The Uptake of Sustainability Reporting in Australia

In this paper, we identify and discuss how sustainability reporting has spread throughout the Australian business community over the past twenty years or so. We identified all Australian business organisations that have produced a sustainability report since 1995, and we undertook an interview survey with managers of reporting companies. By incorporating a wide range and large number of reporting companies, we offer insights beyond those obtained from traditional report content analysis and from close analyses of singular case-study organisations. We reveal that sustainability reporting has deepened in a few high-impact industries, and it has spread to a small number of firms in a wide range of low-impact industries. We tested whether there were any relationships between the drivers of reporting and the experiences of different types of reporting firms. Many of the relationships we observed were not as clear or as consistent as expected. Sustainability reporting is, however, of strategic importance to reporting companies. Given the small number of reporters in Australia, we raise the possibility of strategic differentiation as a key driver of reporting behaviour and suggest further studies to explore institutional fields that may be shaping sustainability reporting practice.     

Scoring Sustainability Reports Using GRI 2011 Guidelines for Assessing Environmental,Economic, and Social Dimensions of Leading Public and Private Indian Companies

Sustainability reporting guidelines developed by Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) provide a systematic approach for the companies to report their performance on social, environmental, and economic dimensions of sustainability. This study compared the sustainability reports of leading Indian public and private sector companies. Reports were analyzed based on GRI guidelines toward their reporting on sustainability. A numerical score from 0 to 3 was assigned for each of the 84 performance indicators (9, 30, and 45 indicators for economic, environment, and social dimensions, respectively) of the GRI 2011 guidelines based on inclusiveness of sustainability report. The analysis showed that reporting on economic dimension was comparatively better as compared to social and environmental dimensions. Sampled companies did not show much difference in their reporting practices on economic performances. However, considerable difference was observed in their reporting practices on environmental and social dimensions. Reporting practices of Tata Steel were better in all dimensions of sustainability and emerged as a responsible company on sustainability reporting.     

Impression management tactics in the CEO statements of Turkish sustainability reports

In this study, we construct a classificatory scheme of impression management tactics and apply it to a sample of sustainability report and annual report CEO statements issued by large Turkish companies. We find a wide range of impression management tactics applied in both types of CEO statements. However, impression management in sustainability report CEO statements emerges as more limited and uniform, revealing clearer prioritizations of impression management tactics when compared to annual report CEO statements. Sustainability report CEO statements emphasize tactics that allow the company to highlight carefully selected, isolated aspects of their sustainability engagement. At the same time, they rarely employ tactics that are geared towards more systematic (quantitative) performance evaluation. We attribute these differences to the way in which corporate sustainability performance is commonly conceptualized and evaluated, emphasising qualitative performance dimensions rather than the reporting of quantitative performance metrics. This results in the application of a different impression management tactics mix and limits the usefulness of sustainability reports as an accountability mechanism when compared to corporate annual reports. In addition, we provide tentative evidence for the context-specific nature of impression management, with the choice of impression management tactics reflecting the institutional environment a company is based in.     

Legitimizing Negative Aspects in GRI-Oriented Sustainability Reporting: A Qualitative Analysis of Corporate Disclosure Strategies

Corporate sustainability reports are supposed to provide a complete and balanced picture of corporate sustainability performance. They are, however, usually voluntary and thus prone to interpretation and even greenwashing tendencies. To overcome this problem, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) provides standardized reporting guidelines challenging companies to report positive and negative aspects of an organization’s sustainability performance. However, the reporting of “negative aspects” in particular can endanger corporate legitimacy if perceived by the stakeholders as not being in line with societal norms and values. Starting from the theoretical lenses of economics-based disclosure theories and socio-political theories of disclosure, the focus of this study therefore was to analyze the communicative legitimation strategies companies use to report “negative aspects,” i.e., negative ecological and social impact caused by corporate activity. Using qualitative content analysis of GRI-oriented sustainability reports from companies listed on the US Dow Jones Industrial Average Index and on the German DAX Index, we identified six legitimation strategies. We discuss these strategies regarding to symbolic and substantial management of legitimacy. We show that symbolic legitimation strategies aiming at modifying the perception of legitimizing stakeholders dominate in the reports at hand. Such persuasion, however, does not meet the requirement of impartiality as postulated by the GRI guidelines. Building upon this conclusion we propose a concise characterization of “negative aspects” and develop a GRI-compliant schema of reporting about them. In doing so, we offer a way to improve the overall “balance” of sustainability reporting contributing to a true and fair view in sustainability disclosure.     

Mitigating information asymmetry through sustainability assurance: The role of accountants and levels of assurance

This paper aims to examine the usefulness of sustainability reporting in reducing information asymmetry as result of lower dispersion and higher accuracy in financial analysts’ earnings forecasts. The empirical results from an international sample of listed companies indicate that the disclosure of sustainability information alone is not sufficient in this regard as our findings indicate that information asymmetry is reduced to a greater when such information is assured, supporting the value relevance role of sustainability reporting and assurance. In addition, the empirical findings suggest differences in terms of assurance attributes (provider and level of engagement) and such differences are even more relevant when controlling the institutional context. Assurance is highly appreciated by investors in more stakeholder-oriented countries; however, in more shareholder-oriented environments, assurance affects information asymmetries only when it is provided by accounting professionals who also report a “reasonable” opinion.     

Stakeholder Relationships,Engagement, and Sustainability Reporting

The concept of sustainability was developed in response to stakeholder demands. One of the key mechanisms for engaging stakeholders is sustainability disclosure, often in the form of a report. Yet, how reporting is used to engage stakeholders is understudied. Using resource dependence and stakeholder theories, we investigate how companies within the same industry address different dependencies on stakeholders for economic, natural environment, and social resources and thus engage stakeholders accordingly. To achieve this objective, we conducted our research using qualitative research methods. Our findings suggest that the resource dependencies on different stakeholders lead to development of different stakeholder relationships and thus appropriate resources within the company to execute engagement strategies that are informing, responding, or involving. Our research explains why diversity exists in sustainability disclosure by studying how it is used to engage stakeholders. We find that five sustainability reporting characteristics are associated with the company’s stakeholder engagement strategy: directness of communication, clarity of stakeholder identity, deliberateness of collecting feedback, broadness of stakeholder inclusiveness, and utilization of stakeholder engagement for learning. Our study develops the literature by providing insight into companies’ choices of stakeholder engagement strategy thus explaining diversity in sustainability reporting based on the characteristics and relationships with specific stakeholders.     

The value relevance of SAM's corporate sustainability ranking and GRI sustainability reporting in the European stock markets

This paper investigates whether relative corporate sustainability as measured by the SAM sustainability ranking and sustainability reporting in terms of Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) application levels are associated with a higher market valuation. We conduct a value relevance study for the 600 largest European companies with the Feltham and Ohlson valuation model as a reference point. Our results indicate that for the observation period 2001 to 2011, the association between corporate sustainability and market value is positive. The empirical evidence of a positive relationship between GRI reporting and market value is statistically significant in some but not all of the model specifications. We find no evidence of interaction between the value relevance of corporate sustainability and sustainability reporting, nor do we find any positive effect of external assurance on the capital market perception of GRI application levels. Our results support the notion that conducting business in accordance with ethical norms is also a shareholder value‐increasing business strategy. However, it is not possible to verify the information given in sustainability reports through external assurance.     

The Role of the Global Reporting Initiative's Sustainability Reporting Guidelines in the Social Screening of Investments

Social screening of investments calls not only for investment policy and criteria, but also for information about companies, their policies, practices and performance. The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and its June 2000 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines have the potential to significantly improve the usefulness and quality of information reported by companies about their environmental, social and economic impacts and performance. The GRI aims to develop a voluntary reporting framework that will elevate sustainability reporting practices to a level equivalent to that of financial reporting in rigour, comparability, auditability and general acceptance. This will be a welcome and efficient supplement to the questionnaires, interviews, press releases, media reports and other sources of information traditionally used for screening in investment decision making – social/ethical and mainstream. The Dow Jones Sustainability Group Index, the Jantzi Social Index and the Innovest EcoValue'21 analytical platform, together with the SRI community, are all likely to benefit from GRI-style sustainability reports. One of the GRI's key challenges is to accommodate the broad variety of disclosure needs and expectations of a wide range of report users and company stakeholders. To maximize the usefulness of the GRI Guidelines, report users, including the SRI community, need to be engaged in the process of developing and refining the Guidelines over time. The GRI Guidelines are emerging as an important instrument in enabling companies to communicate with their stakeholders about performance and accountability beyond just the financial bottom line.     

Does the “management approach” contribute to segment reporting transparency?

Segment reporting creates an opportunity for companies to add value to the information they disseminate about their industry and geographic operations. This article examines the “management approach” to segment reporting from a user perspective that should be of great interest to corporate financial executives. The management approach to segment reporting requires companies to report segment financial information consistent with the way they manage their businesses. We conclude that, despite more segment data being reported, the potential of the new management approach to significantly benefit users is compromised by uneven compliance among reporting companies. The complicity of external auditors in compliance shortcomings should concern all stakeholders in the financial reporting process. Noting two high-profile examples of accounting fraud, we comment on how the management approach sheds light on Enron's operations, while WorldCom concealed important segment information due to probable auditor malfeasance.     

Business Ethics and Financial Reporting Quality: Evidence from Korea

This study examines the relationship between corporate commitment to business ethics and financial reporting quality. We posit that companies with a higher level of ethical commitment exhibit better quality financial reporting than those with a lower level of ethical commitment. Consistent with our prediction, we find that companies with a higher level of ethical commitment are engaged in less earnings management, report earnings more conservatively, and predict future cash flows more accurately than those with a lower level of ethical commitment. We also find that corporate commitment to business ethics has perpetuating effects on future financial reporting quality.     

The Governance of Corporate Sustainability: Empirical Insights into the Development,Leadership and Implementation of Responsible Business Strategy

This article explores how corporate governance processes and structures are being used in large Australian companies to develop, lead and implement corporate responsibility strategies. It presents an empirical analysis of the governance of sustainability in fifty large listed companies based on each company’s disclosures in annual and sustainability reports. We find that significant progress is being made by large listed Australian companies towards integrating sustainability into core business operations. There is evidence of leadership structures being put in place to ensure that board and senior management are involved in sustainability strategy development and are then incentivised to monitor and ensure implementation of that strategy through financial rewards. There is evidence of a willingness to engage and communicate clearly the results of these strategies to interested stakeholders. Overall, there appears to be a developing acceptance amongst large corporations that efforts towards improved corporate sustainability are not only expected but are of value to the business. We suggest that this is evidence of a managerial shift away from an orthodox shareholder primacy understanding of the corporation towards a more enlightened shareholder value approach, often encompassing a stakeholder-orientated view of business strategy. However, strong underlying tensions remain due to the insistent market emphasis on shareholder value.     

Corporate Social Reporting Practice: Evidence from Listed Companies in Bangladesh

This article presents an empirical investigation into the corporate social reporting practices of listed companies from Bangladesh, where corporate social reporting is a matter of voluntary disclosure. Analysis of annual reports published in 2007 reveals that only 15.45% of listed companies made such disclosures. This article presents an extensive survey of the contents, form, nature, and extent of corporate social reporting practices of listed companies. Analysis over a wide range of industries reveals that companies in the banking sector secure the highest rank in terms of corporate social reporting; three fourths of all disclosures are generalized qualitative statements without any attempt at attestation; more than one half of the disclosures are located in the director's report; and the mean amount of disclosures was less than half a page.     

The cultural system and integrated reporting

The complexity of the business world has led to growing demands being made of companies regarding the information provided on their financial performance, management, corporate governance and sustainability record. In response, some leading companies have begun to publish integrated reporting, in the form of a document providing a coherent summary of this information, thus facilitating decision-taking by different stakeholders.The aim of this study is to examine the impact of the Hofstede national cultural system, which is representative of the values of local stakeholders, on integrated reporting, in comparison with the provision of various unrelated documents on corporate performance. The results obtained show that companies located in societies with stronger collectivist and feminist values are in the vanguard of information integration.     

Trajectories of sustainability reporting by MNCs

With increasing attention to sustainable business, reporting by MNCs about the social and environmental dimensions of their activities – alongside their economic impacts – has become rather common. While research has documented sustainability reporting and looked at reports’ contents, studies on MNC reporting as institutionalised phenomenon, considering evolving patterns at the firm level, have been lacking. This paper presents developments and trajectories of sustainability reporting by a panel of Fortune Global 250 firms, and also explores MNCs’ reporting trends in their sector-specific settings. Using three data points covering a period of nine years, five patterns are found: consistent reporters, late adopters, laggards, inconsistent reporters, and consistent non-reporters. Different dynamics can be seen in the various sectors, with some in which reporting has become established and others where it is more emerging. Many sectors show European frontrunners, particularly when it comes to publishing verified reports at a relatively early stage. Peculiarities and implications for research and practice are discussed.     

Environmental and Economic Dimensions of Sustainability and Price Effects on Consumer Responses

The lack of attention to sustainability, as a concept with multiple dimensions, has presented a developmental gap in green marketing literature, sustainability, and marketing literature for decades. Based on the established premise of customer–corporate (C–C) identification, in which consumers respond favorably to companies with corporate social responsibility initiatives that they identify with, we propose that consumers would respond similarly to companies with sustainability initiatives. We postulate that consumers care about protecting and preserving favorable economic environments (an economic dimension of sustainability) as much as they care about natural environments. Thus, we investigate how two sustainability dimensions (i.e., environmental and economic) and price can influence consumer responses. Using an experimental method, we demonstrate that consumers favor sustainability in both dimensions by giving positive evaluations of the company and purchase intent. In addition, consumers respond more negatively to poor company sustainability than to high company sustainability. In comparison, consumers respond more negatively to the company’s poor commitment to caring for the environment than to the company’s poor commitment to economic sustainability. We also find that consumers do not respond favorably to low prices when they have information about the firm’s poor environmental sustainability. Finally, we find support for an interaction effect between consumer support for sustainability and corporate sustainability; that is, consumers evaluate a company more favorably if the company shares the consumers’ social causes. Overall, we conclude, from our empirical study, support for the idea that consumers do respond to multiple dimensions of sustainability.     

Transparency of Corporate Social Responsibility in Dutch Breweries

According to the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs (2001), transparency by means of Sustainability Reporting should lead to better Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) performance of companies. Sustainability Reporting should also give consumers the information they need to purchase the most sustainable products available (Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs, 2004). This article analyses the driving factors influencing CSR and Sustainability Reporting at seven breweries in the Netherlands. It also gives a better understanding of organizational behaviour with reference to CSR and the reasons breweries have for Sustainability Reporting. The Dutch government has no intention of forcing organizations to publish a sustainability report, since it is trying to diminish the volume of legislation. Rather, the government prefers to rely on the willingness and initiatives of organizations to make CSR a success. In 2006, the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs will evaluate the effect of its CSR policy. But is it a success already? During our research, breweries appeared to find CSR more important than Sustainability Reporting. Sustainability reporting is, for most breweries, not the way to reach stakeholders. Most stakeholders have their own means for receiving information e.g. annual reports, meetings, public statements and press releases. Although small breweries think CSR is very important, they feel no pressure from outside to publish a sustainability report. For them it is very complex and expensive to publish a sustainability report. Large breweries feel pressure from many stakeholders to be transparent, but not on a regular basis. We conclude from this research that CSR does not stimulate Sustainability Reporting, but neither does Sustainability Reporting stimulate CSR.     

Effect of Stakeholders’ Pressure on Transparency of Sustainability Reports within the GRI Framework

Transparency is a quality of corporate social responsibility communication that enhances the relationship between the investors and the company. The objective of this paper is to analyze if the transparency of the sustainability reports is affected by the relationship of companies in different industries with their stakeholders. If this were the case, it would indicate that the pressure of significant stakeholders determines the required level of transparency of the reports. We find that the pressure of some groups of stakeholders (customers, clients, employees, and environment) improves the quality of transparency of the reports. We extend previous research by studying the effect of stakeholder group pressure on transparency when reporting sustainability. Our results show that transparency is affected by ownership, along with size and global region.     

A Content Analysis of Whistleblowing Policies of Leading European Companies

Since the introduction of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act in 2002 and several other national corporate governance codes, whistleblowing policies have been implemented in a growing number of companies. Existing research indicates that this type of governance codes has a limited direct effect on ethical or whistleblowing behaviour whereas whistleblowing policies at the corporate level seem to be more effective. Therefore, evidence on the impact of (inter)national corporate governance codes on the content of corporate whistleblowing policies is important to understand their indirect impact on whistleblowing behaviour. This study analyzes the contents of whistleblowing policies, and parts of corporate codes of conduct and codes of ethics, describing such policies of 56 leading European companies. By classifying the contents in seven categories, an exploratory framework was created. General contents often identified were: applicability to all employees, a group-wide scope and an authoritative tone. The most common general violations to report were breaches of internal policies and external regulations or laws. The more specific violations most frequently mentioned were criminal offences and dangers to health and safety or the environment. Contacts to report to were the direct or indirect supervisors, a compliance officer or a confidential “hotline” facility. A confidentiality guarantee was common and anonymous reporting was often possible, though sometimes discouraged. Protection against retaliation is stated by ensuring that retaliation will not happen, prohibiting it or making it punishable. The requirement of good faith was frequently given. Finally, investigation of the report was often guaranteed. Surprisingly little information is given on the treatment of whistleblowers reporting an unfounded complaint in good faith, or reporting a violation they were involved in. The study’s findings are most relevant to companies without a whistleblowing policy or those that intend to benchmark their policies, and to pan-European standard setters.     

Integrated reporting: an international overview

This article analyses the determinants associated with the use of the Integrated Report (IR) as a corporate reporting model for sustainability information. IRs provide information regarding the use and interdependence of different company resources. The previous literature has identified determinants behind the presentation of IRs at the country level (legal system, investor protection, economic development, cultural characteristics) as well as at the company level (size, industry, verification of the sustainability report). Our work contributes to the literature by using a novel statistical approach that addresses the likelihood of the non‐independence of data: companies in the same country are more similar to one another than are companies from different countries. Our results confirm significant inter‐country variance, which may be partially explained by the existence of specific regulations and the individualism vs. collectivism dimension. Although we confirm the effect of company‐level determinants, our results do not support the role of specific variables tested as determinants.     

Stakeholder influence on corporate strategies over time

Modern management reporting on its company's performance is influenced by individuals ethical considerations. Stakeholders philosophies have continued to change over the last 75 years affecting reporting systems for companies reporting information internally and externally. These fundamental changes in philosophy have affected how information is conveyed. We are not claiming that only one philosophical viewpoint dominates companies reporting practices, but there does appear to be a changing trend of philosophies building on one another. We use resource dependence theory in relationship to a decision-making model to explain changing stakeholders positions over time. This paper argues that six dominant philosophical theories have influenced the way individuals and organizations report financial and other information. Further, these philosophies then are depicted in a model that helps us to understand what influences companies to present themselves to the outside world. A vignette is used to depict changing philosophical views for several companies management report over 75 years.