Accounting conservatism and corporate social responsibility

We examine the association between accounting conservatism, expressed in the form of asymmetric timeliness of recognition of economic gains and losses, and corporate social responsibility (CSR). We provide evidence that, under unfavorable macroeconomic conditions and financial constraints, as well as increased levels of outside pressure from debtholders and equity holders, catering for capital providers through conservative reporting becomes a managerial priority over engagement in CSR. Our results overall indicate that, for our whole sample period (starting in the early 2000s), higher levels of conservatism are negatively associated with a CSR orientation shown by firms; however, our analysis also indicates a significant reversing trend regarding the effect of conservatism on CSR, coinciding with the post-financial-crisis period. The findings are robust to a number of specifications and tests, including the use of an instrumental variable approach explicitly addressing endogeneity biases related to reverse causality concerns. Our study suggests that, under monitoring pressure from financial stakeholders, firms prioritize commitment to accounting conservatism over the needs of non-financial stakeholders and other interest groups.     

Excess insider control and corporate social responsibility: Evidence from dual-class firms

We investigate the corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance of firms with a dual-class share structure. Dual-class firms, which represent a fast-growing segment of the U.S. capital market, violate the "one share, one vote" principle by giving corporate insiders control in excess of their economic interest in the firm. We observe a negative association of excess insider control and firms’ CSR performance, primarily with respect to the community- and employee-related dimensions of CSR. Extended analyses reveal that this negative association is mitigated by high financial resource availability. Consistent with a trade-off between corporate spending on CSR or on benefits for insiders, we also observe a negative association between CSR performance and executive pay in dual-class firms. Taken together, these extended analyses are consistent with self-interested behavior of entrenched insiders who, unless resources are abundant, appear to reduce CSR activities to maintain resources available for their personal benefit. While the exposure to risks engendered by a dual-class equity structure may be reflected in the share price, our findings draw attention to an externality: diminished CSR performance affects not just shareholders, but all stakeholders.     

Increasing the role of auditing in corporate governance

While critical accounting research has long been vitally interested in relationships between accounting, auditing and control of business organizations, mainstream research in accounting, finance and management has only recently displayed an increased interest in questions of corporate governance. The notion of corporate governance typically employed in mainstream research focus on enhancing benefits to shareholders. The structure and the functioning of boards of directors, and audit committees of such boards, are primary concerns within this line of research. This paper presents an alternative view of corporate governance and the role of auditing within corporate governance. We argue that the role of auditing should be increased in order to enhance the control of corporations for the benefit of all stakeholders and society generally.     

Do Economic Incentives of Controlling Shareholders Influence Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure? A Natural Experiment

We evaluate whether voluntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure is influenced by the economic incentives of controlling shareholders. To examine this research question, we apply the natural experiment setting based on the Split Share Structure Reform in China. Following this Reform, Chinese state shareholders are allowed to trade their shares in the stock market, which increases their incentives to maximize the market value of the firms that they control. We present empirical evidence of increased CSR disclosure among listed state-owned enterprises after this Reform. This evidence suggests that the economic incentives of key stakeholders are associated with voluntary CSR disclosures.     

Mandatory corporate social responsibility disclosure and dividend payouts: evidence from a quasi‐natural experiment

Employing the enactment of a regulation that mandates a subset of firms to disclose their corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities as a quasi‐natural experiment, we find that mandatory CSR disclosure reduces firms’ dividend payouts significantly. Further analyses indicate that the negative relation is more pronounced for firms with weaker corporate governance mechanisms, where shareholders lack of effective tools to protect themselves against pressures from stakeholders, and a shift of relative power towards stakeholders is more likely to occur. Our paper provides a specific channel through which mandatory CSR disclosure benefits stakeholders at the expense of shareholders.     

Institutional shareholders and corporate social responsibility

This study uses two distinct quasi-natural experiments to examine the effect of institutional shareholders on corporate social responsibility (CSR). We first find that an exogenous increase in institutional holding caused by Russell Index reconstitutions improves portfolio firms’ CSR performance. We then find that firms have lower CSR ratings when shareholders are distracted due to exogenous shocks. Moreover, the effect of institutional ownership is stronger in CSR categories that are financially material. Furthermore, we show that institutional shareholders influence CSR through CSR-related proposals. Overall, our results suggest that institutional shareholders can generate real social impact.     

基于企业社会责任的管理会计框架重构

企业社会责任(CSR)的概念是不断演进的。无论围绕风险管理关注CSR对企业价值的影响,还是投资者结合社会责任投资(SRI)再造投资管理新模式,以及结合CSR与SRI的相关性来重新定位公司治理的作用等,均需要完善管理会计系统,进而重构管理会计的新框架。当前,从CSR的伦理观考察管理会计的框架结构是一种比较现实的选择。     

Shareholder election of CSR committee members and its effects on CSR performance

We examine the election of directors to corporate social responsibility (CSR) committees and whether shareholder votes influence CSR committee effectiveness. Our study is motivated by the importance that shareholders place on CSR and the responsibilities of the board in overseeing a firm's CSR practices. We find that CSR committee members receive greater shareholder support than other directors. We further find that among CSR committee members, those who are more experienced and skilled receive greater shareholder support. Furthermore, when a firm's CSR performance is poorer (better), CSR committee members receive lower (greater) shareholder support compared with other directors. Finally, we find that through voting, shareholders can increase the efficacy of the CSR committee, leading to improvements in CSR committee structure and performance. Overall, our results suggest that shareholders value the services and expertise of CSR committee members and hold them accountable for CSR performance. Shareholder votes are also effective in enhancing CSR performance.     

Long-term financial performance of corporate social responsibility

We conduct an empirical investigation of the relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and long-term stock performance in Japan. This study is set in the Japanese context. We find, first, that CSR activities are positively related to long-term stock returns. Second, shareholders and financial institutions that have long-term investments with strong governance promote CSR activities. Third, discussion with stakeholders, such as loyal well-socialized consumers in developed countries, supports firms' CSR activities, especially environmental issues in Europe and governance in North America. Finally, short-term CSR investment does not yield good stock performance. By applying robust methodology to over 10 years of data, our study supports the hypothesis that investors in the Japanese market are significantly concerned about the social activities of firms, and that these concerns are reflected in the markets. This study provides quantitative evidence of the positive effect that CSR has on long-term stock investments in the Japanese market. In addition, it concludes that CSR has the potential to be a tool to moderate myopic short-termism.     

The business case for regulation of corporate social responsibility and accountability

This paper develops an alternative (or supplementary) theoretical justification for the regulation of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and social and environmental accounting and reporting (SEAR) to the justification contained in the extant academic literature. It does this by demonstrating how, contrary to the dominant business discourse, increased regulation designed to protect the social and environmental interests of a range of stakeholders can also serve to enhance corporate economic performance and shareholder value.

The theoretical perspectives developed in this paper are drawn from Beck's and Giddens’ theories on reflexive modernity, and indicate that reflexively appropriated knowledge can be a key factor in developing socially constructed understandings of the social and environmental risks to a range of stakeholders inherent in business operations.

In situations where voluntary self-regulation of CSR and SEAR has been ineffective in preventing corporate actions and decisions that have resulted in damaging social and environmental consequences, processes of reflexivity can substantially increase public awareness of the level of risk they face from corporate operations. Such increased perceptions of risk can lead to a loss of trust in an individual corporation or a whole industrial sector, and this can be exacerbated where stakeholders begin to actively seek out alternative risk discourses to inform themselves about possible risks of which they were previously unaware. We argue that effective statutory regulation could avoid these outcomes, and the loss of shareholder economic value that can flow from these outcomes.     

Measuring corporate environmental performance

As shareholders, government regulators, consumers, employees, and the general public pay more attention to companies' environmental performance, measurement issues are becoming increasingly important and demand is growing for relevant information to assist stakeholders in making key decisions. Despite the enhanced interest in and attention to companies' environmental activities, the accounting profession has been slow to take on the role of defining, measuring, and controlling this broad corporate domain. Thus, measures of environmental performance have proliferated in the absence of clear, generally accepted guidelines as to what constitutes good and bad environmental performance. As a result, the public is becoming increasingly confused and cynical about interpretation of such data. In this paper, we use theoretical and empirical approaches to define corporate environmental performance and consider how well existing measures operationalize the construct. Interestingly, some popular environmental rating schemes seem to rely more heavily on public reaction to environmental events than on more precise and measurable outcome or process dimensions. Our findings suggest a need for explicit environmental performance metrics in order to provide stakeholders with more reliable, consistent, and accurate information for comparing companies and making key strategic decisions. We argue that the accounting profession is an obvious candidate for establishing such metrics since the domain of accounting typically includes measuring, communicating, and regulating information about company performance. Expanding accountants' domain to include environmental performance can greatly contribute to the usefulness of environmental performance metrics.     

Stock repurchasing and corporate social responsibility

Stock repurchases are controversial. Researchers often view the positive association between free cash flow and the volume of the stock repurchases to be in the shareholders’ interest and the positive association between executive options and stock repurchases to be in the managers’ interest. Using firms’ corporate social responsibility (CSR) ratings as a measure of ethical culture—one that increases the cost of self-serving behavior for managers— we examine whether a firm’s CSR rating is related to its stock repurchase decisions. Although the baseline regression shows a positive association between CSR and repurchases, we find that CSR amplifies the positive association between free cash flow and stock repurchases and lessens the positive association between executive options and stock repurchases. These results indicate that ethical culture might play a role in repurchase decisions: it may encourage repurchases aligned with shareholders’ interests and discourage those primarily in managers’ interest. Furthermore, we also find that high CSR firms are associated with a greater completion rate of announced repurchase programs and receive more favorable stock market reaction to their repurchase announcements.     

Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder governance around the world

This paper examines the impact of stakeholder governance on corporate social responsibility (CSR) to determine whether CSR is employed as a mechanism to mitigate conflicts of interest between managers and diverse stakeholders, or used as managerial perquisites. To examine this relation properly, we not only employ an extensive sample of international firms, but also mitigate endogeneity by using various econometric methods. We find that stakeholder governance positively influences firms' CSR engagement with a greater magnitude than board governance after controlling for confounding factors. Stakeholders' influence in CSR engagement is more pronounced when investor protections and board governance are relatively weak.     

Corporate social performance,ownership structure,and corporate governance in France

Empirical evidence of the influence of shareholders and governance practices on corporate social responsibility (CSR) policies is mixed, and most studies have been conducted in the United States. This study of the French market and its unique characteristics reveals the forms of shareholding and CSR implementations, thereby shedding new light on the influence of shareholders on corporate social performance (CSP). Specifically, with a sample of French listed companies, the authors investigate how ownership concentration, ownership type, and governance practices relate to CSP. The geography of capital is relevant, but little evidence arises of the importance of shareholders’ identity. That is, neither family nor institutional shareholders influence CSP, and large shareholders seem to place less emphasis on CSR, suggesting that they are reluctant to invest in it. Finally, the results related to good governance practices are mixed, but board independence provides a foundation for good CSR.     

Session III: Securities Law in Twenty‐First Century America: A Conversation with SEC Commissioner Robert Jackson

SEC Commissioner Robert Jackson comments on three major issues the Commission has been investigating: (1) the concentration of ownership among American stock exchanges; (2) the extent of common ownership of, and potential for undue influence over, U.S. corporations by large institutional shareholders; and (3) the role of corporate boards in promoting and protecting stakeholder interests as well as shareholder interests. In the first of the three areas, Jackson argues that the ownership of 12 of the 13 U.S. stock exchanges by just three financial conglomerates suggests a competitiveness problem— one that, despite the significant reductions in trading costs during the last 15 years, should receive further investigation. To the concerns raised by the common and increasingly concentrated ownership of U.S. public companies by institutional shareholders, the Commissioner's main response is to note that whatever culpability corporate America is forced to assume for our large and growing environmental and social problems must be shared with the largest U.S. institutional shareholders, whose collective resources and influence confer a responsibility to help guide companies when responding to such problems. Finally, on the issue of stakeholder theory and ESG, Jackson insists that asking corporate boards to put the interests of all stakeholders on a par with their shareholders’ when making strategic business decisions would be a mistake. Besides creating a major accountability problem, the adoption of stakeholder theory in place of “the clear, single‐minded objective function of increasing long‐run shareholder value” would deprive boards of their principal guide “when making the difficult tradeoffs among stakeholders that effective oversight and management of public companies require.”     

Corporate social responsibility versus corporate shareholder responsibility: A family firm perspective

Recent literature suggests that some socially responsible corporate actions benefit shareholders while others do not. We study differences in policy toward corporate social responsibility (CSR) between family and non-family firms, using environmental performance as the proxy for CSR. We show that family firms are more responsible to shareholders than non-family firms in making environmental investments. When shareholder interests and societal interests coincide, i.e., when it comes to alleviating environmental concerns that have potential to harm society and elevate the firm's risk exposure, family firms do at least as well as non-family firms in protecting shareholder interests. However, when shareholder and societal interests diverge, i.e., when it comes to making environmental investments that might benefit society but do not benefit shareholders, family firms protect shareholder interests by undertaking a significantly lower level of such investments than non-family firms. Our findings suggest that lack of diversification by controlling families creates strong incentives for them to act in the financial interest of all shareholders, which more than overcomes any noneconomic benefits families may derive from engaging in social causes that do not benefit non-controlling shareholders.     

A systemic evaluation framework for futures research

Evaluation of futures studies is a topic that has frequently aroused discussion. Futures studies often deal with great societal or strategic business issues, and thus the validity and reliability of the results is of great interest to stakeholders. Existing literature contains discussions of such important issues as ethics of futures studies, the nature of knowledge about the future, and futures methodology, which together contribute to the quality, validity and credibility of futures studies, but discussion on the evaluation of futures studies is more scant.Thus, the main research question that guides our study is: “how should we evaluate futures studies to ensure the reliability and credibility of the results?” We answer the question by deriving a systemic framework for evaluation following the input-process-output schema to ensure that the whole chain from the data to reporting and implementation contributes to the quality and impact of the study.The main contribution is the systemic evaluation framework. The framework will contribute to the evaluation of existing and ongoing studies by offering guidelines for evaluation, and as a net effect, we propose, it will increase the impact of futures studies by making the practices more transparent and thus generating more confidence in the results.     

Corporate social responsibility and social capital

When corporations make an effort to be socially responsible beyond what is required by the law, this effort is often described as strategic—made mainly for the shareholders’ or managers’ benefit. A large body of literature corroborates this belief. But, could the incentives for corporate social responsibility (CSR) come from an altruistic inclination fostered by the social capital of the region in which the firm is headquartered? We investigate whether this phenomenon exists by examining the association between the social capital in the region and the firm’s CSR. We find that a firm from a high social capital region exhibits higher CSR. This result suggests that the self-interest of shareholders or mangers does not explain all of the firm’s CSR, but the altruistic inclination from the region might also play a role.     

The effect of corporate social responsibility on the branding of financial services

In today's global world, corporate social responsibility (CSR) is increasing public demand for greater transparency from multinational companies. CSR is a new and growing financial risk factor. If it is mismanaged, a firm's corporate reputation can be badly damaged and a direct negative impact on its business and bottom-line may result. Instead of simply campaigning directly against industrial groups and lobbying governments and international organisations to issue new legislation, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are increasingly putting pressure on the financial services groups and insurance companies. This new global tactic may affect a bank's relationship with its clients and shareholders.There are market benefits and competitive advantages for those companies whose business policies integrate CSR. The growth in socially responsible investments and in CSR awareness among City people persuades some bankers that the most successful firms of the future will be those who proactively balance short-term financial goals with long-term sustainable franchise building. To respond to this challenge, corporations will have to convince citizens they can trust both their brands and the people behind them. In this context, one must recognise that finance brands have been clumsily managed. Nowadays, several big consumer brands are used as societal role models, but they are also the targets of anti-globalisation and anti-logo activists. In order to avoid such an outcome — not to mention corporate mortification — the key social marketing strategy must be to communicate proactively the business activity's raison d'être to opinion leaders and the general public. In general, industry does not yet care enough and many companies are reacting only when put under pressure by public opinion. It is time, however, to market the social raison d'être of a business and indeed to contest its current exclusion from ‘civil society’. Consumer and service sectors lead the field. In view of the downturn of the global economy, more than ever before, CSR branding is of paramount importance to the financial sector if bankers do not want to become the easy scapegoats. It is necessary to make it clear that financial services companies are global citizens too.