Sustainability reporting nexus to corporate governance in scholarly literature
-
Author(s)Oleh PaskoLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6275-5885
,
Fuli ChenLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3929-3651
,
Tetyana KutsLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8389-6070
,
Inna SharkoLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3875-2323
,
Natalia RyzhikovaLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3019-8172
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ee.13(1).2022.06
-
Article InfoVolume 13 2022, Issue #1, pp. 61-78
- Cited by
- 830 Views
-
187 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Sustainability reporting has become a practice of the majority and is decided by boards of directors as the supreme governing body in the decision-making process of companies. The paper provides a high-view picture and visualizes research to portray the historical shifts in sustainability reporting nexus to corporate governance through an analysis utilizing CiteSpace software on 935 articles published in Web of Science Core Collection from 2009 to 2021.
The number of papers in the area has expanded, especially since 2013 (a branching point), while the study determines a type of bifurcation spot (the year 2017) that evinces the SR-CG field maturity. The study determined the dominant countries through affiliated to them researchers (the United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, China and Australia), the most esteemed journals (Journal of Business Ethics, Business Strategy and the Environment and Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal), and the major co-occurrence of hot keywords (carbon disclosure project, environmental disclosure quality, integrated reporting, financial performance, foreign director, environmental reporting, public sector, sustainability assurance statement).
The paper identifies principal issues where SR-CG research lags (dearth of those research in developing economies and geographical limitation of research) and unravels uncharted so far domains (jurisdictions-related studies) in the realm. Future research in the realm is likely to focus on ESG, disclosures and governance performance, as well as on specific areas (geography, industry, etc.), and will explore in depth the role of multiple factors together. This papers indicate the growing convergence between SR and CG in literature, and given predominance of ‘SR as a function of CG’ approach a more stalwart and sound CG framework could bring about more tenable SR practices. The paper puts forward an agenda for advancing forthcoming research in the realm of SR-CG interdependence.
Acknowledgment
This paper is co-funded by European Union through the European Education and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA) within the project “EU BEST PRACTICE OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL ACCOUNTING AND SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING” 101047667 — EULASTING — ERASMUS-JMO-2021-HEI-TCH-RSCH https://bit.ly/3Bbvquw
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)G34, M14, Q56
-
References78
-
Tables10
-
Figures7
-
- Figure 1. Summary of the overall research methodology employed
- Figure 2. Number of publications (2009–2021) forming the studies’ sample
- Figure 3. Number of articles in each country
- Figure 4. Co-Cited journal
- Figure 5. Map of articles published by institutions
- Figure 6. Co-Cited article map
- Figure 7. Keyword clustering map
-
- Table 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria of sample selection
- Table 2. The search formula used in the study
- Table 3. Top 20 countries in the number of articles
- Table 4. Statistics of cited journals
- Table 5. Number of articles published by authors
- Table 6. Statistics of the number of references cited
- Table 7. Keyword clustering results
- Table 8. Future research directions
- Table A1. Statistics on the number of articles published by institutions
- Table B1. The top three cited and three papers with the highest Burst value
-
- Adams, C. A. (2015). The International Integrated Reporting Council: A call to action. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 27, 23-28.
- Adams, C. A. (2020). Sustainability Reporting and Value Creation. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, 40(3), 191-197.
- Adams, C. A., & Whelan, G. (2009). Conceptualising future change in corporate sustainability reporting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 22(1), 118-143.
- Ahn, J. S., Assaf, A. G., Josiassen, A., Baker, M. A., Lee, S., Kock, F., & Tsionas, M. G. (2020). Narcissistic CEOs and corporate social responsibility: Does the role of an outside board of directors matter? International Journal of Hospitality Management, 85, 102350.
- Ali, W., Frynas, J. G., & Mahmood, Z. (2017). Determinants of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Disclosure in Developed and Developing Countries: A Literature Review. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 24(4), 273-294.
- Amran, A., Lee, S. P., & Devi, S. S. (2014). The Influence of Governance Structure and Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility Toward Sustainability Reporting Quality. Business Strategy and the Environment, 23(4), 217-235.
- Baboukardos, D., & Rimmel, G. (2016). Value relevance of accounting information under an integrated reporting approach: A research note. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 35(4), 437-452.
- Barth, M. E., Cahan, S. F., Chen, L., & Venter, E. R. (2017). The economic consequences associated with integrated report quality: Capital market and real effects. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 62, 43-64.
- Ben-Amar, W., Chang, M., & McIlkenny, P. (2017). Board Gender Diversity and Corporate Response to Sustainability Initiatives: Evidence from the Carbon Disclosure Project. Journal of Business Ethics, 142(2), 369-383.
- Bernardi, C., & Stark, A. W. (2018). Environmental, social and governance disclosure, integrated reporting, and the accuracy of analyst forecasts. The British Accounting Review, 50(1), 16-31.
- Bornmann, L., & Wohlrabe, K. (2019). Normalisation of citation impact in economics. Scientometrics, 120(2), 841-884.
- Bruna, M. G., Đặng, R., Houanti, L., Sahut, J.-M., & Simioni, M. (2022). By what way women on corporate boards influence corporate social performance? Evidence from a semiparametric panel model. Finance Research Letters, 49, 103048.
- Chen, C., Ibekwe-SanJuan, F., & Hou, J. (2010). The structure and dynamics of cocitation clusters: A multiple-perspective cocitation analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(7), 1386-1409.
- Clarkson, P. M., Li, Y., Richardson, G. D., & Vasvari, F. P. (2008). Revisiting the relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: An empirical analysis. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33(4-5), 303-327.
- Correa-Garcia, J. A., Garcia-Benau, M. A., & Garcia-Meca, E. (2020). Corporate governance and its implications for sustainability reporting quality in Latin American business groups. Journal of Cleaner Production, 260, 121142.
- Dam, L., & Scholtens, B. (2012). Does Ownership Type Matter for Corporate Social Responsibility? Corporate Governance: An International Review, 20(3), 233-252.
- De Villiers, C., Rinaldi, L., & Unerman, J. (2014). Integrated Reporting: Insights, gaps and an agenda for future research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 27(7), 1042-1067.
- de Villiers, C., Venter, E. R., & Hsiao, P.-C. K. (2017). Integrated reporting: Background, measurement issues, approaches and an agenda for future research. Accounting & Finance, 57(4), 937-959.
- Dhaliwal, D. S., Li, O. Z., Tsang, A., & Yang, Y. G. (2011). Voluntary Nonfinancial Disclosure and the Cost of Equity Capital: The Initiation of Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting. The Accounting Review, 86(1), 59-100.
- Dong, W., Dong, X., & Lv, X. (2022). How does ownership structure affect corporate environmental responsibility? Evidence from the manufacturing sector in China. Energy Economics, 112, 106112.
- Dumay, J., Bernardi, C., Guthrie, J., & Demartini, P. (2016). Integrated reporting: A structured literature review. Accounting Forum, 40(3), 166-185.
- Fifka, M. S. (2013). Corporate Responsibility Reporting and its Determinants in Comparative Perspective – a Review of the Empirical Literature and a Meta-analysis. Business Strategy and the Environment, 22(1), 1-35.
- Flower, J. (2015). The International Integrated Reporting Council: A story of failure. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 27, 1-17.
- Frias-Aceituno, J. V., Rodriguez-Ariza, L., & Garcia-Sanchez, I. (2013). The Role of the Board in the Dissemination of Integrated Corporate Social Reporting. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 20(4), 219-233.
- Fuente, J. A., García-Sánchez, I. M., & Lozano, M. B. (2017). The role of the board of directors in the adoption of GRI guidelines for the disclosure of CSR information. Journal of Cleaner Production, 141, 737-750.
- Gao, H., Ding, X.-H., & Wu, S. (2020). Exploring the domain of open innovation: Bibliometric and content analyses. Journal of Cleaner Production, 275, 122580.
- Garcia-Sanchez, I., Hussain, N., Khan, S. A., & Martínez-Ferrero, J. (2020). Managerial entrenchment, corporate social responsibility, and earnings management. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(4), 1818-1833.
- Garriga, E., & Melé, D. (2004). Corporate Social Responsibility Theories: Mapping the Territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1/2), 51-71.
- Gerwing, T., Kajüter, P., & Wirth, M. (2022). The role of sustainable corporate governance in mandatory sustainability reporting quality. Journal of Business Economics, 92(3), 517-555.
- Hong, J., Lee, J., & Roh, T. (2022). The effects of CEO narcissism on corporate social responsibility and irresponsibility. Managerial and Decision Economics, 43(6), 1926-1940.
- Issah, O., & Rodrigues, L. L. (2021). Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Tax Aggressiveness: A Scientometric Analysis of the Existing Literature to Map the Future. Sustainability, 13(11), 6225.
- Jain, T., & Jamali, D. (2016). Looking Inside the Black Box: The Effect of Corporate Governance on Corporate Social Responsibility. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 24(3), 253-273.
- Jin, R., Zou, P. X. W., Piroozfar, P., Wood, H., Yang, Y., Yan, L., & Han, Y. (2019). A science mapping approach based review of construction safety research. Safety Science, 113, 285-297.
- Jizi, M. (2017). The Influence of Board Composition on Sustainable Development Disclosure. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(5), 640-655.
- Jizi, M. I., Salama, A., Dixon, R., & Stratling, R. (2014). Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure: Evidence from the US Banking Sector. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(4), 601-615.
- Junior, R. M., Best, P. J., & Cotter, J. (2014). Sustainability Reporting and Assurance: A Historical Analysis on a World-Wide Phenomenon. Journal of Business Ethics, 120(1), 1-11.
- Khan, A., Muttakin, M. B., & Siddiqui, J. (2013). Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosures: Evidence from an Emerging Economy. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(2), 207-223.
- Kiliç, M., Kuzey, C., & Uyar, A. (2015). The impact of ownership and board structure on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) reporting in the Turkish banking industry. Corporate Governance, 15(3), 357-374.
- Kolk, A. (2008). Sustainability, accountability and corporate governance: exploring multinationals’ reporting practices. Business Strategy and the Environment, 17(1), 1-15.
- Kolk, A., & Perego, P. (2008). Determinants of the adoption of sustainability assurance statements: an international investigation. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19(3), 182-198.
- Kordsachia, O., Focke, M., & Velte, P. (2022). Do sustainable institutional investors contribute to firms’ environmental performance? Empirical evidence from Europe. Review of Managerial Science, 16(5), 1409-1436.
- KPMG. (2020). The time has come. KPMG Survey of Sustainability Reporting 2020.
- Kuzey, C., & Uyar, A. (2017). Determinants of sustainability reporting and its impact on firm value: Evidence from the emerging market of Turkey. Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 27-39.
- La Torre, M., Sabelfeld, S., Blomkvist, M., & Dumay, J. (2020). Rebuilding trust: sustainability and non-financial reporting and the European Union regulation. Meditari Accountancy Research, 28(5), 701-725.
- Lee, K.-W., & Yeo, G. H.-H. (2016). The association between integrated reporting and firm valuation. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 47(4), 1221-1250.
- Leydesdorff, L., & Milojević, S. (2012). Scientometrics.
- Liao, L., Lin, T. (Philip), & Zhang, Y. (2018). Corporate Board and Corporate Social Responsibility Assurance: Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics, 150(1), 211-225.
- Liao, L., Luo, L., & Tang, Q. (2015). Gender diversity, board independence, environmental committee and greenhouse gas disclosure. The British Accounting Review, 47(4), 409-424.
- Maddi, A., & Sapinho, D. (2022). Article processing charges, altmetrics and citation impact: Is there an economic rationale? Scientometrics.
- Makarenko, I., Sukhonos, V., Zhuravlyova, I., Legenchuk, S., & Szołno, O. (2020). Sustainability reporting assessment for quality and compliance: the case of Ukrainian banks’ management reports. Banks and Bank Systems, 15(2), 117-129.
- Masud, M. A. K., Nurunnabi, M., & Bae, S. M. (2018). The effects of corporate governance on environmental sustainability reporting: empirical evidence from South Asian countries. Asian Journal of Sustainability and Social Responsibility, 3(1), 3.
- Mazutis, D., Hanly, K., & Eckardt, A. (2022). Sustainability (Is Not) in the Boardroom: Evidence and Implications of Attentional Voids. Sustainability, 14(14), 8391.
- Melloni, G., Caglio, A., & Perego, P. (2017). Saying more with less? Disclosure conciseness, completeness and balance in Integrated Reports. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 36(3), 220-238.
- Michelon, G., Pilonato, S., & Ricceri, F. (2015). CSR reporting practices and the quality of disclosure: An empirical analysis. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 33, 59-78.
- Minciullo, M., Zaccone, M. C., & Pedrini, M. (2022). The Antecedents of Corporate Sustainability Performance: A Study on Generic and Sustainability-Related Corporate Governance Mechanisms. Sustainability, 14(15), 9761.
- Mingers, J., & Yang, L. (2017). Evaluating journal quality: A review of journal citation indicators and ranking in business and management. European Journal of Operational Research, 257(1), 323-337.
- Pasko, O., Balla, I., Levytska, I., & Semenyshena, N. (2021a). Accountability on Sustainability in Central and Eastern Europe: An Empirical Assessment of Sustainability-Related Assurance. Comparative Economic Research. Central and Eastern Europe, 24(3), 27-52.
- Pasko, O., Chen, F., Oriekhova, A., Brychko, A., & Shalyhina, I. (2021b). Mapping the Literature on Sustainability Reporting: A Bibliometric Analysis Grounded in Scopus and Web of Science Core Collection. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 10(1), 303.
- Pasko, O., Chen, F., Proskurina, N., Mao, R., Gryn, V., & Pushkar, I. (2021c). Are corporate social responsibility active firms less involved in earnings management? Empirical evidence from China. Business: Theory and Practice, 22(2), 504-516.
- Pasko, O., Zhang, L., Bezverkhyi, K., Nikytenko, D., & Khromushyna, L. (2021d). Does external assurance on CSR reporting contribute to its higher quality? Empirical evidence from China. Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 18(4), 309-325.
- Pasko, O., Zhang, L., Tuzhyk, K., Proskurina, N., & Gryn, V. (2021e). Do sustainability reporting conduct and corporate governance attributes relate? Empirical evidence from China. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 19(4), 110-123.
- Peters, G. F., & Romi, A. M. (2015). The association between sustainability governance characteristics and the assurance of corporate sustainability reports. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 34(1), 163-198.
- Pistoni, A., Songini, L., & Bavagnoli, F. (2018). Integrated Reporting Quality: An Empirical Analysis. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25(4), 489-507.
- Plumlee, M., Brown, D., Hayes, R. M., & Marshall, R. S. (2015). Voluntary environmental disclosure quality and firm value: Further evidence. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 34(4), 336-361.
- Rao, K., & Tilt, C. (2016). Board Composition and Corporate Social Responsibility: The Role of Diversity, Gender, Strategy and Decision Making. Journal of Business Ethics, 138(2), 327-347.
- Shiffrin, R. M., & Borner, K. (2004). Mapping knowledge domains. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(1), 5183-5185.
- Simnett, R., & Huggins, A. L. (2015). Integrated reporting and assurance: Where can research add value? Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 6(1), 29-53.
- Simnett, R., Vanstraelen, A., & Chua, W. F. (2009). Assurance on Sustainability Reports: An International Comparison. The Accounting Review, 84(3), 937-967.
- Sokil, O., Zvezdov, D., Zhuk, V., Kucherkova, S., & Sakhno, L. (2020). Social and environmental costs: the impact of accounting and analytical support on enterprises’ sustainable development in Germany and Ukraine. Economic Annals-ХХI, 181(1-2), 124-136.
- Surroca, J. A., Aguilera, R. V., Desender, K., & Tribó, J. A. (2020). Is managerial entrenchment always bad and corporate social responsibility always good? A cross-national examination of their combined influence on shareholder value. Strategic Management Journal, 41(5), 891-920.
- Székely, N., & vom Brocke, J. (2017). What can we learn from corporate sustainability reporting? Deriving propositions for research and practice from over 9,500 corporate sustainability reports published between 1999 and 2015 using topic modelling technique. PLOS ONE, 12(4), e0174807.
- Tibiletti, V., Marchini, P. L., Furlotti, K., & Medioli, A. (2020). Does corporate governance matter in corporate social responsibility disclosure? Evidence from Italy in the “era of sustainability.” Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 28(2), 896-907.
- Tumwebaze, Z., Bananuka, J., Kaawaase, T. K., Bonareri, C. T., & Mutesasira, F. (2022). Audit committee effectiveness, internal audit function and sustainability reporting practices. Asian Journal of Accounting Research, 7(2), 163-181.
- Wei, F., & Zhang, G. (2020). Exploring the intellectual structure and evolution of 24 top business journals: a scientometric analysis. The Electronic Library, 38(3), 493-511.
- Wu, Y., Wang, H., Wang, Z., Zhang, B., & Meyer, B. C. (2019). Knowledge Mapping Analysis of Rural Landscape Using CiteSpace. Sustainability, 12(1), 66.
- Zaman, R., Jain, T., Samara, G., & Jamali, D. (2022). Corporate Governance Meets Corporate Social Responsibility: Mapping the Interface. Business & Society, 61(3), 690-752.
- Zaman, R., Nadeem, M., & Carvajal, M. (2021). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility synergies: evidence from New Zealand. Meditari Accountancy Research, 29(1), 135-160.
- Zhou, S., Simnett, R., & Green, W. (2017). Does Integrated Reporting Matter to the Capital Market? Abacus, 53(1), 94-132.
-
The role of accounting in sustainable development
Inna Makarenko ,
Alex Plastun
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/afc.01(2).2017.01
Accounting and Financial Control Volume 1, 2017 Issue #2 pp. 4-12 Views: 7573 Downloads: 4708 TO CITEIdeology of Sustainable Development and Sustainable Development Goals influence the transformation of business processes in the companies. Professional accountants are important part of this transformation. In this paper the role of accounting in Sustainable Development Goals achievement is discussed. Different approaches to structuring the role of professional accountants in Sustainable Development are investigated. Among them are types of roles that perform accountants, their professional functions, skills and competencies in the corporate environment. As the result a holistic vision of the role of accounting in sustainable development in the new economic conditions is provided.
-
The relationship between corporate social responsibility and earnings management: accounting for endogeneity
Hyunjung Choi , Byungchul Choi ,
Jungyoon Byun
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.15(4).2018.06
Investment Management and Financial Innovations Volume 15, 2018 Issue #4 pp. 69-84 Views: 4587 Downloads: 537 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯThis study examines the relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and earnings management after controlling for endogeneity of CSR. Using a sample of non-financial firms listed on Korean Securities Market between 2002 and 2010, this study finds that ignoring endogeneity biases the estimated relation between CSR and earnings management. Specifically, the results show that the negative and significant relation between CSR commitment and discretionary accruals reported in the previous studies becomes insignificant. However, the negative and significant relation between CSR commitment and real activities manipulation remains significant even when the endogeneity of CSR commitment is taken into account. Therefore, this study provides evidence that proactive CSR engagement significantly affects firm’s practice of real activities manipulation, while it does not affect its practice of discretionary accruals. These results indicate that CSR commitment leads managers to be more responsible in management of operational activities than in accruals management.
-
Does board composition have an impact on CSR reporting?
Patrick Velte
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.15(2).2017.02
Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 15, 2017 Issue #2 pp. 19-35 Views: 4455 Downloads: 1718 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯCorporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting plays a key role in management control, particularly in light of the increased demand for non-financial reporting after the financial crisis of 2008–2009. This literature review evaluates 47 empirical studies that concentrate on the influence of several board composition variables on the quantity and quality of CSR reporting. The author briefly introduces the research framework that underpins current empirical studies in this field. This is followed by a discussion of the main variables of board composition: (1) committees (audit and CSR committees), (2) board independence, (3) board expertise, (4) CEO duality, (5) board diversity (gender and foreign diversity), (6) board activity, and (7) board size. The author, then, summarizes the key findings, discusses the limitations of the existing research and offers useful recommendations for researchers, firm practice and regulators.
