Mind the Gap: Is Water Disclosure a Missing Component of Corporate Social Responsibility?

Corporate water stewardship is conventionally internally focused, but now it is becoming a critical issue in a wider socio-political context. Drawing on the theory of self-regulation, we investigate the rationale behind, and the factors contributing to, corporate decisions to voluntarily disclose water information via the CDP. The study uses innovative proxies for corporate self-regulation, including water governance, water policy, water actions, and water performance. Our results show that these proxies are significantly related to the propensity of the companies participating in the CDP to disclose water information. Furthermore, belonging to a water-intensive industry may moderate the impact of self-regulation on water transparency. Finally, sharing water information privately with key institutional investors is a strategic tool for implementing self-regulation. The study suggests that corporate self-regulation can play a powerful role in reducing corporate water opaqueness when mandatory water legislation is absent or not yet applicable.     

The institutionalisation of corporate social responsibility reporting

This study examines corporate social responsibility reporting (CSRR) structures through a comparison of the disclosures in two countries with different social issues. The analysis is guided by a focus on the legitimisation offered by isomorphism. We compare the 2007 annual report and website (including standalone report) CSRR of a matched sample of 18 Australian and 18 South African mining companies. Among the 30 comparisons of disclosure patterns, 29 show no difference. We also provide examples of specific disclosures that show a remarkable level of similarity in CSRR and in the CSRR management structures adopted in the two countries. Our findings show similar overall patterns of CSRR in diverse settings, while differences in CSRR content at a more detailed level remain. For example, companies refer to the applicable national regulations and rules; as well as to their specific local communities. These findings provide evidence that the same reporting templates are used in CSRR globally. There is evidence to suggest that CSRR is institutionalised through professionalization and other means, suggesting a need to interpret CSRR characteristics and patterns as a reflection of global CSRR templates. Management intent or company-specific characteristics, such as social and environmental performance, do not necessarily drive CSRR patterns.     

The association between employee stock option disclosures and corporate governance: Evidence from an enhanced disclosure regime

This study examines the role of corporate governance in employee stock option (ESO) disclosures following the revision of AASB 1028 Employee Benefits in 2001. We find that, while firms do not fully comply with AASB 1028 ESO disclosures, they voluntarily provide other ESO disclosures. In relation to corporate governance measures that have a role in the financial reporting process, we find two corporate governance measures dominate our results—the quality of auditor and duality of the role of CEO and Chair of the Board of Directors. We show that, in general, external auditor quality has positive incremental association with both mandatory and voluntary ESO disclosures while the dual role of CEO and chairperson of the board is associated with lower levels of mandatory disclosure.     

The IPO corporate social responsibility information disclosure: Does the stock market care?

We create textual information indices using corporate social responsibility (CSR) information extracted from IPO prospectuses in China. We use the indices to measure the issuers’ corporate social performance (CSP) and corporate environmental performance (CEP) and assess how the stock market reacts. We find that CSP disclosure is significantly related to the post‐market performance of the firm. Specifically, better CSP disclosure is correlated with higher post‐IPO listing holding period returns among firms that do not disclose donations or environmental expenditures, although the association does not hold for firms that make donations and environmental expenditures. In addition, institutional investors seem to care more about the CEP information for a firm than the CSP information.     

Discussion of ‘Strange bedfellows? Voluntary CSR disclosure and politics’

This article discusses the paper by Griffin and Sun (2013). Griffin and Sun (2013) investigate (i) the association between the company individuals and stakeholders political interests and the intensity of voluntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosures, and (ii) investors response to these CSR disclosures. This discussion focuses on issues relating to five key areas of Griffin and Sun (2013), namely, the relationship between political interests and CSR disclosure intensity, the relationship between political interests and investors reactions to CSR disclosure, the political interest proxies employed, sample selection and the empirical analyses.     

Corporate social responsibility and dividend policy

This study outlines and tests two corporate social responsibility (CSR) views of dividends. The first view argues that firms are likely to pay fewer dividends because CSR activities lower the cost of equity, encouraging firms to invest or hoard cash rather than to pay dividends. The second view suggests that CSR activities are positive NPV projects that increases earnings and hence dividend payouts. The first (second) view predicts that firms with a stronger involvement in CSR activities should be associated with a lower (higher) dividend payouts. The finding supports the second view and is robust.     

Are red or blue companies more likely to go green? Politics and corporate social responsibility

Using the firm-level corporate social responsibility (CSR) ratings of Kinder, Lydenberg, Domini, we find that firms score higher on CSR when they have Democratic rather than Republican founders, CEOs, and directors, and when they are headquartered in Democratic rather than Republican-leaning states. Democratic-leaning firms spend $20 million more on CSR than Republican-leaning firms ($80 million more within the sample of S&P 500 firms), or roughly 10% of net income. We find no evidence that firms recover these expenditures through increased sales. Indeed, increases in firm CSR ratings are associated with negative future stock returns and declines in firm ROA, suggesting that any benefits to stakeholders from social responsibility come at the direct expense of firm value.     

中外企业社会责任报告信息披露比较

本文通过对中国石油和壳牌石油2006~2009年度社会责任报告在形式和内容上的比较,分析了中外企业社会责任报告披露的异同之处,然后对改进我国企业社会责任报告披露提出了一些重要启示:统一社会责任报告的编制框架;完善利益相关方的参与和信息反馈机制;开展社会责任报告第三方审验;社会责任报告内容要体现平衡原则;选择适当的社会责任报告披露形式以提高披露的效果。