Voluntary Sustainability Disclosures in Non-Listed Companies: An Exploratory Study on Motives and Practices
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Framework and Empirical Evidence
2.1. Voluntary Sustainability Disclosures: Concept
2.2. Motives for Voluntary Sustainability Disclosure
2.2.1. Meet Stakeholder’s Information Needs (Stakeholder Theory)
2.2.2. Manage Image and Reputation (Legitimacy Theory)
2.2.3. Signal the Quality of the Company (Signaling Theory)
2.2.4. Reduce Information Asymmetries and Agency Costs (Agency Theory)
2.2.5. Avoid Political Costs (Political Costs Theory)
2.2.6. Respond to Institutional Pressures (Institutional Theory)
2.2.7. Summary of the Motives for Voluntary Sustainability Disclosure
- Respond to sustainability information needs and expectations of specific stakeholders (stakeholder theory);
- Legitimize companies’ actions related to sustainability (legitimacy theory);
- Signal the companies’ positive sustainability performance to stakeholders (signaling theory);
- Reduce the information asymmetries and agency costs of the relationship between managers and capital providers (agency theory);
- Reduce wealth transfers due to political costs that may arise from poorer sustainability performance or disclosure (political costs theory);
- Respond to institutional pressures regarding both sustainability performance and disclosure through an isomorphic change process (institutional theory).
2.3. Reasons for Non-Disclosure (Proprietary Cost Theory)
3. Research Methods
3.1. Multiple Case Study
3.2. Data Collection, Analysis and Treatment
4. Results
4.1. Motives for the Voluntary Preparation of a Sustainability Report
4.2. Sustainability Disclosure Practices
4.2.1. Sustainability Reports
4.2.2. Sustainability Disclosures on the Webpages
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
C1 | C2 | C3 | C4 | C5 | Total Companies Disclosing the Item | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Environment (13 Items) Total Items by Company | 4 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 7 | |
Environmental policies or company concern for the environment | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
Environmental management, systems, and audit | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
Environmental training and certificates (e.g., ISO) | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Environmental awards | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
Pollution from business operations | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
Pollution arising from use of product | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Discussion of specific environmental laws and regulations | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Prevention or repair of damage to the environment | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Conservation of natural resources and recycling activities | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
Sustainability (any mention of sustainable development or social/environmental responsibility) | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
Environmental aesthetics | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Conservation of energy in the conduct of business operations (and investments in renewable energies) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
Energy (and water consumption) efficiency of products | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
2. Human Resources (14 Items) Total Items by Company | 2 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 4 | |
Employee remuneration | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Profit sharing and bonuses | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Employee share purchase schemes | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Employee benefits (insurance; healthcare and social assistance) | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Employee profiles | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Information on employee turnover | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Occupational health and safety | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
Employee development (training, volunteering actions outside the company) | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
Information on support for daytime care, maternity, and paternity leave | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Encouraging diversity (employment of minorities, disabled persons, and women) | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Employee morale | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Relationships with trade unions | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Awards/recognitions related to working conditions and reconciliation of work and family life | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
Activities with workers (Christmas party, holiday camps for children) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
3. Products and Customers (6 Items) Total Items by Company | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
Product safety | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Product quality | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
Disclosing of consumer safety practices | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Costumer complaints/satisfaction | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Provision for disabled, aged, and difficult-to-reach consumers | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Consumer (or product) awards | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
4. Community Involvement (6 Items) Total Items by Company | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 5 | |
Charitable donations and activities | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
Support for education (scholarships, conferences, seminars, and student internships) | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
Support for the arts, culture, and sports | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Support for public health initiatives, projects, and campaigns | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
Support for local activities, industry, and agriculture | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
Awards/recognitions (ex. “PME líder”) | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
5. Suppliers (1 Item) | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
Information for suppliers (purchasing requirements, evaluation criteria, code of conduct for suppliers) | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
Total (40 Items) | 11 | 4 | 17 | 8 | 18 |
References
- European Parliament and Council. Directive 2014/95/UE of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 Amending Directive 2013/34/UE as Regards Disclosure of Non-Financial and Diversity Information by Certain Large Undertakings and Groups. 2014. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32014L0095 (accessed on 31 August 2020).
- Tettamanzi, P.; Venturini, G.; Murgolo, M. Sustainability and financial accounting: A critical review on the ESG dynamics. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 16758–16761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ali, W.; Frynas, J.G.; Mahmood, Z. Determinants of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) disclosure in developed and developing countries: A literature review. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2017, 24, 273–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aqif, T.; Wahab, A. The institutionalisation of sustainability reporting in management practice: Evidence through action research. Sustain. Account. Manag. Policy J. 2022, 13, 362–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dienes, D.; Sassen, R.; Fischer, J. What are the drivers of sustainability reporting? A systematic review. Sustain. Account. Manag. Policy J. 2016, 7, 154–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fifka, M.S. Corporate Responsibility Reporting and its determinants in comparative perspective—A review of the empirical literature and a meta-analysis. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2013, 22, 1–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hahn, R.; Kühnen, M. Determinants of sustainability reporting: A review of results, trends, theory, and opportunities in an expanding field of research. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 59, 5–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, M.; Hassan, A.; Harrison, C.; Tarbert, H. CSR reporting: A review of research and agenda for future research. Manag. Res. Rev. 2020, 43, 1395–1419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chi, W.; Wu, S.J.; Zheng, Z. Determinants and consequences of voluntary corporate social responsibility disclosure: Evidence from private firms. Br. Account. Rev. 2020, 52, 100939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Girella, L.; Zambon, S.; Rossi, P. Reporting on sustainable development: A comparison of three Italian small and medium-sized enterprises. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2019, 26, 981–996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Massa, L.; Farneti, F.; Scappini, B. Developing a sustainability report in a small to medium enterprise: Process and consequences. Meditari Account. Res. 2015, 23, 62–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rossi, A.; Luque-Vílchez, M. The implementation of sustainability reporting in a small and medium enterprise and the emergence of integrated thinking. Meditari Account. Res. 2020, 29, 966–984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gray, R.; Owen, D.; Adams, C. Some theories for social accounting? A review essay and a tentative pedagogic categorisation of theorisations around social accounting. In Sustainability, Environmental Performance and Disclosures (Advances in Environmental Accounting and Management); Freedman, M., Jaggi, B., Eds.; Emerald Group Publishing Limited: Bingley, UK, 2010; Volume 4, pp. 1–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernando, S.; Lawrence, S. A theoretical framework for CSR practices: Integrating legitimacy theory, stakeholder theory and institutional theory. J. Theor. Account. 2014, 10, 149–178. [Google Scholar]
- Turzo, T.; Marzi, G.; Favino, C.; Terzani, S. Non-financial reporting research and practice: Lessons from the last decade. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 345, 131154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Christensen, H.B.; Hail, L.; Leuz, C. Mandatory CSR and sustainability reporting: Economic analysis and literature review. Rev. Account. Stud. 2021, 26, 1176–1248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eugénio, T.P.; Lourenço, I.C.; Morais, A.I. Sustainability strategies of the company TimorL: Extending the applicability of legitimacy theory. Manag. Environ. Qual. Int. J. 2013, 24, 570–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Branco, M.C.; Rodrigues, L.L. Factors influencing social responsibility disclosure by Portuguese companies. J. Bus. Ethics 2008, 83, 685–701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Monteiro, A.P.; Pereira, C.; Barbosa, F.M. Environmental disclosure on mandatory and voluntary reporting of Portuguese listed firms: The role of environmental certification, lucratively and corporate governance. Meditari Account. Res. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dias, A.; Rodrigues, L.L.; Craig, R.; Neves, M.E. Corporate social responsibility disclosure in small and medium-sized entities and large companies. Soc. Responsib. J. 2019, 15, 137–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferreira, C. Environmental accounting: The Portuguese case. Manag. Environ. Qual. Int. J. 2004, 15, 561–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Monteiro, S.M.S.; Aibar-Guzmán, B. Determinants of environmental disclosure in the annual reports of large companies operating in Portugal. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2010, 17, 185–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Branco, M.C.; Rodrigues, L.L. Social responsibility disclosure: A study of proxies for the public visibility of Portuguese banks. Br. Account. Rev. 2008, 40, 161–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Commission. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2013/34/EU, Directive 2004/109/EC, Directive 2006/43/EC and Regulation (EU) N. 537/2014, as Regards Corporate Sustainability Reporting. 2021. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52021PC0189&from=EN (accessed on 9 January 2022).
- Armitage, S.; Marston, C. Corporate disclosure, cost of capital and reputation: Evidence from finance directors. Br. Account. Rev. 2008, 40, 314–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Scaltrito, D. Voluntary disclosure in Italy: Firm-specific determinants an empirical analysis of Italian listed companies. EuroMed J. Bus. 2016, 11, 272–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Meek, G.K.; Roberts, C.B.; Gray, S.J. Factors influencing voluntary annual report disclosures by U.S., U.K. and continental European multinational corporations. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 1995, 26, 555–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kolk, A. Sustainability, accountability and corporate governance: Exploring multinationals’ reporting practices. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2008, 17, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bouten, L.; Everaert, P.; Roberts, R.W. How a two-step approach discloses different determinants of voluntary social and environmental reporting. J. Bus. Financ. Account. 2012, 39, 567–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nikolaeva, R.; Bicho, M. The role of institutional and reputational factors in the voluntary adoption of corporate social responsibility reporting standards. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2011, 39, 136–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clarkson, P.; Li, Y.; Richardson, G.; Tsang, A. Causes and consequences of voluntary assurance of CSR reports: International evidence involving Dow Jones Sustainability index inclusion and firm valuation. Account. Audit. Account. J. 2019, 32, 2451–2474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akbaş, H.E.; Canikli, S. Determinants of voluntary greenhouse gas emission disclosure: An empirical investigation on Turkish firms. Sustainability 2019, 11, 107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ching, H.Y.; Gerab, F. Sustainability reports in Brazil through the lens of signaling, legitimacy and stakeholder theories. Soc. Responsib. J. 2017, 13, 95–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matuszak, Ł.; Różańska, E. Online corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure in the banking industry: Evidence from Poland. Soc. Responsib. J. 2020, 16, 1191–1214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adams, C.A.; Frost, G.R. Integrating sustainability reporting into management practices. Account. Forum 2008, 32, 288–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Freeman, R.E. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach; Pitman: Zionsville, IN, USA, 1984. [Google Scholar]
- Freeman, R.E.; Evan, W.M. Corporate governance: A stakeholder interpretation. J. Behav. Econ. 1990, 19, 337–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mitchell, R.K.; Agle, B.R.; Wood, D.J. Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1997, 22, 853–886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roberts, R.W. Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An application of stakeholder theory. Account. Organ. Soc. 1992, 17, 595–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Herremans, I.M.; Nazari, J.A.; Mahmoudian, F. Stakeholder relationships, engagement, and sustainability reporting. J. Bus. Ethics 2016, 138, 417–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boshnak, H.A. Determinants of corporate social and environmental voluntary disclosure in Saudi listed firms. J. Financ. Rep. Account. 2021. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Orazalin, N.; Mahmood, M. Determinants of GRI-based sustainability reporting: Evidence from an emerging economy. J. Account. Emerg. Econ. 2019, 10, 140–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caby, J.; Ziane, Y.; Lamarque, E. The determinants of voluntary climate change disclosure commitment and quality in the banking industry. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2020, 161, 120282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amoako, K.O.; Amoako, I.O.; Tuffour, J.; Marfo, E.O. Formal and informal sustainability reporting: An insight from a mining company’s subsidiary in Ghana. J. Financ. Rep. Account. 2021. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deegan, C. Introduction: The legitimising effect of social and environmental disclosures—A theoretical foundation. Account. Audit. Account. J. 2002, 15, 282–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suchman, M.C. Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1995, 20, 571–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reynolds, M.; Yuthas, K. Moral discourse and corporate social responsibility reporting. J. Bus. Ethics 2008, 78, 47–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burlea-Schiopoiu, A.; Popa, I. Legitimacy Theory. In Encyclopedia of Corporate Social Responsibility; Idowu, S.O., Capaldi, N., Zu, L., Gupta, A., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013; pp. 1579–1584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Patten, D.M. Exposure, legitimacy, and social disclosure. J. Account. Public Policy 1991, 10, 297–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gamerschlag, R.; Möller, K.; Verbeeten, F. Determinants of voluntary CSR disclosure: Empirical evidence from Germany. Rev. Manag. Sci. 2010, 5, 233–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jaggi, B.; Allini, A.; Macchioni, R.; Zagaria, C. The factors motivating voluntary disclosure of carbon information: Evidence based on Italian listed companies. Organ. Environ. 2018, 31, 178–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Byrd, J.; Hickman, K.; Baker, C.R.; Cohanier, B. Corporate Social Responsibility reporting in controversial industries. Int. Rev. Account. Bank. Financ. 2016, 8, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grougiou, V.; Dedoulis, E.; Leventis, S. Corporate social responsibility reporting and organizational stigma: The case of “sin” industries. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 905–914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heflin, F.; Wallace, D. The BP oil spill: Shareholder wealth effects and environmental disclosures. J. Bus. Financ. Account. 2017, 44, 337–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, L. The influence of institutional contexts on the relationship between voluntary carbon disclosure and carbon emission performance. Account. Financ. 2019, 59, 1235–1264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hummel, K.; Schlick, C. The relationship between sustainability performance and sustainability disclosure—Reconciling voluntary disclosure theory and legitimacy theory. J. Account. Public Policy 2016, 35, 455–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Connelly, B.L.; Certo, S.T.; Ireland, R.D.; Reutzel, C.R. Signaling theory: A review and assessment. J. Manag. 2011, 37, 39–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spence, M. Job Market Signaling. Q. J. Econ. 1973, 87, 355–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kirmani, A.; Rao, A.R. No pain, no gain: A critical review of the literature on signaling unobservable product quality. J. Mark. 2000, 64, 66–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karaman, A.S.; Kilic, M.; Uyar, A. Green logistics performance and sustainability reporting practices of the logistics sector: The moderating effect of corporate governance. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 258, 120718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahoney, L.S.; Thorne, L.; Cecil, L.; LaGore, W. A research note on standalone corporate social responsibility reports: Signaling or greenwashing? Crit. Perspect. Account. 2013, 24, 350–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fama, E.F.; Jensen, M.C. Separation of ownership and control. J. Law Econ. 1983, 26, 301–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jensen, M.; Meckling, W. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. J. Financ. Econ. 1976, 3, 305–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Diamond, D.W.; Verrecchia, R.E. Disclosure, liquidity, and the cost of capital. J. Financ. 1991, 46, 1325–1359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, O.; Verrecchia, R.E. Market liquidity and volume around earnings announcements. J. Account. Econ. 1994, 17, 41–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verrecchia, R.E. Essays on disclosure. J. Account. Econ. 2001, 32, 97–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carp, M.; Pavaloaia, L.; Afrasinei, M.B.; Georgescu, I.E. Is sustainability reporting a business strategy for firm’s growth? Empirical study on the Romanian capital market. Sustainability 2019, 11, 658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gjergji, R.; Vena, L.; Sciascia, S.; Cortesi, A. The effects of environmental, social and governance disclosure on the cost of capital in small and medium enterprises: The role of family business status. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2021, 30, 683–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalu, J.U.; Buang, A.; Aliagha, G. Determinants of voluntary carbon disclosure in the corporate real estate sector of Malaysia. J. Environ. Manag. 2016, 182, 519–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Watts, R.L.; Zimmermann, J.L. Towards a positive theory of the determination of accounting standards. Account. Rev. 1978, 53, 112–134. [Google Scholar]
- Watts, R.L.; Zimmermann, J.L. Positive Accounting Theory; Prentice Hall: London, UK, 1986. [Google Scholar]
- Watts, R.L.; Zimmermann, J.L. Positive accounting theory: A ten year perspective. Account. Rev. 1990, 65, 131–156. [Google Scholar]
- Doonan, J.; Lanoie, P.; Laplante, B. Determinants of environmental performance in the Canadian pulp and paper industry: An assessment from inside the industry. Ecol. Econ. 2005, 55, 73–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Innes, R.; Sam, A.G. Voluntary pollution reductions and the enforcement of environmental law: An empirical study of the 33/50 program. J. Law Econ. 2008, 51, 271–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- DiMaggio, P.J.; Powell, W.W. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. Am. Sociol. Rev. 1983, 48, 146–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Oliver, C. Sustainable competitive advantage: Combining institutional and resource-based views. Strateg. Manag. J. 1997, 18, 697–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Carpenter, V.L.; Feroz, E.H. Institutional theory and accounting rule choice: An analysis of four US state governments’ decisions to adopt generally accepted accounting principles. Account. Organ. Soc. 2001, 26, 565–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meyer, J.W.; Rowan, B. Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. Am. J. Sociol. 1977, 83, 340–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- De Villiers, C.; Low, M.; Samkin, G. The institutionalisation of mining company sustainability disclosures. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 84, 51–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- De Villiers, C.; Alexander, D. The institutionalisation of corporate social responsibility reporting. Br. Account. Rev. 2014, 46, 198–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hedberg, C.-J.; Von Malmborg, F. The Global Reporting Initiative and corporate sustainability reporting in Swedish companies. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2003, 10, 153–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wijethilake, C.; Munir, R.; Appuhami, R. Strategic responses to institutional pressures for sustainability: The role of management control systems. Account. Audit. Account. J. 2017, 30, 1677–1710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bebbington, J.; Higgins, C.; Frame, B. Initiating sustainable development reporting: Evidence from New Zealand. Account. Audit. Account. J. 2009, 22, 588–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Stekelorum, R.; Laguir, I.; Elbaz, J. CSR disclosure and sustainable supplier management: A small to medium-sized enterprises perspective. Appl. Econ. 2018, 50, 5017–5030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bansal, P.; Kistruck, G. Seeing is (not) believing: Managing the impressions of the firm’s commitment to the natural environment. J. Bus. Ethics 2006, 67, 165–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Merkl-Davies, D.M.; Brennan, N. Discretionary disclosure strategies in corporate narratives: Incremental information or impression management? J. Account. Lit. 2007, 26, 116–196. [Google Scholar]
- Verrecchia, R.E. Discretionary disclosure. J. Account. Econ. 1983, 5, 179–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Healy, P.M.; Palepu, K.G. Information asymmetry, corporate disclosure, and the capital markets: A review of the empirical disclosure literature. J. Account. Econ. 2001, 31, 405–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stubbs, W.; Higgins, C.; Milne, M. Why do companies not produce sustainability reports? Bus. Strategy Environ. 2013, 22, 456–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dissanayake, D.; Kuruppu, S.; Qian, W.; Tilt, C. Barriers for sustainability reporting: Evidence from Indo-Pacific region. Meditari Account. Res. 2021, 29, 264–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krishnamurti, C.; Velayutham, E. The influence of board committee structures on voluntary disclosure of greenhouse gas emissions: Australian evidence. Pac. -Basin Financ. J. 2018, 50, 65–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, R.K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 4th ed.; Sage Publications: London, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Patton, M.Q. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, 4th ed.; Sage Publications: New York, NY, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
Sector | Total Assets | Turnover | Total Employees |
---|---|---|---|
Motorcycle, bicycle, and parts manufacturing | 58 M | 33 M | 253 |
Ceramic wall and floor tile manufacturing | 92 M | 73 M | 448 |
Plastic pipe and pipe fitting manufacturing | 75 M | 63 M | 430 |
Household non-electric appliances manufacturing | 126 M | 261 M | 1045 |
Industrial organic chemicals manufacturing | 337 M | 291 M | 382 |
Company | Interviewees Profile |
---|---|
C1 | Marketing Director Environmental Director |
C2 | Director of Quality, Environment and Occupational Safety |
C3 | Head of communication |
C4 | Chief Financial Officer |
C5 | Sustainability Officer |
Q1 | What were the reasons that led the company to voluntarily prepare a sustainability report? |
Q2 | How did the process of preparing the sustainability report begin and how has it evolved? |
Q3 | Which departments are involved in the preparation of the sustainability report? |
Q4 | Who are the stakeholders to whom the sustainability report is addressed? |
Q5 | How is the content of the sustainability report defined? |
Q6 | What are the advantages and disadvantages associated with sustainability reporting? |
Motives | Companies |
---|---|
Required by specific customers | C1 |
Required by the parent company | C2, C3 |
On the company’s own initiative | C4, C5 |
Stakeholders | Companies |
---|---|
Customers | C1, C2, C3, C4, C5 |
Community, local authorities, associations, scientific and academic community | C1, C3, C4, C5 |
Suppliers | C2, C3, C5 |
Shareholders | C2, C5 |
Banks | C5 |
Company | First Year for which the SR Was Prepared | Are the SRs Available on the Webpage? | Departments Involved in the Preparation of the SR | Content and Format of the SR |
---|---|---|---|---|
C1 | Biennium 2018–2019 | Yes (Biennium 2018–2019) | Quality, environment, and safety department. Human resources department. Marketing department. | Customers demand information on environmental issues and social issues such as working conditions and gender equality. The SR is structured in accordance with the Sustainable Development Pillars (social, environmental, and economic). |
C2 | 2013 | No | The SR is done by an external consultant, with support from: human resources department; environment and safety department; and purchasing department. | Follow the GRI Standards. |
C3 | 2015 | Yes (2019 and 2020) | Environmental department. Communication department. | Mention the SDG of United Nations. |
C4 | 2015 | Yes (From 2015 to 2018) | Marketing and communication department. | Follow the GRI Standards. |
C5 | 2014 | Yes (2016) | Innovation and sustainability department. | Follow the GRI Standards. Mention the SDG of United Nations. Present the matrix of materiality. |
C1 | C2 | C3 | C4 | C5 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Does the webpage have a standalone section labelled “CSR”, “Sustainability”, “Responsibility” or similar? What is the name of the tab/section? | No | No | Yes Our company > Our responsibility > Sustainability | Yes Sustainability | Yes Sustainability |
What are the tabs/sections where information about sustainability matters is available? | About the company | Certification | News and history | Communication > News | Sustainability > The factory > Environment |
News and events | Our company > Our responsibility > Sustainability | Sustainability > Environmental management system | Sustainability > Social responsibility | ||
Our company > Our responsibility > Safety, environmental protection and quality | Sustainability > Indicators | ||||
Is the sustainability report available on the webpage? What is the name of the tab/section? | Yes News and events | No | Yes Our company > Our responsibility > Sustainability | Yes Company > Annual reports | Yes Sustainability > Social responsibility > Sustainability report |
Are the annual reports, management reports or financial statements available on the webpage? What is the name of the tab/section? | No | No | Yes (Annual report 2020) Our company > The group in the world | Yes (Annual reports from 2007 to 2019; Integrated report 2020) Company > Annual reports | Yes (Annual report 2016; Integrated reports from 2017 to 2020) Company > Financial information |
Company | C1 | C2 | C3 | C4 | C5 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Panel A—Sustainability disclosures on the webpages | |||||
1. Environment | 4 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. Human resources | 2 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 4 |
3. Products and customers | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
4. Community involvement | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
5. Suppliers | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Total | 11 | 4 | 17 | 8 | 18 |
Panel B—Stakeholders of sustainability reports | |||||
Customers | x | x | x | x | x |
Community, local authorities, associations, scientific and academic community | x | x | x | x | |
Suppliers | x | x | x | ||
Shareholders | x | x | |||
Banks | x |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Carmo, C.; Miguéis, M. Voluntary Sustainability Disclosures in Non-Listed Companies: An Exploratory Study on Motives and Practices. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7365. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127365
Carmo C, Miguéis M. Voluntary Sustainability Disclosures in Non-Listed Companies: An Exploratory Study on Motives and Practices. Sustainability. 2022; 14(12):7365. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127365
Chicago/Turabian StyleCarmo, Cecília, and Mercedes Miguéis. 2022. "Voluntary Sustainability Disclosures in Non-Listed Companies: An Exploratory Study on Motives and Practices" Sustainability 14, no. 12: 7365. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127365