Search results

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.

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.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a theoretically informed analysis of a struggle for power over the regulation of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and social and environmental accounting and reporting (SEAR) within the European Union.

The paper combines insights from institutional theory (Lawrence and Buchanan, 2017) with Vaara et al.’s (2006) and Vaara and Tienar’s (2008) discursive strategies approach in order to interrogate the dynamics of the institutional “arena” that emerged in 2001, following the European Commission’s publication of a Green Paper (GP) on CSR policy and reporting. Drawing on multiple sources of data (including newspaper coverage, semi-structured interviews and written submissions by companies and NGOs), the authors analyse the institutional political strategies employed by companies and NGOs – two of the key stakeholder groupings who sought to influence the dynamics and outcome of the European initiative.

The results show that the 2001 GP was a “triggering event” (Hoffman, 1999) that led to the formation of the institutional arena that centred on whether CSR policy and reporting should be voluntary or mandatory. The findings highlight how two separate, but related forms of power (systemic and episodic power) were exercised much more effectively by companies compared to NGOs. The analysis of the power initiatives and discursive strategies deployed in the arena provides a theoretically informed understanding of the ways in which companies acted in concert to reach their objective of maintaining CSR and SEAR as a voluntary activity.

The theoretical framework outlined in the paper highlights how the analysis of CSR and SEAR regulation can be enriched by examining the deployment of episodic and systemic power by relevant actors.

Because corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports in China are surging in quantity but are low in quality, impression management in CSR reports has become a hot research topic in recent years. This paper aims to research whether and how media coverage affects CSR report impression management and whether CSR report disclosure attributes have different regulating effects.

Based on the effective supervision hypothesis and the market pressure hypothesis, this study uses Heckman’s two-stage regression model to examine the effect of media coverage on CSR report impression management from the perspective of managers’ self-interest.

The results support the market pressure hypothesis, which suggest that firms with higher levels of media coverage are more likely to engage in CSR report impression management, and this effect is especially significant in firms with a higher proportion of institutional investor shareholding and more analysts tracking. Further cross-sectional group studies show that market pressure is only present in firms whose CSR reports are subject to mandatory disclosure without third-party assurance or policy-oriented media attention.

This paper does not consider the attention of other forms of media. The findings of this paper has policy implications for a better understanding of the motivation underlying impression management in CSR reports, encouraging voluntary disclosure and assurance to relieve the market pressure from media coverage.

From the perspective impression management of social responsibility report, further understanding the governance role of media coverage. A large number of previous literatures have shown that media coverage has a good supervisory role, but these studies mainly focus on the financial level of enterprises. Media coverage seems to be a “double-edged sword”. While it plays a supervisory role and inhibits earnings management or irregularities at the financial level, it also brings enormous market pressure to the enterprises, which is reflected in the increase of impression management behavior of social responsibility reports at the non-financial level, and this pressure is probably caused by the financial level.

Voluntary disclosure and verification of social responsibility reports, as an important mechanism to improve the quality of social responsibility reports, supports the correctness, scientificity and rationality of the current policies of the SFC and the exchange on encouraging voluntary disclosure and verification. In the future, changing regulatory thinking, encouraging voluntary disclosure of social responsibility reports and introducing more independent and authoritative certification agencies should be the direction and focus of policy-making, so that social responsibility reports can play a better role in helping investors make decisions.

From the perspective of impression management of CSR reports, this paper provides evidence regarding the effect of media coverage and its transmission mechanisms. This paper uses China's unique institutional environments to study the impact of different types of media coverage on impression management in CSR reports in emerging market economy. Different from the institutional environment of developed countries such as the USA, mandatory disclosure and voluntary disclosure coexist in CSR reporting in China. The authors provide critical evidence to show that third-party assurance and voluntary disclosure improves the quality of CSR reports.

Despite numerous calls from civil society for mandatory regulation on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), the European Commission in its Green and White Paper, emphasised the voluntary character of CSR. This paper tries to go beyond the voluntary / mandatory juxtaposition by reframing CSR as Network Governance. In the paper, we argue that a network perspective is an adequate way to look at corporations, that the European Commission's communications are compatible with that perspective, but that the Commission's role in a European framework on CSR goes further than promoting voluntary actions. Rather, to develop a European mandatory framework on CSR as Network Governance would insure that fair interactions between stakeholders are started up and intensified. However, CSR as Network Governance does leave substantial flexibility for tailoring local integration of business.

The spotlight of this chapter is to understand the connection between public policy and corporate social responsibility (CSR); in other words – the institutionalization of CSR. What is the role of the government for setting standards and mandating for ensuring responsibility? The emerging accepted wisdom in policy and academic circles is that many sustainability solutions are likely to result from institutional (i.e., governance) reform. A perceptive on CSR evolving as an institution of broader societal governance appears as a promising opportunity to delve into at a point in time when conventional rules, actors, and markets that steered the global economy demonstrate to be undergoing credibility crisis. CSR therefore must be considered within the wider field of institutions for governing the corporation and the economy. This chapter is exploratory as it dwells into theoretical underpinning of emerging mandatory CSR as well as provides empirical mapping of corporate responses to the new enacted legislation. The CSR analysis presented is based on a content analysis of the information contained in the annual reports of some prominent companies, government documents, audits reports, companies websites, and newspaper reports, which will provide us evidences of responses of corporates toward the CSR provisions.

Many corporations engage in corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities voluntarily, but there is an ongoing debate about whether the government should intervene in CSR, particularly in countries with challenging institutional contexts. While some have argued that CSR should remain a discretionary exercise, as any attempt to make CSR mandatory through any form of state intervention will negate the meaning and objectives of CSR. However, drawing on the institutional theory, this chapter argues for the need to have some form of legislated CSR for banks operating in countries with challenging institutional contexts. The chapter further acknowledges that a universal CSR framework would be difficult to achieve due to differences in institutional contexts between countries; consequently, the nature, scope, and application of CSR legislation would vary significantly amongst countries as CSR is context dependent. Nonetheless, given the crucial role banks plays in society besides acting as the country's payment system, banks also transform illiquid liabilities into liquid assets, therefore making the banks the drivers of national economic developments globally. Governments in developing and emerging markets (DEMs) should ensure that banks' CSR initiatives are not only meaningful but also impactful by implementing a limited legislated CSR framework. This framework would require banks to establish a CSR committee of the board, make mandatory non-financial disclosures on their CSR activities in their Annual Reports, provide mandatory CSR continuous professional development (CPD) training for bankers, and mandate banks to contribute a certain percentage of their yearly profits before tax to agreed CSR initiatives, among other requirements.

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.

This paper seeks to provide the reader with a clear insight into the discussion over the voluntary aspect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and the attempts to introduce regulatory reforms to control corporate activities within Australia.

This paper evaluates the arguments regarding the need for CSR and the criticisms against its voluntary initiative, and analyses three proposed aspects for regulatory amendment in Australia: fiduciary duty, extraterritorial regulation and corporate disclosure.

This paper recognises the attributes of both the mandatory and voluntary aspects, and suggests that there needs to be a balance between both mechanisms in order to achieve a positive outcome.

Although, in Australia, amendment proposals have not been approved, the discussions over regulatory reform will continue. This paper will provide those involved in this field with an insight to the underlying issues over directors' duties, extraterritorial regulation and corporate disclosure. The understanding of these issues will be useful in the future development of appropriate mechanisms regarding CSR.