Search results

The problem investigated is whether there is a positive relationship between the environmental responsibility and the financial performance of South African listed companies. The financial performance measures ROE, ROA, ROC and EVA were individually correlated with the environmental reporting percentages (i.e. the measure for environmental responsibility) for all the companies. Based on the results of the correlation analyses, it is concluded that there is a positive relationship between the environmental responsibility and the financial performance of South African listed companies; i.e. the higher the level of environmental responsibility of a company, the better its financial performance.

The implementation of the principles of corporate governance by South African companies has increased considerably since the release of the King Report in 1994. This report exerted a great influence, especially regarding the disclosure of information on corporate governance in the annual financial statements of companies. Several research projects have been undertaken to determine to what extent companies abide by these principles in their annual financial statements. This article reflects the results of a research project in which the annual financial statements of certain listed South African companies, which were published during 2000, were analysed with regard to the above‐mentioned matter. The results of the project are also compared with those of a similar project undertaken in 1999. The matters addressed in this article deal with inter alia directors and directors’ remuneration, remuneration committees, audit committees, codes of conduct, adherence to the King Report and employees’ involvement.

This study measures and compares the expectations of two different groups – the first is selected preparers of environmental reports (ERs) in South Africa (companies and professional environmental consultants), and the second is selected users of ERs (this included environmental activists, pressure groups and non‐governmental organisations [NGOs] with environmentally related objectives(. The study considers the perceived importance of environmental reports, the areas that are reported on and the levels of disclosure. It compares and contrasts the expectations of the above groups. The study found significant differences between the expectations of the groups. Predictably, the responses of the users showed expectations of higher levels of disclosure than those of professional environmental consultants, who in turn expected higher levels of disclosure than company respondents. Significant differences were found between the responses of the groups with regard to the importance of specific areas of environmental disclosure. The study shows that there is evidence of a gap between the expectations of the different groups, and hence that there is a need for improved environmental reporting in South Africa.

This study applies social identity theory (SIT) to explore the perceptual differences among various stakeholder groups regarding the relevance of social and environmental accounting (SEA), SEA education and mandatory disclosure of SEA.

The study adopts a mixed method applying a qualitative and quantitative approach. In total, 325 structured questionnaires were analyzed quantitatively, using ANOVA and group comparison methods. Responses from 18 interviews were analyzed qualitatively to provide complementary evidence for the quantitative study.

There were significant differences between various stakeholder groups regarding the relevance of SEA practice and SEA education. Regulators were mostly affected by considerations about the external perception of work quality, followed by financiers. Practitioners and shareholders were influenced by the ability of SEA in its current state to affect actual work quality. This possibly indicates that academic qualifications have marginal effects on predicting considerations about SEA compared to social identity.

This is the first application of SIT to SEA research and contributes to the effort to improve SEA within emerging economies, highlighting that a one-size-fits-all approach may be ineffective.

This survey examines the environmental awareness, current disclosure practices and problems associated with environmental accounting and reporting of twenty large and medium sized companies from the industrial sector in Bahrain. A review of literature from Western and Asia‐Pacific regions indicate a low level of environmental disclosure practices but there has been a considerable increase in the number of organisations performing environmental accounting and reporting. The present survey reveals that companies in Bahrain are environmentally sensitive, yet none of the companies are actually performing environmental accounting for external purposes. Half of them stated that they prepare environmental reporting for management requirements. A majority of them were strongly in favour of introducing accounting regulations in this area. Over 85% of them stated that both financial and non‐financial information should be reported. However, quantification and provision of information is both costly and subjective. The study concludes that in an unregulated environment, accountants and management of companies in Bahrain are likely to be less than objective in their environmental related disclosure practices in future.

The value added statement has been voluntarily reported by South African companies for many years despite reservations about its usefulness. This article examines current literature on value added statements in two areas: the usefulness of the value added statement in South Africa and the relevance of social accounting theories in explaining its continued disclosure in South African listed companies’ annual reports. It also reports the results of a questionnaire survey addressed to preparers of value added statements.The research studies examined in the literature review indicate that legitimacy theory is more likely to provide an explanation for the disclosure of value added statements in annual reports in South Africa. The results of the empirical survey indicate that the majority of the respondents are of the opinion that it is desirable to prepare a value added statement, but that it is not used in the majority of companies. Furthermore, the reasons advanced by the preparers for the desirability of the value added statement provide some evidence that legitimacy theory may be behind the propensity of companies to publish a value added statement. The article recommends that the preparation of the value added statement should be standardised. However, the disclosure of an independently prepared value added report may be more useful to all users.

South African companies have, in the past, not recognised an asset for unused Secondary Tax on Companies (“STC”) credits. AC 501, Accounting for “Secondary Tax on Companies (STC)”, which is effective for annual periods beginning on or after 1 January 2004, now requires South African companies to recognise a deferred tax asset for unused STC credits, to the extent that it is probable that an entity will declare dividends of its own, against which the unused STC credits can be utilised. In terms of AC 501 and IAS 12 (AC 102), Income Taxes (the local and international accounting standard on income taxes), the recognition of a liability to pay STC has to be postponed until the declaration of a dividend. Some accounting commentators have indicated that they find it anomalous to recognise a deferred tax asset in respect of unused STC credits, while no liability is recognised for the STC that would be payable on the future distribution of retained earnings. The objective of the study is to consider whether it is conceptually anomalous to recognise a deferred tax asset for unused STC credits while no liability is raised for the STC that would become payable on future dividend declarations on profits already recognised in the financial statements. The study concludes that it is conceptually anomalous to recognise a deferred tax asset for unused STC credits when no corresponding liability is raised.

There is increasing academic pressure on Departments of Accounting in South Africa whose academic programmes are accredited with the South African Institute of Chartered Accountants (SAICA). The reason for this that the academic training of potential chartered accountants has long been their main academic focus, and they often fail to do justice to their real academic mission of scholarly activity in accounting (the pursuit of science as an endeavour), which is central to the essence of a university. The quality of such departments’ research is not yet an important criterion for their prestige. However, only Departments of Accounting that develop Accounting as a social science in scholarly activity in accounting deserve international recognition. This empirical study attempts to convince Departments of Accounting, particularly those whose academic programmes are accredited by SAICA, to embark on scholarly activity in accounting as soon as possible.

Previous research has highlighted a contradiction in regard to environmental reporting in South Africa. Managers, who can influence decisions regarding disclosure, express the view that more environmental reporting is needed, yet very little such reporting is done. A questionnaire was sent to every company listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) with the request that the financial director should complete it. The questionnaire set out to establish whether managers are still as positive about environmental reporting as reported in previous research findings and, furthermore, to determine the reasons for the dearth of environmental reporting. Managers are still as positive as before about environmental reporting. The reasons for not reporting range from the contention that data is not available, that there are no legal requirements and that there is no demand for the data to the contention that it is not applicable to the particular industry and that costs exceed benefits. Most respondents do not regard the fear of liability to be a very important reason for non‐disclosure. The most important reason for non‐disclosure is that there is no legal requirement in respect of disclosure. This reason, together with the positive attitude of directors towards environmental reporting in general and towards reporting on a compulsory basis in particular, makes a strong case for the introduction of legislation in this regard. The introduction of legislation could be achieved by amending the Fourth Schedule of the Companies’ Act or the introduction by The South African Institute of Chartered Accountants (SAICA) of a statement of Generally Accepted Accounting Practice (GAAP) on environmental disclosure.

Although the intention of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) is not to permit choices in the accounting treatment of similar transactions and events, International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs) still contain various choices of accounting treatment. Different accounting alternatives for similar transactions limit the comparability of financial information. Certain accounting policies result in differences in recognition, measurement and disclosures. This article identifies 16 such accounting policy choices and presents the descriptive empirical results on which accounting policies were in fact chosen by a sample of 157 South African listed companies, in cases where IFRSs allow a choice between alternative accounting policies. Disclosure of accounting policies is necessary for the users of financial statements to enable them to compare the financial statements of various entities in making economic decisions. The research also found a lack of disclosures relating to chosen accounting policies in limited cases.