Socially Responsible Investment and Corporate Social and Environmental Reporting in the UK: An Exploratory Study

This exploratory study examines the relations between corporate social and environmental reporting (CSR) and the socially responsible investment (SRI) sector. The evidence presented, based upon the informed opinions of 14 experts within the SRI field, suggests that the field of CSR is on the verge of a major change towards a substantial and sustained improvement in quality and quantity. The SRI sector is undergoing radical changes. A wider social movement has already led to exponential growth, as more people become concerned with how their money is invested. Moreover, the Pensions Review has widened this concern to institutional investment. Representing 35% of the stock market, the potential impact of this regulation is anticipated to be significant. One possible outcome could be a marked increase in the size and power of the SRI sector, improving their ability to successfully influence corporate behaviour. Success is likely to increase further as corporations begin to see a business case, as well as, or as opposed to a moral case, for acting in a more responsible manner. The Turnbull report on the combined codes of corporate governance is a significant factor influencing this. For the first time, reputational risk, and hence how companies manage environmental, ethical and social reputations, is on the core corporate governance agenda. A more powerful outcome would be an increased interest from mainstream fund managers in SRI modes of corporate assessment. Preliminary evidence suggests that this will create a greater demand for CSR, and greater legitimacy of CSR within the accounting orthodoxy.     

Corporate responsibility towards employees and innovation: Evidence from an emerging market

Against a background of rising labor costs and the need to build a harmonious labor–capital relationship in China, this paper focuses on non-pecuniary incentives for employees and discusses the impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) towards employees on innovation performance. The empirical results show that CSR towards employees significantly promotes corporate innovation, and that this effect remains robust after accounting for alternative proxies and endogeneity issues. In addition, the positive effect of CSR towards employees on innovation is more significant for firms in high-tech industries, with high levels of R&D inputs and high valuation of employee collaboration. Further analysis indicates that CSR towards employees does not promote R&D investment, but does significantly improve innovation efficiency and the marginal output of R&D investment and reduces the turnover rate of management-level staff with production and R&D backgrounds, which is conducive to stability of the innovation team. In addition, this paper also finds that for companies with high R&D expenditures, CSR towards employees significantly eases the sensitivity between executive turnover and performance, which helps executives resist pressure arising from a decline in short-term performance. The findings of this paper have implications for improving labor–capital relations and enhancing firm innovation capabilities.     

Hadfields Ltd: its annual general meetings 1903–1939 and their relevance for contemporary corporate social reporting

Little attention has been given to studies of the historical antecedents of corporate social reporting (CSR). The paper looks at the disclosures made by Hadfields Ltd and other British companies at the beginning of the 20th century, and finds that these included topics such as economic, political and industrial relations conditions, in a style analogous to that employed in CSR reporting today, during periods of difficulty and conflict for the reporting companies. The paper concludes that these findings support the argument that CSR may be less a reflection of a new relationship between companies and society than another form of what Milne calls ‘advocacy advertising’.     

Corporate social responsibility and classification shifting

This study examines the relation between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and firm behavior to misclassify core expenses as special items in the income statement to inflate core earnings (i.e., classification shifting). We find that firms with good CSR performance (high-CSR firms) are less likely to engage in classification shifting than firms with poor CSR performance (low-CSR firms). We also find that high-CSR firms engage in less classification shifting even when they have greater incentives to meet earnings benchmarks. Overall, our results are consistent with the notion that socially responsible firms behave ethically in financial reporting.     

Corporate social responsibility reporting: A comprehensive picture?

This study develops a content analysis framework that provides information on the comprehensiveness of corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting, an important aspect of social and environmental accountability. Comprehensive reporting, as defined here, requires three types of information for each disclosed CSR item: (i) vision and goals, (ii) management approach, and (iii) performance indicators. The feasibility of the framework to assess the comprehensiveness of CSR reporting is demonstrated using the 2005 annual reports of a sample of publicly traded Belgian companies. The content analysis reveals a low level of comprehensive reporting. This finding complements those of prior studies on the completeness of CSR reporting and, therefore, feeds the debate regarding the extent to which CSR reporting can be considered a mechanism for discharging social and environmental accountability.     

Authoritarian state,global expansion and corporate social responsibility reporting: The narrative of a Chinese state-owned enterprise

This case study examines why stand-alone Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) reporting has been initiated in a Chinese state-owned enterprise (SOE). Chinese SOEs have been pioneering CSR reporting since the mid–2000?s and extant literature interprets its development as no more than a consequence of government interventions. However, there is a dearth of qualitative evidence illuminating the subtle interrelationships between the global, national and internal organisational dynamics mediating CSR reporting initiative of Chinese SOEs within the authoritarian state. To fill this gap, we provide a nuanced multi-level institutional analysis of the drivers underlying the initiation of CSR reporting within the case examined.     

The Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Trend

Corporate Social Responsibility, or “CSR,” has recently become a subject of study by financial economists. While there is no shortage of anecdotal evidence to support all variety of positions, broad‐based statistical evidence about the CSR movement is in short supply. This article presents some new empirical evidence that aims to answer three related questions about CSR: First, are corporations increasing their “investment” in what is considered socially responsible behavior? Second, does corporate investment in social responsibility affect a company's financial performance and shareholder value? Third, why do companies invest in CSR: to increase shareholder value, or to uphold a “moral” commitment to non‐investor stakeholders and “society”? Using a social responsibility metric that measures the net CSR strengths (i.e., strengths less concerns) of each S&P 500 and Domini 400 company, the authors report that the average net CSR for both indexes decreased during the 15‐year period (1991‐2005) of the study—though the Domini 400, as might be expected, experienced a smaller decline. The authors also report that corporate strengths have increased, on average, but at a slower rate than the “concerns,” which suggests that corporate CSR efforts may be aimed at a moving target with steadily rising expectations and requirements. Second, the authors report that companies with more CSR strengths or fewer CSR weaknesses produced higher ROA over the same 15‐year period. The authors' findings here suggest a “circular” causality in which profitable companies are more likely to invest in CSR initiatives to begin with, but then find their performance further improved by such investment. Third, the authors' findings suggest that most companies devote resources to CSR initiatives as a means of maximizing long‐run value rather than out of a prior commitment to stakeholders. More specifically, the study shows that companies appear to invest more heavily to build CSR strengths than to eliminate CSR concerns. And as the authors conclude, this behavior is consistent with a strategy of using CSR as a form of “risk management” that promotes corporate strengths in order to limit the potential negative effects of—perhaps by diverting attention from—their weaknesses.     

On the ideological role of employee reporting

This paper analyzes narrative employee reporting and problematizes corporate talk about employees. Annual and CSR reports of the 25 biggest Finnish companies from the year 2008 are investigated, and the CEO letters and the special sections addressing employee-related issues are analyzed. The study employs the concept of ideological strategies as developed by Eagleton (1991/2007) to analyze the ideologies underlying employee reporting. The analysis shows that corporate disclosure, though relatively developed in some areas, still paints a partial picture of people within companies. Employees are presented in a fairly narrow, mechanistic manner as efficiently aiming at a kind of development and growth of [only] instrumental value to companies, and not as complex, individual human beings possessing a variety of qualities and needs. The study reveals how corporate talk presents the relationship between companies and labor according to a unitarist perception. Particularly, the study shows how corporate talk works to naturalize and universalize this ideological claim and, hence, hide its contingent nature. The study adds to an increasing body of accounting literature using interpretive and critical approaches to analyze corporate disclosures and to study the less developed area of narrative employee reporting. The study also highlights the possible advantages of social accounting.     

Gender-diverse board and the relevance of voluntary CSR reporting

In this paper, we focus on voluntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure, and we test the extent to which the value relevance of CSR reporting is affected by the appointment of female directors. Using a sample of French listed companies belonging to the SBF 120 index from 2001 to 2011, we control for differences in firm characteristics between firms with and without female board membership by using propensity score matching. Our results show that high CSR reporting is more relevant in terms of market value for firms with gender-diverse boards than for firms with completely male directors. This finding holds when we use the accounting-based performance measures, namely, return on assets (ROA) and return on equity (ROE). We also highlight that engaging an external assurance provider for CSR reporting is value relevant for firms without female directors but not value relevant for firms with female directors, suggesting a substitute relationship between gender-diverse boards and CSR assurance. Our results are stable when we consider the presence of at least two and three female directors.     

THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTING EXPECTATIONS GAP: AUSTRALIAN EVIDENCE

Recent research of corporate reporting practices has suggested that corporate environmental reporting within Australia, and a number of other countries, is typically deficient and not of a standard to satisfy the information needs of various classes of report readers. This paper explores whether a potential information demand/supply imbalance is due to differing perceptions between report users and report preparers as to the relative importance of various items of environmental performance information to the users’ decision making processes. The paper explores whether an environmental reporting ‘expectations gap’ exists within Australia. The study, sponsored by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia, surveyed the attitudes of senior executives within 462 of the largest companies within Australia (the preparers group), as well as the attitudes of 474 individuals from various categories of annual report users. In comparing the responses, significant differences between the views of users and the preparers were found to exist in relation to various issues associated with corporate environmental performance reporting. The evidence is consistent with the existence of an environmental reporting expectations gap within Australia.     

Corporate social responsibility assurance and reporting quality: Evidence from restatements

Previous research has shown that obtaining independent assurance of corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting has capital market benefits and that these benefits are amplified when accountants provide the assurance. Yet, little is known about whether and the manner in which CSR assurance improves the quality of CSR reporting, and whether accounting providers improve reporting quality to a greater extent than non-accounting providers. This study uses the unique setting of CSR restatements to examine these issues. We present theoretical and empirical evidence supporting a competitive advantage of using accounting firms as assurance providers as they not only identify inaccuracies in previous reports earlier than non-accounting providers, but also prevent future reporting inaccuracies. CSR assurance, from either type of provider, also leads to improved reporting definitions, scopes, and methodologies that require restatements for comparability. Results also indicate that CSR reporting frameworks (e.g., GRI) are not a substitute for obtaining CSR assurance as the latter has incremental benefits over GRI usage in terms of identifying errors and reporting improvements. These results have implications for public policy makers considering the merits of mandating CSR assurance and for organizations assessing the relative benefits and costs of preparing GRI-based CSR reports, obtaining CSR assurance, and choosing between accounting vs. non-accounting CSR assurance providers.     

The effect of mandatory CSR disclosure on firm profitability and social externalities: Evidence from China

We examine how mandatory disclosure of corporate social responsibility (CSR) impacts firm performance and social externalities. Our analysis exploits China's 2008 mandate requiring firms to disclose CSR activities, using a difference-in-differences design. Although the mandate does not require firms to spend on CSR, we find that mandatory CSR reporting firms experience a decrease in profitability subsequent to the mandate. In addition, the cities most impacted by the disclosure mandate experience a decrease in their industrial wastewater and SO₂ emission levels. These findings suggest that mandatory CSR disclosure alters firm behavior and generates positive externalities at the expense of shareholders.     

上市公司社会责任报告解读与完善建议

国内关于社会责任信息披露的研究主要以年报为主，本文以（2006年20份专门的社会责任报告为研究对象，对报告进行内容分析和整体质量解读。本文认为，社会责任报告是公司传递社会责任信息的有效途径，政策指引对相关披露具有良好的引导推动作用，并且公司之间形成了披露的示范效应；但也发现公司对社会责任理解存在偏差、披露缺乏中立性、形式重于实质等问题。本文最后提出了完善社会责任报告的建议与思考。     

Capital market liberalisation and voluntary corporate social responsibility disclosure: Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment in China

This paper investigates the impact of the Shanghai–Hong Kong Stock Connect (SHSC) scheme on voluntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure in China. Using a difference-in-differences (DiD) design, we find that companies that participate in the SHSC scheme are more inclined to voluntarily issue CSR reports. This effect is more pronounced for companies that have limited access to international markets and those with weak corporate governance. Additional analyses show that SHSC-connected firms also produce higher quality CSR reports and achieve a better CSR performance. Our findings imply that capital market liberalisation promotes voluntary corporate disclosure for investors.     

Auditor selection and corporate social responsibility

This study examines the association between the selection of an industry‐specialist auditor and corporate social responsibility (CSR). We find that firms with higher CSR ratings are more likely to hire industry‐specialist auditors (national‐level industry leaders, city‐level industry leaders or joint city‐national industry leaders). Moreover, firms with better CSR performance related to product quality and the environment in controversial industries are found to select non‐specialized auditors. The results suggest that such firms may overinvest in CSR activities associated with the environment and product issues to disguise the sin nature of their manufactured goods, and simultaneously engage low quality auditors perhaps to avoid full disclosure of potential environmental and legal liabilities. Overall, we conclude that CSR is associated with the non‐controversial firms ensuring high quality financial reporting in response to societal expectations, and thus CSR firms in such industries have strong incentives to engage industry‐specialist auditors.     

Columbia Law School Roundtable on A Governance Research Agenda for the Academy

Since Jensen and Meckling's formulation of the theory of “agency costs” in 1976, corporate finance and governance scholars have produced a large body of research that attempts to identify the most important features and practices of effective corporate governance systems. But for all the research that has been done in the past 40 years, many practitioners continue to see a disconnect between theory and practice, between the questions researched and the questions that need to be answered. In this roundtable, Martijn Cremers begins by challenging the conventional view that limiting “agency costs” is the main challenge confronted by boards of directors in representing shareholder interests and, hence, the proper focus of most governance scholarship. Especially in today's economy, with the high values assigned to growth companies, the most important function of corporate governance may instead be to overcome the problem of American “short termism” that he attributes to “inadequate shareholder commitment to long‐term cooperation.” And he buttresses his argument with the findings of his own recent research suggesting that obstacles to the workings of the corporate control market like staggered boards and supermajority voting requirements may actually improve long‐run corporate performance by lengthening the decision‐making horizon of boards and the managements they supervise. Vik Khanna discusses Indian Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) spending and its effects in light of a recent law requiring Indian companies of a certain size to devote at least 2% of their after‐tax profit to CSR initiatives. One unintended effect of this mandate, which took effect in 2010, was that all Indian companies that were spending more than the prescribed 2% of profits cut their expenditure back to that minimum, suggesting that CSR and advertising are substitutes to some extent, and that such legal mandates can discourage CSR spending by early adapters or “leaders.” Nevertheless, Khanna also found evidence of social norms developing in support of CSR, including a spreading perception that such spending can help some companies achieve strategic goals. Jeff Gordon closes by arguing that, to the extent investors are short‐sighted, their short‐sightedness is likely to be justified by their recognition that public company directors have neither the information nor the incentives to do an effective job of monitoring corporate managements. The best solution to the problems with U.S. corporate governance is to replace today's “thinly informed” directors with “activist” directors who more closely resemble the directors of private‐equity owned firms. Such directors would spend far more time with, and be much more knowledgeable about, corporate management and operations—and they would have much more of their personal wealth at stake in the form of company stock.     

Corporate social responsibility and the assessment by auditors of the risk of material misstatement

This paper investigates whether, and how, firms’ corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance influences the auditor's assessment of the risk of material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, at the financial statement level by analysing their pricing decision (i.e., audit fees). Using a panel data set of 12,330 firms from 28 countries over the period 2003–2012 and different measures of CSR performance, we find a U‐shaped relationship between firms’ CSR performance and audit fees. This result suggests that there is an optimal level of CSR performance that minimizes the auditor's assessment of the risk of material misstatement, which in turn lowers the need for greater auditor effort; that is why auditors charge firms significantly less when their CSR performance is at the optimal level. Finally, we also show that the optimal level of CSR performance varies with the degree of environmental dynamism, ownership concentration and leverage.