Heterogeneity of Institutional Owners

2021 ◽  
pp. 19-27
Author(s):  
Michael J. Rubach
Keyword(s):  
2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ece Acar ◽  
Serdar Ozkan

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the extent of disclosure of provisions reported under IAS 37 provisions, contingent liabilities and contingent assets and explore the relation between provisions and corporate governance. Design/methodology/approach The current research utilizes a panel data analysis using a sample of 1,078 firm-year observations from Borsa Istanbul between the years 2005 and 2010. Findings Overall findings indicate that 62 percent of 1,078 firm-year observations recognize provisions, and among those, only 32 percent provide IAS 37’s full disclosure requirements. Firms that recognize provisions have larger board of directors and are more likely to be characterized with concentrated ownership and institutional owners. Also, firms with larger board of directors, greater independence and concentrated ownership have higher total provision/total debt ratios. Finally, firms that make full disclosure of provisions are more likely to have larger boards, higher ownership concentration and institutional owners and less likely to have CEO duality. Research limitations/implications As with all research, there are several limitations of this study. The study suffers from a lack of literature about provisions under IAS 37. The lack of literature directly focusing on provisions or IAS 37 appears to be one of the main limitations as well as one of the main contributions. Since this study focuses on one country, the comparison is not possible. Further research may contribute to literature by the use of other emerging economy’s capital market data. Moreover, further research can cover any other mandatory disclosure information specified in IASs/IFRSs and can provide comparative results about the compliance and strictness of the mandatory disclosure regime. Practical implications This study can be of interest to government, investors, business management, regulatory bodies, educators, researchers, accountants, auditors and scholars particularly in the field of accounting by seeking to make theoretical and practical contributions in the area of accounting disclosures and also serves as benchmark for future researches on corporate disclosures. Also this study provides significant insights to accounting regulators who set disclosure requirements. Originality/value Accurate corporate reporting is a necessary tool for the short- and long-term survival of the firms, hence the capital markets. Studying the level of disclosure will enable us to have additional insights about corporate reporting and will enhance the understanding of the nature of corporate reporting in developing countries. Disclosure practices by developing countries were empirically investigated in the past; however, the relation between provisions under IAS 37 and corporate governance has been unexplored in the literature. Thus, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is a pioneering research on provisions and corporate governance structure.


2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 357-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuanyang Song ◽  
Peter T. Gianiodis ◽  
Yuanxu Li

ABSTRACTIn this study, we examine the effect of institutional ownership on corporate philanthropy in China, an emerging economy. Employing stakeholder identification and salience theory, we posit that institutional ownership positively influences corporate philanthropy, which varies for different types of institutional investors. We further argue that institutional ownership's influence is stronger when philanthropy is aligned with firm goals. Using data from Chinese publicly listed firms, we find a positive effect of institutional ownership on philanthropy, and this effect is stronger for domestic institutional owners when compared to foreign institutional owners, and long-term when compared to short-term institutional owners. We also find that the positive influence of institutional ownership is stronger in private firms and in regions with low institutional development – situations characterizing high alignment between philanthropy and firm goals. Our findings highlight the important role of institutional investors on corporate philanthropy decisions, which have implications for scholars studying and policy makers enacting corporate governance in emerging economies.


2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-252
Author(s):  
Sandeep Yadav

This study fills the gap in the literature by considering the heterogeneous impact of institutional ownership on various dimensions of corporate social performance (CSP). Using the behavioural risk agency perspective, we argue that the risk behaviour of various institutional owners is not the same towards the CSP. We have taken a balanced panel sample of 61 Indian multinational firms for the span of 2013–2018 to test the proposed hypotheses. Results show a negative association of pressure-sensitive institutional investors’ ownership with social and governance dimensions of CSP. Mutual funds ownership is positively associated with the social and governance dimensions of CSP. Foreign institutional investors ownership has no significant impact on CSP. We found that the environmental dimension of CSP is ignored by institutional owners. The moderating effect of firm internationalisation on the relationship between institutional ownership and CSP is also examined.


10.1068/a3791 ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 37 (11) ◽  
pp. 1995-2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
James P Hawley ◽  
Andrew T Williams

In this paper we examine the long-term interests that large institutional owners (for example, the California Public Employees' Retirement System, Hermes, and the Universities Superannuation Scheme) have in the development of global corporate governance standards, especially as governance standards increasingly become intertwined with other standards and regime parameters involved in the globalization debates. We argue that institutional owners have a unique perspective and voice with which to contribute to the formulation of global standards in a variety of areas on the basis of their long-term financial interests. This conclusion is supported by an analytic review of the current state of global corporate governance, including multilateral initiatives (for example, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the World Bank); an analysis of significant institutional investors, the role of various rating agencies (for example, Fitch, Moody's), the International Corporate Governance Network, and the growing role of various nongovernmental organizations (for example, the Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economics, the Carbon Disclosure Project) in relation to corporate governance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document