Search results

This paper aims to explore current trends in how companies disclose climate-related risks and opportunities in their financial statements. As part of the authors’ analysis, they examine: whether forward-looking assumptions and judgements are typically considered in reporting climate-related risks/opportunities; whether there are differences in the reporting practices of firms in carbon-intensive industries versus non-carbon-intensive industries; and whether negative media reports have an influence on the levels of disclosure a firm makes.

The authors chose content analysis as their methodology and examined the financial statements published by firms listed on the UK’s FTSE 100 between 2016 and 2020. This analysis is framed by Suchman’s three dimensions of legitimacy, being pragmatic, cognitive and moral.

Climate-related disclosures in the notes and financial accounts of these firms did increase over the period. Yet, overall, the level the disclosures was inadequate and the quality was inconsistent. From this, the authors conclude that pragmatic legitimacy is not a particularly strong driving factor in compelling organisations to disclose climate-related information. The firms in carbon-intensive industries do provide greater levels of disclosure, including both qualitative and quantitative (monetary) content, which is consistent with cognitive legitimacy. However, from a moral legitimacy perspective, this study finds that firms did not adapt responsively to negative media coverage as a way of reflecting their accountability to broader public norms and values. Overall, this analysis suggests that regulatory enforcement and a systematic reporting framework with adequate guidance is going to be critical to developing transparent climate-related reporting in future.

This paper contributes to existing studies on climate-related disclosures, which have mainly examined the ‘front-half’ of annual reports. Conversely, this study aims to shed light on these practices in the “back-half” of these reports, exploring the underlying reasons for reporting climate-related risks and opportunities in financial accounts. The authors’ insights into the current disclosure practices make a theoretical contribution to the literature. Practitioners can also draw on these insights to improve how they report on climate-related risks and opportunities in their financial statements.

This study aims to examine the relationship between climate change disclosure performance (CCDP) and audit pricing. The moderating effect of corporate governance characteristics on that relationship is also investigated.

Using a sample of top 300 Australian Securities Exchange listed non-financial firms over the period 2008–2019, this study investigates the association between CCDP and audit fees. The findings are robust to a difference-in-difference test thereby alleviating potential endogeneity concerns.

CCDP is found to be significantly positively related to external auditor fees.

The findings show some important implications for firm management, regulators, investors and auditors. This study presents empirical evidence that climate change, as a factor of external risk, influences audit fees.

Firms with governance structures characterized by larger more independent boards, larger audit committees and audit committees with a higher level of independence significantly moderate the relationship between CCDP and audit fees.

Investors’ demand for firm transparency and disclosure of information regarding the risks of climate change, effects and opportunities has increased significantly over the past decade, as these factors could have a significant effect on valuation and investment decisions.

Importantly, stakeholders need to be aware of the costs of climate change, the quantification of climate change impacts and how firms address climate change in their business risk management processes. This study quantifies the impact of CCDP on auditor risk assessments via audit fees.

This study aims to examine the impact of corporate governance (CG) on anti-corruption disclosure (A-CD), paying particular attention to the FTSE 100. Notably, it examines how board and audit committees’ characteristics affect the quantity and quality of anti-corruption disclosure.

Data from FTSE 100 firms, spanning the period from 2014 to 2020, were analysed using the regression of the Poisson fixed effect and GEE analyses.

The findings show that gender diversity, audit committee expertise and the independence of the audit committee are positively associated with both quantity and quality of anti-corruption disclosure. Notably, no statistically significant relationships were identified between anti-corruption disclosure and factors such as board size, role duality or board meetings.

The findings provide valuable insights for decision-makers and regulatory bodies, shedding light on the elements that compel UK companies to enhance their anti-corruption disclosure and governance protocols to alleviate corruption and propel efforts towards ethical behaviour.

This study makes a notable contribution to the sparse body of evidence by examining the influence of board and audit committee attributes on anti-corruption disclosure subsequent to the implementation of the UK Bribery Act in 2010. Specifically, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study assesses for the first time the impact of board and audit committee mechanisms on both the quantity and quality of anti-corruption disclosure.

This paper aims to contribute to the development of the European Union (EU) regulatory environment for sustainability reporting by analyzing how materiality is defined in the Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD) and Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and by examining the added value and challenges of legalizing reporting and materiality requirements from both regulatory and practical company perspectives. It provides insights on whether this is reflected by EU pharmaceutical companies and to what extent companies report information on their materiality analysis process.

Doctrinal analysis was used to examine regulatory instruments. Qualitative document analysis was used to analyze companies’ reports. The added value and challenges were examined using a governance approach. It focused on legalizing reporting and materiality requirements, with a brief extension to corporate management and organization studies.

Materiality has evolved from a vague concept in the NFRD toward double materiality in the CSRD. This was reflected by the industry, but reports revealed inconsistencies in materiality definitions and reported information. Challenges include lack of self-reflection and company-centric perceptions of materiality. Companies should explain how they identify relevant stakeholders and how input is considered in decision-making.

Managers must consider how they conduct materiality assessments to meet society’s expectations. The underlying processes should be explained to increase the credibility of reports. Sustainability reporting should be seen as a corporate governance tool.

This work contributes to the literature on materiality in sustainability reporting and to the debate on the need for a holistic, society-centric approach to enhance the sustainability of companies.

International business research is showing an increasing interest in the link between international business and human rights. Despite extensive coverage of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and sustainability, the analysis and discussion of why multinational corporations include human rights in corporate reporting is still in its early stages. This chapter develops an analytical framework on corporate human rights reporting, with special emphasis on international business. The conceptual part of the framework draws on legitimacy theory, stakeholder theory and signalling theory. The analytical part distinguishes between factors inside the corporation and the external environment of business organisations operating internationally.

The current study aims to analyze the role of International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) in sustainability issues and its impact on the attitude of practitioners (auditors) in industrial companies. The current study relies on the analytical method, one of the tools of the inductive approach, by examining the literature of researchers, international and local organizations, publications, series, alerts, and topics dealt with by the IFAC, as well as reviewing studies, theoretical and applied research, periodicals, books, and statistics. And specialized publications for this subject, which is related to other sciences – such as – environmental science, economic, and political sciences. The study reached many results, the most important of which are: (1) The first half of the current decade has seen high interest from the IFAC, has led to the issuance of International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) international standard on assurance engagements 3410, (GHG) Statements. (2) Sustainability has become important to a growing number of enterprises, and may have a significant influence, in certain cases, the financial statements, also became the sustainability of the topics under increasing attention from users of financial statements. Thus, the financial statements will need a practitioner to take into consideration sustainability issues and a private greenhouse gas when auditing the financial statements. This study is distinguished by analyzing the role of the IFAC and the IAASB for the period from 1998 to 2023 regarding sustainability issues.

This study aims to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of auditor mandatory suspicious activity reporting versus the exercise of professional judgement in the anti-money laundering regimes of the UK and the USA.

The research draws upon the following sources. Firstly, statistics provided by the UK National Crime Agency, 2019 (NCA) regarding suspicious activity report (SAR) filing rates. Secondly, anti-money laundering legislation in the USA and UK. Thirdly, statements made in the political domain in the USA, particularly those which raised constitutional concerns during the progress of the Patriot Act 2001. Finally, statements and recommendations by a UK Parliamentary Commission enquiring into the effectiveness of the suspicious activity reporting regime.

The UK reporting regime does not accommodate professional judgement, resulting in the filing of SARs with limited intelligence value. This contrasts with discretionary reporting in the USA: voluntary reporting guides and influences auditor behaviour rather than mandating it. Defensive filing by UK auditors (defence to anti-money launderings [DAMLs]) has increased in recent years but the number of SARs filed has declined.

The study evaluates auditor behavioural responses to legislative regimes which mandate or alternatively accommodate discretion in the reporting suspicion of money laundering. Consideration of constitutional and judicial activism in this context is a novel contribution to the literature. For its theoretical framework the study uses Foucault’s concept of discipline of the self to evaluate auditor behaviour under both regimes.

This study aims to propose an innovative model that integrates variables and examines the influence of internet usage expertise, perceived risk and attitude toward information control on privacy concerns (PC) and, consequently, in consumers’ willingness to disclose personal information online. The authors also propose to test the mediation role of trust between PCs and willingness to disclose information. Trust is not a predictor of PC but a causal mechanism – considering that the focus is to understand consumers’ attitudes and behavior regarding the virtual environment (not context-specific) (Martin, 2018).

The authors developed a survey questionnaire based on the constructs that compose the proposed model to collect data from 864 respondents. The survey questionnaire included the following scales: internet usage expertise from Ohanian (1990); perceived risk, attitude toward information control, trust and willingness to disclose personal information online from Malhotra et al. (2004); and PC from Castañeda and Montoro (2007). All items were measured on a Likert seven-point scale (1 = totally disagree; 7 = totally agree). To obtain Westin’s attitudinal categories toward privacy, respondents answered Westin’s three-item privacy index. For data analysis, the authors applied covariance-based structural equation modeling.

First, the proposed model explains the drivers of consumers’ disposition to provide personal information at a level that surpasses specific contexts (Martin, 2018), bringing the analysis to consumers’ level and considering their general perceptions toward data privacy. Second, the findings provide inputs to propose a better definition of Westin’s attitudinal categories toward privacy, which used to be defined only by individuals’ information privacy perception. Consumers’ perceptions about their abilities in using the internet, the risks, their beliefs toward information control and trust also help to delimitate and distinguish the fundamentalists, the pragmatics and the unconcerned.

Some limitations weigh the theoretical and practical implications of this study. The sample size of pragmatic and unconcerned respondents was substantially smaller than that of fundamentalists. It might be explained by applying Westin’s self-report index to classify the groups according to their score regarding PCs. Most individuals affirm having a great concern for their data privacy but still provide online information for the benefit of personalization – known as the privacy paradox (Zeng et al., 2021). It leads to another limitation of this research, given the lack of measures that classify respondents by considering their actual behavior toward privacy.

PC emerges as an important predictor of consumer trust and willingness to disclose their data online, and trust also influences this disposition. Managers need to implement actions that effectively reduce consumers’ concerns about privacy and increase their trust in the company – e.g. adopting a clear and transparent policy on how the data collected is stored, treated, protected and used to benefit the consumer. Regarding the perception of risk, if managers convince consumers that the data collected on the internet is protected, they tend to be less concerned about privacy.

The results suggest different aspects influencing the willingness to disclose personal information online, including different responses considering consumers’ PCs. Through their policies and legislation, the authors understand that governments must be attentive to this aspect, establishing regulations that protect consumers’ data in the virtual environment. In addition to regulatory policies, education campaigns can be carried out for both consumers and managers to raise the discussion about privacy and the availability of information in the online environment, demonstrating the importance of protecting personal data to benefit the government, consumers and organizations.

Although there is increasing research on consumers’ privacy, studies have not considered their attitudinal classifications – high, moderate and low concern – as moderators of willingness to disclose information online. Researchers have also increased attention to the antecedents of PCs and disclosure of information but overlooked possible mechanisms that explain the relationship between them.

The paper addresses the privacy–personalisation paradox in the post-GDPR-2018 era. As the regulation came in a bid to regulate the collection and use of personal data, its implications remain underexplored. The research question is: How do consumers perceive the matter of personal data collection for the use of highly targeted and personalised ads post-GDPR-2018? The invasion of privacy vs the benefits of highly personalised digital marketing.

To address the research question, this qualitative study conducts semi-structured interviews with 14 individuals, consisting of average users and digital experts.

This paper reports on increasing consumer vulnerability post-GDPR-2018 due to increased awareness of personal data collection yet incessant lack of control, particularly regarding the repercussions of the digital footprint. The privacy paradox remains an issue except among experts, and personalisation remains necessary, yet critical challenges arise (e.g. filter bubbles and intrusion).

Policy implications include education, regulating consent platforms and encouraging consensual sharing of personal data.

While the privacy–personalisation paradox has been widely studied, the impact of GDPR-2018 has rarely been addressed in the literature. GDPR-2018 has seemingly had little impact on instilling a sense of security for consumers; if anything, this paper highlights greater concerns for privacy as users sign away their rights on consent forms to access websites, thus contributing novel insights to this area of research.

Although the phenomenon of the corporate social responsibility disclosure (CSRD) has derived the interest of several scholars, in recent years, the comparative studies between Islamic banks (IBs) regarding CSRD quantity versus quality have not been the subject matter of studies till now. In this perspective, this chapter aims to investigate the importance given by IBs to the quality and quantity disclosure of CSR. Moreover, it seeks to explore the impact of CSRD quality and quantity on the IBs' financial performance (FP). To meet these objectives, we used a sample of 59 IBs from 2011 to 2016 in the Arab world and non-Arab world. Then, by adopting the content analysis approach, the authors constructed two CSRD indexes (quality and quantity). The empirical results indicated that IBs give more importance to the qualitative disclosure than the quantitative. Our findings will be very helpful for the policymakers and the managers of IBs because maintaining a good CSRD policy increases the capacity of IBs to deal with possible reputational events, thus protecting their profits and financial results. As far as the comparison between the Arabian and non-Arabian IBs, based on financial reports and Accounting and Auditing Organization for Islamic Financial Institutions (AAOIFI) governance standard N°7 is concerned, our study is among the first studies that provides two new CSRD indexes (quantity and quality).