Corporate social responsibility and firm financial risk reduction: On the moderating role of the legal environment

Approaching the institutional environment through its regulative component, we distinguish between shareholder‐oriented and stakeholder‐oriented countries. Identifying first this classification with the distinction between common law versus civil law countries and using a large sample of 5,716 firm‐year observations that represents 1,169 individual firms in 25 countries between 2001 and 2011, we show that Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) significantly reduces firms’ idiosyncratic risk in civil law countries but not in common law countries. Using then a more direct classification based on shareholder and employee protection scores, our findings suggest that CSR negatively affects firms’ idiosyncratic and systematic risks only in less shareholder‐oriented and more stakeholder‐oriented countries, respectively. These findings are similar in the different components of CSR with two notable exceptions: a high score in corporate governance reduces firm risk only in common law countries, and community involvement increases idiosyncratic risk in more shareholder‐oriented and less stakeholder‐oriented countries, respectively. Taken together, our results strongly support the view that the relationship between CSR and financial risk is moderated by the institutional context of the firm.     

Corporate social responsibility and financial fraud: evidence from China

This paper investigates the impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on corporate financial fraud in China. We find that CSR scores are negatively associated with fraudulent financial activities, suggesting that CSR firms are less likely to engage in financial fraud. The results also indicate that the negative relation is more significant for CSR performance than CSR disclosure. Additionally, we demonstrate that the negative effect of CSR is more pronounced for firms with voluntary CSR practices, continuous CSR engagements, financial pressure and internal control weaknesses. Overall, we find that CSR is an ethical behaviour that reduces financial misconduct.     

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.     

Awe culture and corporate social responsibility: Evidence from China

By proxying ‘awe culture’ (i.e., reverence for life and ethical behaviour) with regional induced abortion rates, we examine the impact of awe culture on corporate social responsibility (CSR) in a sample of Chinese firms. We find that firms located in areas with higher induced abortion rates spend less funds on CSR activities and obtain lower CSR scores. The findings remain intact after an array of robustness tests. Further analysis shows that the effect of awe culture on CSR is more pronounced in areas with weaker law enforcement and where the local government emphasises economic growth targets. However, the effect becomes insignificant when firms are well-represented by top executives with overseas experience, foreign directors, and a high proportion of female board members. The significance of the effect also diminishes for non-state-owned firms, and firms with higher institutional ownership and higher cash holdings. Moreover, the lack of awe culture attenuates the positive impact of CSR on firm value. Overall, we document that awe culture, as an informal institution, shapes CSR behaviours.     

Corporate social responsibility reporting in financial institutions: Evidence from Euronext

The legitimacy, the identity and the social impact of financial institutions go beyond the generation of revenues for providers of capital, through financial intermediation. Financial institutions bear significant corporate social responsibility (CSR). We produce measures of CSR disclosure and explore the determinants of CSR disclosure practices in a cross section of financial institutions. Working with financial companies whose stocks are listed in the Euronext stock exchange, we find that the extent of disclosure of CSR practices is greater in large companies and also in companies of greater financial leverage. Therefore, increased corporate visibility and financial risk increase stakeholder demand for transparency on the social impact of financial institutions and their CSR practices.     

Corporate social responsibility and corporate tax avoidance: The channel effect of consumer awareness

This paper investigates the relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate tax avoidance and the impact of consumer awareness on the constructs. We show that consumer awareness has the effect of decreasing the positive relation between CSR ratings and tax avoidance levels. Our findings are robust to various measures of our constructs. Collectively, the findings of this study lend credence to the risk-management view of CSR and demonstrate that consumer awareness acts as a behavioral intervention and governance mechanism to help mitigate corporate hypocrisy.     

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.     

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.     

Corporate social responsibility and dividend policy

Using a sample of 22,839 US firm-year observations over the 1991–2012 period, we find that high CSR firms pay more dividends than low CSR firms. The analysis of individual components of CSR provides strong support for this main finding: five of the six individual dimensions are also associated with high dividend payout. When analyzing the stability of dividend payout, our results show that socially irresponsible firms adjust dividends more rapidly than socially responsible firms do: dividend payout is more stable in high CSR firms. These findings are robust to alternative assumptions and model specifications, alternative measures of dividend, additional control, and several approaches to address endogeneity. Overall, our results are consistent with the expectation that high CSR firms may use dividend policy to manage the agency problems related to overinvestment in CSR.     

Corporate social responsibility committees and the use of corporate social responsibility assurance services

This study examines whether corporate social responsibility (CSR) committees associate with the external assurance of CSR reports. Specifically, we consider the presence and effectiveness of CSR committees. Using a sample of Australian firms over the period 2004–2016, we show the mere presence of a CSR committee is not related to the external assurance of CSR. However, CSR committee effectiveness is positively related. In addition, firms with higher CSR committee effectiveness are more likely to seek external assurance provided by the Big4 accountancy firms and acquire financial audit and CSR assurance services from the same provider. Taken together, CSR committee effectiveness plays an active role in CSR assurance services. Our results are particularly relevant to those with interests in understanding the demand and choice of external CSR assurance services, as well as the impact of corporate governance mechanisms on these services.     

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.     

The influence of corporate social responsibility on investment efficiency and innovation

We examine two important channels through which corporate social responsibility (CSR) affects firm value: investment efficiency and innovation. We find that firms with higher CSR performance invest more efficiently: these firms are less prone to invest in negative net present value (NPV) projects (overinvestment) and less prone to forego positive NPV projects (underinvestment). We also find that firms with higher CSR performance generate more patents and patent citations. Mediation analysis indicates that firms with higher CSR performance are more profitable and valuable, consequences partially attributable to efficient investments and innovation. These results, robust to alternate model specifications, lend support to enlightened stakeholder theory.     

Corporate social responsibility and corruption risk: A global perspective

This paper extends our knowledge on corporate corruption risk by examining whether and to what extent corporate social responsibility (CSR) affects firm-level corruption risk. Using a cross-country sample of major multinational firms, we find that firm-level CSR mitigates corruption risk. On closer examination, we find that the relationship between CSR and corruption risk is mediated by country-level variables such as institutional quality, protection of minority shareholders’ rights, stock market development and freedom of the press. Further, we find that in emerging countries, CSR mitigates corruption risk only when the country-level institutional quality is high and citizens enjoy press freedom. Our findings suggest that both formal institutions and the quality of civil society influence the effect of CSR on corruption risk. Our results remain robust to controls for endogeneity and potential sample selection bias.     

Cross-border mergers and acquisitions and corporate social responsibility: Evidence from Chinese listed firms

This study examines the impact of cross-border mergers and acquisitions (M&As) on acquirers’ corporate social responsibility (CSR). Based on a sample of Chinese listed firms, we find that firms with cross-border M&A activities experience an improvement in subsequent CSR performance. Specifically, the CSR rating is approximately 8.24% higher in firms with cross-border M&As than in those without such activities. We also find that this positive influence is more pronounced in firms with low initial CSR ratings than in those with high initial CSR ratings at the time when a cross-border M&A deal is completed. Additional analyses reveal that this positive effect is mainly driven by the target firms from countries with high social preference relative to China and that the enhancement in CSR driven by cross-border M&As translates into higher operating performance and easier access to finance. Overall, our findings demonstrate that cross-border M&As can serve as a critical channel for acquirers from a country with low institutional quality to build a better reputation through environmentally friendly behaviour and socially responsible engagement, and therefore gain capital market benefits.     

Corporate social responsibility,country-level predispositions,and the consequences of choosing a level of disclosure

We study the different levels of corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosures of the largest European firms. We find that firms are more predisposed to disclose more CSR information in countries with better investor protection, higher levels of democracy, more effective government services, higher quality regulations, more press freedom, and a lower commitment to environmental policies. Our analysis of the association of different levels of CSR disclosure with share prices indicates that a high level of CSR disclosure is associated with higher share prices, whereas a low level of CSR disclosure in sensitive industries is associated with lower share prices (compared to no disclosure). These results are also present when we analyse changes in CSR disclosure and are robust to the inclusion of an accounting quality measure in our model. The overall effect of the association of higher levels of CSR disclosure with higher share prices is stronger in countries with more democracy, more government effectiveness, better regulatory quality, and more press freedom. Therefore, market participants find CSR disclosures more informative in countries where investors are in a better position to voice their concerns and where there is better regulation and more effective government implementation of regulations.     

Using corporate social responsibility performance to evaluate financial disclosure credibility

Due to the paucity of immediate and direct information about financial disclosure credibility, it is often difficult for investors to assess the credibility of financial disclosures (e.g. whether reported earnings are biased). Given this situation, the present study proposes and finds that investors use additional cues, such as information about corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance, to form overall impressions about management's honesty, credibility, and trustworthiness. Similar to other findings in the halo effect literature, we find that these overall impressions subsequently influence both investors' assessments of financial disclosure credibility and the prices they are willing to pay for a company's stock. The findings support the theoretical framework on financial disclosure credibility by (1) showing that management credibility is an important tool that investors use to assess disclosure credibility and (2) suggesting that management credibility is a multidimensional latent construct for which CSR performance can be one of several relevant indicators.     

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.     

Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosures: Evidence from India

Over the last few decades, a number of studies, mostly in the western countries, have investigated the nature and frequency of corporate social responsibility disclosures, their patterns and trends, and their general relationships with corporate size and profitability. This study seeks to extend the knowledge regarding the relationship between a number of financial and non-financial corporate characteristics and the level of social responsibility disclosures based on an extensive sample of top Indian companies. Corporate size and industry category are found to correlate with the corporate social disclosures of the companies and the corporate reputation as recognised through awards and social ratings has also been observed to be a significant factor that influences the social disclosures made by the Indian companies.     

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.     

Value Maximisation, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function

This paper examines the role of the corporate objective function in corporate productivity and efficiency, social welfare, and the accountability of managers and directors. I argue that since it is logically impossible to maximise in more than one dimension, purposeful behaviour requires a single valued objective function. Two hundred years of work in economics and finance implies that in the absence of externalities and monopoly (and when all goods are priced), social welfare is maximised when each firm in an economy maximises its total market value. Total value is not just the value of the equity but also includes the market values of all other financial claims including debt, preferred stock, and warrants. In sharp contrast stakeholder theory, argues that managers should make decisions so as to take account of the interests of all stakeholders in a firm (including not only financial claimants, but also employees, customers, communities, governmental officials and under some interpretations the environment, terrorists and blackmailers). Because the advocates of stakeholder theory refuse to specify how to make the necessary tradeoffs among these competing interests they leave managers with a theory that makes it impossible for them to make purposeful decisions. With no way to keep score, stakeholder theory makes managers unaccountable for their actions. It seems clear that such a theory can be attractive to the self interest of managers and directors. Creating value takes more than acceptance of value maximisation as the organisational objective. As a statement of corporate purpose or vision, value maximisation is not likely to tap into the energy and enthusiasm of employees and managers to create value. Seen in this light, change in long‐term market value becomes the scorecard that managers, directors, and others use to assess success or failure of the organisation. The choice of value maximisation as the corporate scorecard must be complemented by a corporate vision, strategy and tactics that unite participants in the organisation in its struggle for dominance in its competitive arena. A firm cannot maximise value if it ignores the interest of its stakeholders. I offer a proposal to clarify what I believe is the proper relation between value maximisation and stakeholder theory. I call it enlightened value maximisation, and it is identical to what I call enlightened stakeholder theory. Enlightened value maximisation utilises much of the structure of stakeholder theory but accepts maximisation of the long run value of the firm as the criterion for making the requisite tradeoffs among its stakeholders. Managers, directors, strategists, and management scientists can benefit from enlightened stakeholder theory. Enlightened stakeholder theory specifies long‐term value maximisation or value seeking as the firm’s objective and therefore solves the problems that arise from the multiple objectives that accompany traditional stakeholder theory. I also discuss the Balanced Scorecard, the managerial equivalent of stakeholder theory. The same conclusions hold. Balanced Scorecard theory is flawed because it presents managers with a scorecard which gives no score—that is, no single‐valued measure of how they have performed. Thus managers evaluated with such a system (which can easily have two dozen measures and provides no information on the tradeoffs between them) have no way to make principled or purposeful decisions. The solution is to define a true (single dimensional) score for measuring performance for the organisation or division (and it must be consistent with the organisation’s strategy). Given this we then encourage managers to use measures of the drivers of performance to understand better how to maximise their score. And as long as their score is defined properly, (and for lower levels in the organisation it will generally not be value) this will enhance their contribution to the firm.