Factors affecting the readiness for ESG reporting in Vietnamese enterprises
-
Author(s)Dung Thi Phuong NguyenLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6347-544X
,
Lien Thi Huong NguyenLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6664-1148
,
Anh Thi Mai NguyenLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0009-0003-8210-5235
,
Long Le Thanh PhanLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0009-0002-4491-048X
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.22(3).2024.21
-
Article InfoVolume 22 2024, Issue #3, pp. 263-275
- 317 Views
-
68 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Countries around the world are taking further steps toward transparency and corporate sustainability. Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) reporting will be required for all firms listed on European exchanges as of 2026 according to the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive. Meanwhile, the companies’ rate in Vietnam reporting and disclosing ESG information is still limited. There is an empirical gap between the theory and practices of ESG reporting in Vietnam. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the determinants affecting the readiness for ESG reporting in Vietnamese enterprises. Survey questionnaires and quantitative analysis are employed based on the structural models using SmartPLS4 software to analyze the sample of 169 manufacturing, commercial, and service enterprises in Vietnam. The findings show that accountant qualifications, management processes, women on management boards, and information technology systems positively affect Vietnamese firms’ readiness to report ESG. The relationship between business executives’ ESG awareness, public media pressure, governmental guidelines, and the readiness for ESG reporting is not statistically supported. Based on the research results, Vietnamese enterprises should increase women’s participation on management boards, facilitate professional development and training for accountants, invest in information technology systems, and improve management processes to enhance the adoption of ESG reporting in Vietnam.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)M14, M40, M41, Q56
-
References66
-
Tables5
-
Figures0
-
- Table 1. Sample characteristics
- Table 2. Cronbach’s Alpha and composite reliability
- Table 3. Discriminant validity test
- Table 4. p-values and original sample results
- Table A1. Measurement of variables and sources of reference
-
- Acs, Z. J., & Audretsch, D. B. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of entrepreneurship research: An interdisciplinary survey and introduction (pp. 165-182). New York: Springer.
- Arayssi, M., Dah, M., & Jizi, M. (2016). Women on boards, sustainability reporting, and firm performance. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 7(3), 376-401.
- Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16, 74-94.
- Bear, S., Rahman, N., & Post, C. (2010). The impact of board diversity and gender composition on corporate social responsibility and firm reputation. Journal of Business Ethics, 97, 207-221.
- Bloomberg Intelligence. (2022, January 24). ESG May Surpass $41 Trillion Assets in 2022, But Not Without Challenges.
- Buniamin, S., Ahmad, N. N. N., & Nazli Nik Ahmad, N. (2018). Public stakeholders’ salience and esg reporting of Malaysian Plcs: Managers’ perceptions. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences, 44.
- Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 946-967.
- Chen, S., Song, Y., & Gao, P. (2023). Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance and financial outcomes: Analyzing the impact of ESG on financial performance. Journal of Environmental Management, 345, Article 118829.
- Darnall, N., Ji, H., Iwata, K., & Arimura, T. H. (2022). Do ESG reporting guidelines and verifications enhance firms’ information disclosure? Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(5), 1214-1230.
- Delloite. (2023). IT architecture as an ESG accelerator.
- Devellis, R. (2012). Scale development theory and application. New York: Sage Publications.
- DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160.
- European Banking Authority (EBA). (2021). EBA report on management and supervision of ESG risks for credit institutions and investment firms (EBA/REP/2021/18).
- Ellili, N. O. D. (2022). Impact of ESG disclosure and financial reporting quality on investment efficiency. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 22(5), 1094-1111.
- European Commission. (2021). Communication from the commission to the European parliament, the Council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions. ‘Fit for 55’: Delivering the EU’s 2030 Climate Target on the way to climate neutrality. Brussels.
- Flammer, C., Hong, B., & Minor, D. (2019). Corporate governance and the rise of integrating corporate social responsibility criteria in executive compensation: Effectiveness and implications for firm outcomes. Strategic Management Journal, 40(7), 1097-1122.
- Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 375-381.
- Freeman, R. E. (2010). Strategic management processes. In Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach (pp. 83-84). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Granlund, M., & Mouritsen, J. (2003). Special section on management control and new information technologies. European Accounting Review, 12(1), 77-83.
- Gray, R. H., Owen, D. L., & Adams, C. A. (2003). Accounting and accountability: Changes and challenges in corporate social and environmental reporting. London: Prentice Hall.
- Ground, J. (2022). ESG Global Study 2022. Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance.
- Gutiérrez-Ponce, H. (2023). Sustainability as a strategy base in Spanish firms: Sustainability reports and performance on the sustainable development goals. Sustainable Development, 31(4), 3008-3023.
- Ha, N. (2023, May 1). Việt Nam cam kết và hành động vì mục tiêu Net Zero vào năm 2050 [Vietnam commits and acts towards the goal of Net Zero by 2050]. Labour Newspaper. (In Vietnamese).
- Hair, J. F., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2014). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education.
- Helfaya, A., Morris, R., & Aboud, A. (2023). Investigating the factors that determine the ESG disclosure practices in Europe. Sustainability, 15(6), Article 5508.
- Henisz, W., Koller, T., & Nuttall, R. (2019). Five ways that ESG creates value. McKinsey Quarterly, 4, 1-12.
- Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43, 115-135.
- Higgins, C., & Larrinaga, C. (2014). Sustainability reporting: Insights from institutional theory. In Sustainability accounting and accountability (pp. 273-285). Routledge.
- Hillman, A. J., Cannella Jr, A. A., & Harris, I. C. (2002). Women and racial minorities in the boardroom: How do directors differ? Journal of Management, 28(6), 747-763.
- Huang, S. Z., Lu, J. Y., Chau, K. Y., & Zeng, H. L. (2020). Influence of ambidextrous learning on eco-innovation performance of startups: Moderating effect of top management’s environmental awareness. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 1976.
- International Finance Corporation (IFC). (2021). IFC ESG Guidebook.
- Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2017). The consequences of mandatory corporate sustainability reporting (Harvard Business School Research Working Paper 11-100).
- Kamaludin, K., Ibrahim, I., Sundarasen, S., & Faizal, O. V. A. (2022). ESG in the boardroom: Evidence from the Malaysian market. International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, 7(1), Article 4.
- Kathy Rao, K., Tilt, C. A., & Lester, L. H. (2012). Corporate governance and environmental reporting: An Australian study. Corporate Governance, 12(2), 143-163.
- Khanh, H. T. M., & Tuan, N. A. (2018). Determinants of sustainability reporting: An empirical research on Vietnamese Listed companies. Science & Technology Development Journal: Economics - Law & Management, 2(2), 62-73.
- 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.
- Krasodomska, J., Michalak, J., & Świetla, K. (2020). Directive 2014/95/EU: Accountants’ understanding and attitude towards mandatory non-financial disclosures in corporate reporting. Meditari Accountancy Research, 28(5), 751-779.
- Luc, T. H., & Phuoc, T. T. (2019). Các yếu tố ảnh hưởng đến việc công bố báo cáo phát triển bền vững – Trường hợp các doanh nghiệp tại Việt Nam [Factors affecting the publication of sustainable development reports – The case of Vietnamese companies]. Ho Chi Minh City Open University Journal of Science – Economics and Business Administration, 14(2), 87-99. (In Vietnamese).
- Ly, H. (2022). Program on benchmarking and announcing sustainable companies in Vietnam in 2022 kicked off. Vietnam Business Forum.
- Lys, T., Naughton, J. P., & Wang, C. (2015). Signaling through corporate accountability reporting. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 60(1), 56-72.
- Manoj, P. K., & Mini, J. (2022). ESG reporting for business sustainability: Role of CMAs in internal audit. The Management Accountant Journal, 57(7), 68-71.
- Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363.
- Nguyen, T. M. A., Nguyen, T. P. D., & Pham, A. T. (2023). Exploring environmental, social, and governance (ESG) reporting at Vietnamese company case studies. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Emerging Challenges: Smart Business and Digital Economy 2023 (ICECH 2023).
- Nguyen, T. P. D., Nguyen, T. H. L., Dao, P.D., & Dang, H.G. (2019). The determinants influencing managerial accounting in Vietnamese manufacturing and trading enterprises. Academy of Accounting and Financial Studies Journal, 23(5).
- Nguyet, N. T. T., & Hai, T. T. T. (2023). Ảnh hưởng của áp lực các bên liên quan đến mức độ công bố thông tin phát triển bền vững [The influence of stakeholder pressure on the level of sustainable information disclosure]. Vietnam Accounting and Auditing Journal. (In Vietnamese).
- Niu, S., Park, B. I., & Jung, J. S. (2022). The effects of digital leadership and ESG management on organizational innovation and sustainability. Sustainability, 14(23), Article 15639.
- Peng, H., & Chandarasupsang, T. (2023). The effect of female directors on ESG practice: Evidence from China. International Journal of Financial Studies, 11(2), Article 66.
- Phornlaphatrachakorn, K. (2019). Effects of transformational leadership, organisational learning, and technological innovation on strategic management accounting in Thailand’s financial institutions. Asian Journal of Business and Accounting, 12(1), 165-188.
- Post, C., Rahman, N., & Rubow, E. (2011). Green governance: Boards of directors’ composition and environmental corporate social responsibility. Business & Society, 50(1), 189-223.
- PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). (2022). Report on the level of readiness to practice ESG in Vietnam.
- Ramadhan, Y., Resca, Y., Saputra, S., Diana, W., & Qamar, S. S. (2023). Literature study: The role of accountants in reporting environmental, social, and governance information. International Journal of Social Service and Research, 3(5), 1285-1289.
- Rezaee, Z. (2016). Business sustainability research: A theoretical and integrated perspective. Journal of Accounting Literature, 36(1), 48-64.
- Romito, S., & Vurro, C. (2020). Non-financial disclosure and information asymmetry: A stakeholder view on US listed firms. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 28(2), 595-605.
- Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities. Sage Publications.
- Spence, M. (1973). Job market signaling. The Quarterly Journal of Economic, 87(3), 355-374.
- Su, X., Wang, S., & Li, F. (2023). The impact of digital transformation on ESG performance based on the mediating effect of dynamic capabilities. Sustainability, 15(18), Article 13506.
- Sun, L., & Saat, N. A. M. (2023). How does intelligent manufacturing affect the ESG performance of manufacturing firms? Evidence from China. Sustainability, 15(4), Article 2898.
- Tan, Y., & Zhu, Z. (2022). The effect of ESG rating events on corporate green innovation in China: The mediating role of financial constraints and managers’ environmental awareness. Technology in Society, 68, Article 101906.
- Tran, N. H., & Nguyen, T. T. H. (2021). Factors impacting on social and corporate governance and corporate financial performance: evidence from listed Vietnamese enterprises. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 8(6), 41-49.
- United Nations. (2004). Who cares wins: The global compact connecting financial markets to a changing world.
- Velte, P. (2016). Women on management board and ESG performance. Journal of Global Responsibility, 7(1), 98-109.
- VinaCapital. (2022). VinaCapital asset management. Responsible investment policy.
- Wang, J., & Coffey, B. S. (1992). Board composition and corporate philanthropy. Journal of Business Ethics, 11, 771-778.
- Weston, P., & Nnadi, M. (2023). Evaluation of strategic and financial variables of corporate sustainability and ESG policies on corporate finance performance. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 13(2), 1058-1074.
- Williams, R. J. (2003). Women on corporate boards of directors and their influence on corporate philanthropy. Journal of Business Ethics, 42, 1-10.
- Xenitidou, M., & Edmonds, B. (Eds.). (2014). The complexity of social norms. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
-
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: 7146 Downloads: 4523 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.
-
Standardization of sustainability reporting: rationale for better investment decision-making
Henry Mynhardt , Inna Makarenko ,
Alex Plastun
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/pmf.06(2).2017.01
Public and Municipal Finance Volume 6, 2017 Issue #2 pp. 7-15 Views: 2222 Downloads: 317 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯThe role of sustainability reporting in investment decision-making is not clear and obvious. Despite the steady increase of such statements in corporate annual reports, the relationship between the sustainability reporting and the financial performance of companies is not always positive. The main problems of sustainability reporting nowadays are insufficient comparability of reporting, accuracy (lack of materiality, reliability and validity of indicators), lack of common approaches for its verification.
Synthesis of standardization and regulation features of sustainability reporting, which is provided in this paper in different dimensions (countries, regulators standards), allows to identify long-term trends of this reporting to ensure its quality during investment decision-making in traditional and responsible financial markets.
-
Sustainability reporting: An overview of the recent development
Inten Meutia ,
Zulnaidi Yaacob ,
Shelly F. Kartasari
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/afc.03(1).2020.03
Accounting and Financial Control Volume 3, 2020-2021 Issue #1 pp. 23-39 Views: 2181 Downloads: 760 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯThis study aims to provide an extensive overview of the current state of sustainability reporting through the review studies on sustainability reports (SR) in the accounting literature for the period 2015–2020. A structured literature review (SLR) methodology is used to investigate how the SR literature develops and focuses. The study uses keywords such as “sustainability report” and “sustainability reporting” to identify studies that are relevant to a given topic. A total of 44 published studies were found. This study identifies the main directions of SR research in the 2015–2020 period and discusses several important aspects of research, namely methodology, research methods, and the theory used. To enrich the results, this study defines the scope, country of research, topics and sectors studied. The study provides insight into future SR research used by researchers to develop SR research. Several things are proposed that can be used as a guide for future SR research, such as sustainability in SMEs and the public sector. Ensuring sustainability is one of the research topics that can be a direction for researchers in the future. Theories such as contingency and source credibility can be an alternative to explaining the reality of sustainability reporting.
