Search results

Policymakers are developing government-level pandemic response strategies (GPRS) to assist architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) enterprises. However, the effectiveness of the GPRS has not been assessed. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the interrelationships between GPRS and AEC enterprises. To achieve that aim, the study objectives are to compare GPRS effectiveness between small-medium and large AEC enterprises, develop groupings to categorize interrelated GPRS and evaluate the effectiveness of the GPRS and interrelated constructs.

A systematic literature review and semi-structured interviews with 40 AEC industry professionals were carried out, generating 22 GPRS. Then, questionnaire survey data was collected among AEC professionals. In total, 114 valid survey answers were received and analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis H test, normalized mean analysis, factor analysis and fuzzy synthetic evaluation.

Small-medium enterprises have four distinct critical GPRS: “form a special task force to provide support in maneuvering COVID-19,” “provide infrastructure investment budgets to local governments,” “develop employee assistance programs that fit all types of working groups” and “diversify existing supply chain.” Large enterprises have two distinct critical GPRS: “provide help in digitalizing existing construction projects” and “mandate COVID-19 as force majeure.” Eighteen GPRS can be categorized into the following five constructs: “market stability and financial aid,” “enterprise capability management,” “supply chain improvement,” “law and policy resources” and “information and workforce management.” The former two constructs are more effective than other GPRS constructs.

This is the first paper that evaluates the effectiveness of GPRS for AEC enterprises, providing new evidence to policymakers for well-informed decision-making in developing pandemic response strategies.

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.