The impact of corporate governance on sustainability reporting quality: Evidence from Vietnamese listed companies

Corporate 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.

The current research aims to explore the impact of corporate governance on the Saudi banking performance for the period of 2014–2017. Though many researchers tested the relationship of corporate governance and firm performance, globally as well as in Saudi Arabia, however, during the literature review, it was found that many excluded the banking industry. This study tries to fill the gap by looking exclusively at the Saudi banking industry. Firm performance is measured through return on assets, return on equity, and Tobin’s Q as the dependent variables. The corporate governance practices are measured through the board characteristics (size, meeting, number of committees, independence, foreign board membership), and an audit committee (size, meeting, independence) as the independent variables. Firm size and firm age are the controls. Panel data analysis was implemented, using both descriptive and multivariate analysis through multiple regression to investigate the governance practices and firm performance. The empirical findings demonstrate that board size, audit committee meeting and bank size have a positive impact on ROE, whereas board independence has a negative impact on ROE. Similarly, board size and bank size have a positive relationship with ROA and board meeting has a negative relationship with ROA. Further, board (size and independence) and bank size have a positive relationship with Tobin’s Q, whereas number of board committees and bank age have a negative relationship with Tobin’s Q. Finally, audit committee (size and independence) and foreign board membership have no impact on the bank performance.

Research on corporate governance has been conducted extensively over the past few decades. However, the result of various studies failed to produce conclusive insight. This study is aimed at identifying, classifying, analyzing and interpreting previous research on corporate governance in Asia by using meta-analytical approach. By using the HOMA (Hedges-Olkin Meta-Analytical) procedures, the current study collected eighty articles from journals ranging from 1999 until 2017. Data were gathered from empirical scientific papers. Through rigorous research process, the current study found that most previous research on corporate governance in Asia observed the patterns of influence of various types of ownership structure and board characteristics on corporate performance. Ownership by family, government, and management tend to have a negative impact on performance, whilst institutional ownership and foreign ownership show positive effect on performance. The study reveals inconsistent result for frequency of board meetings, existence of family members on board, outside director, and board independence towards performance. Similar finding appeared for the relationship of performance to women on board and CEO duality. CGPI as the Corporate Governance Perception index and board size were found to have a positive consistency on performance. Apart from limitations of the study, the result suggests that there exists institutional and environmental specificity in the study of corporate governance in Asia that may be different from other context of study so that future researcher need to take a precaution of this matter.