the mandatory CSR law.

Few countries have made CSR mandatory therefore CSR literature is limited. But mandating CSR is a growing phenomenon so this study augments to the body of knowledge. Until now literature generally converged on a positive relationship between CSR performance and FP but the current study shows altering directions to this relationship in a changing CSR environment. The use of the bandwagon-bias theory contributes to the theoretical approaches. Theoretically, the findings add to the body CSR literature and offer impetus to the evolving domain of impact measurement and reporting.

Results of the study offer a clear indication to managers that they need to re-strategise their CSR activities during the mandatory CSR environment if they wish to draw instrumental benefits of a positive impact on the FP of their firms. CSR expenditure is now a leveller so managers may either exceed the mandatory 2% expenditure as some firms did during the voluntary CSR phase or else design their CSR implementation plans to bring about a more impactful positive change. Communicating the impact of CSR to influential and powerful stakeholders beyond the mandatory reporting to the government is yet another way through which managers can draw benefits of CSR activities. Additionally to draw positive results from CSR activities firms may consider adopting international reporting and benchmarking standards such as the GRI and ISO 26000. Finally, the results of the study can be used by policymakers to make a note that the CSR law is causing a weakening of the financial benefits and therefore.

The results of the study can be used by policymakers also need to make a note that the CSR law is causing a weakening of the financial benefits and therefore firms are adopting shortcuts, by donating the required amount of funds. But donation of funds defeats the real purpose of mandatory CSR which is social impact, therefore the regulators may want to make the necessary changes unplug the gaps in the CSR law to ensure better adherence to the law in spirit and a real impact on the ground activities.

While CSR–FP relationship has been extensively explored but limited studies have explored this relationship in a mandatory CSR environment and no other work presents a comparative view of the CSR–FP relationship, namely, before and after the mandatory CSR policy. The current study is one of the limited few studying the impact of mandatory CSR policy on FP, and the only one that uses the bandwagon-bias effect to explain the phenomenon of weakening impact of CSR on FP of firms. Bandwagon-bias effect has been used in studying consumer behaviour, where group effect impacts behaviour of individuals and with mandatory CSR policy, firms following the other firms leading to crowding in. Using the bandwagon-bias effect has found limited attention from the CSR scholars, the current study uses this theoretical basis and therefore augments the CSR literature.

This paper aims to empirically examine the impact of mandatory CSR disclosure on the CEO pay performance sensitivity.

Using the mandatory requirement of CSR disclosure as an exogenous shock, the authors compare the changes in CEO pay performance sensitivity for treatment firms with control firms through a difference-in-difference (DiD) approach.

The authors find that mandatory CSR disclosure enhances CEO pay performance sensitivity. The results also show that monitoring CEO power is a conduit through which mandatory CSR disclosure affects CEO pay performance sensitivity. The positive impact is more profound in firms with a powerful CEO, i.e. one who is politically well-connected, holds dual roles as both CEO and Chairman, and/or has had a long tenure. Furthermore, the increased CEO pay performance sensitivity after the mandate is prominent among state-owned enterprises (SOEs) only.

The findings of this paper have implications for other economies with similar institutional backgrounds as China. Although the mandatory CSR disclosure does not require firms to spend on CSR investment, the mandatory CSR disclosure alters firm behaviour, and mitigates agency problems.

This paper contributes to the studies on the impact of CSR disclosure on firms' behaviour. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study to examine the effects of mandatory CSR disclosure on CEO pay performance sensitivity using the quasi-natural experiment settings.

In this paper, the authors examine the relation between cross-listing and the noncompliance with the mandatory corporate social responsibility (CSR) expenditure regulation in India, the first country to legally mandate the CSR expenditure.

The authors apply panel logit and ordinary least square (OLS) regression models to examine the impact of cross-listing on the noncompliance with the mandatory CSR expenditure regulation because panel regression has lesser multicollinearity problems and has the benefit of controlling for individual or time heterogeneity mostly present in cross-section or time series data.

Using a sample of 1,027 listed Indian firms, the authors show that the cross-listed firms are more likely to comply with the mandatory CSR expenditure than non-cross-listed firms. The authors further show that this relation holds only for those firms which are exposed to higher agency problems, for firms affiliated to business groups and for firms operating in high litigation risk industries. Finally, the authors show that cross-listed firms complying with the mandatory CSR expenditure command more valuation premiums.

This study’s results suggest that the noncompliance of the Indian firms with the mandatory CSR expenditure regulation comes down once they cross-list their shares in the US or the UK since such firms have to bond to the stronger corporate governance standards of the listed country. Hence, the authors recommend that merely making the investment in CSR activities mandatory may not serve the purpose and the convergence in corporate governance as well as compliance with the CSR expenditure can be achieved through cross-listing in US and UK markets.

One, the authors analyze the effect of cross-listing on the likelihood and magnitude of noncompliance with the CSR mandate. Two, this study is based in India where CSR expenditure has been made mandatory under the Companies Act, 2013. Using CSR mandate as a natural experiment, the authors have access to a richer data set on CSR in terms of the actual expenditure made by the company on CSR activities and the mandatory amount to be spent in a particular year.

The purpose of this study is to examine the moderating effect of mandatory corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting on CSR expenditure and financial performance of listed firms in India. It uses institutional theory to explain the relationship.

The study used the Indian stock market as the testing grounds and applied descriptive statistics, hierarchical regression and panel regression with fixed effect assumptions for 800 firm-year observations for the period 2010 to 2019.

The study shows a positive and statistically significant association between CSR expenditure and financial performance [return on assets (ROA) and Tobin’s q]. Also, the study shows a positive association between financial performance (ROA and Tobin’s q) and CSR expenditure. Furthermore, the study shows that mandatory CSR reporting leads to an increase in CSR expenditure. Finally, the study shows that mandatory CSR reporting moderates the association between CSR expenditure and financial performance stock price returns). The study control for any form of heteroscedasticity, serial correlation and endogeneity effects.

The study used one country data to represent the emerging economies. The use of one country data can limit the generalisation of the study.

Different studies have examined mandatory CSR reporting association with CSR disclosure or financial performance. However, this study takes the discussion further and contribute a novelty to sustainability development studies with the examined moderating effect of mandatory CSR reporting in the association between CSR expenditure and financial performance.

This study aims to examine the causal relationship between mandatory CSR disclosure and financial audit efficiency.

The authors use the unique institutional setting of China, where a subset of listed firms are mandated to disclose their corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports. The authors use propensity score matching and difference-in-differences approaches to compare audit efficiency in the pre- and post-mandatory CSR disclosure periods between the treatment and control groups. The regression models are estimated with robust standard errors clustered at the firm level.

This study finds that following China’s adoption of the mandatory disclosure of CSR, audit report lags decreased by 6% on average, suggesting that audit efficiency improved greatly following mandatory CSR disclosure. Moreover, this association is stronger when firms have better CSR performance, higher CSR report preparation costs, more earnings management before disclosure regulations and better internal controls and when firms belong to high-profile industries and in Big 4 (Big 10) accounting firms. Moreover, neither audit quality nor audit fees decrease when shorter audit lags occur for firms with mandatory CSR disclosures. Overall, the evidence suggests that mandatory CSR disclosure has a positive effect on audit efficiency and that the improvement of audit efficiency does not come as a consequence of reducing audit fees or deteriorating audit quality.

The results reported in this study have practical and policy implications for policymakers, accounting firms and auditors to pay more attention to CSR information.

This study provides evidence of the causal relationship between mandatory CSR disclosure regulation and audit efficiency. It enriches the research on audit service production efficiency from the perspective of nonfinancial information disclosure.

There is a current agitation by community leaders, global leaders and society on the morality aspect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities of firms. The change in policy raises the question of whether moral capital is affected. Therefore, this study aims to examine whether the shift from voluntary to mandatory reporting increases the moral capital of CSR and also whether moral capital affects the firm performance of listed firms in India.

This study examines 800 firm-year observations on the Bombay Stock Exchange (split into 320 firm-year observations for the voluntary period and 480 firm-year observations for the mandatory period). This study uses panel regression with random effect assumptions for data interpretation.

The first findings show that a shift from voluntary to mandatory policy on CSR increases the moral capital value of listed firms in India. The second and third findings show that voluntary reporting of moral capital has no significant association with market performance (stock price returns [SPR]) or firm value (Tobin’s q). The fourth findings show a negative and statistically significant association between mandatory reporting of moral capital and SPR but an insignificant association with Tobin’s q. This study conducted a robustness test, and results show that the previous year 1 and 2 moral capital for voluntary and mandatory periods has no association with SPR and Tobin’s q.

Although prior research has examined the effect of change in policy from voluntary to mandatory reporting on firm performance, little is known about the impact of moral capital on firm performance for the emerging economies, including India.

This study, based on the instrumental approach of the stakeholder theory, examines the firm performance of public and private sector firms in the mandatory corporate social responsibility (CSR) expenditure regime in India. CSR was legislated in India in the year 2014.

The study hypothesizes that firms which fulfill the mandatory CSR expenditure requirement will have a higher firm performance and uses one-way ANOVA and post-hoc test for analysis. Firm performance is examined with respect to firm value and market performance.

The instrumental approach of the stakeholder theory is not supported in the mandatory CSR expenditure regime in India. The public sector firms that comply with the mandatory CSR expenditure requirement have a lower firm performance. Further, the private sector firms that meet the mandatory CSR expenditure criterion do not have a significantly different firm performance than the private sector firms that do not fulfill this criterion.

The study indicates as to why some firms fail to meet the CSR expenditure compliance. It also gives suggestions on how regulators and government agencies can solicit the participation of the Indian firms to undertake CSR initiatives. The study further suggests how firms may reap maximum benefit from the CSR expenditure.

Since CSR expenditure has been made mandatory only in the year 2014 in India, hardly any study has examined firm performance in the mandatory CSR expenditure regime in India.

This study aims to examine the association between mandatory corporate social responsibility (CSR) regulations (CSR mandate) and social disclosures (SOCDS) in India. It also investigates whether CSR committees mediate the relationship between CSR mandate and SOCDS. Furthermore, this paper explores how business group (BG) affiliation moderates CSR committee quality and SOCDS.

This study uses a data set of 5,345 observations from the Bombay stock exchange (BSE)-listed firms over 10 years (2011–2020) to examine the research questions. Baron and Kenny’s (1986) three-step model is estimated to examine the mediating role of CSR committees on the relationship between CSR mandate and SOCDS.

The study reveals that the CSR mandate positively impacts SOCDS in India due to coercive pressures. CSR committees mediate this relationship, with higher CSR committee quality leading to increased SOCDS. Furthermore, the authors report that SOCDS in India is positively related to CSR committee quality, and this relationship is stronger for BG firms. Finally, the supplementary analysis reveals that promoting CSR committee quality enhances firms’ likelihood of meeting CSR mandatory spending and actual CSR spending in India.

This research contributes to the academic literature by shedding light on the intricate dynamics of CSR mandates, CSR committees and SOCDS in emerging economies. Notably, the authors identify the previously unexplored mediation role of CSR committees in the link between CSR mandates and SOCDS. The creation of a composite index that measures complementary CSR committee attributes allows us to undertake a novel assessment of CSR committee quality. An examination of the moderating influence of BG affiliation documents the importance of CSR committee quality, particularly in governance, for enhancing SOCDS transparency within BG firms.

In 2014, the European Union (EU) adopted the non-financial reporting Directive (2014/95/EU) making the disclosure of certain non-financial topics mandatory for large listed companies. They are required to report on policies, actions and outcomes regarding their environmental impact, social and employee matters, impact on human rights and corruption. Denmark introduced mandatory corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting already in 2009, while Germany had no specific legislation on CSR reporting before 2017. Some authors allege that regulation positively impacts CSR reporting, while others argue that the voluntary nature of CSR reporting is essential (Romolini, Fissi, & Gori, 2014). Critics of mandatory reporting claim that non-financial reporting should develop bottom-up, as mandatory one-size-fits-all solutions are inappropriate given the differences among companies (ICC, 2015). The aim of this chapter is to evaluate the effect of legislation on reporting quality by comparing Denmark with a long tradition for mandatory reporting and Germany introducing mandatory rather recently. However, a rich body of literature exists on factors impacting CSR reporting other than legislation. These are among others: firm size, ownership structure, industrial sector and culture (Hahn & Kühnen, 2013.)

The chapter applies a content analysis of 150 CSR reports from German and Danish listed companies between 2008 and 2017 from four different industrial sectors. The chapter finds that mandatory reporting improves overall report quality by lifting the quality floor, yet, without lifting the quality ceiling. Size is important as improvements in reporting are largest in small and medium-sized companies. Companies in environmentally sensitive sectors tend to disclose more relevant environmental information than companies in less sensitive sectors. Both culture and ownership structure has a moderating effect on report quality.

Mandatory corporate social responsibility (CSR) aims to protect the long-term benefit of shareholders; therefore, this study aims to seek empirical evidence for the benefit of mandatory CSR from the perspective of shareholders.

Consistent with the objective of this study, the long-term shareholder benefit is measured using the sustainability perspective. Companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange that have at least five years of CSR implementation, as its mandate and have retroactive earnings data for minimum six years before the observation year are selected as the study’s sample.

The findings support that mandated CSR protects long-term shareholder value; there is a significant association between CSR and sustainable shareholder value. Industry profiles are an essential aspect of the association model. The results are robust through testing the association for various scenarios of time.

This study uses a single measurement of shareholder value based only on accounting measurement. Further, due to limitations in accessing internal company data, this study relies on annual reporting information to measure CSR implementation.

This study is the first to provide empirical evidence of the long-term benefit of mandatory CSR from the shareholders' perspective. This study also contributes to the existing literature by evaluating the success of mandatory CSR in developing countries. Those that successfully implemented mandatory CSR can serve as a model for other developing countries interested in creating similar policies to encourage socially responsible companies.