scholarly journals Sustainability Disclosure in Integrated Reporting: Does It Matter to Investors? A Cheap Talk Approach

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 4393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renato Camodeca ◽  
Alex Almici ◽  
Umberto Sagliaschi
Keyword(s):  
Value Relevance ◽  
Corporate Sustainability ◽  
Cheap Talk ◽  
Theoretical Framework ◽  
Integrated Reporting ◽  
Sustainability Disclosure ◽  
Verifiable Disclosure ◽  
Market Valuations ◽  
Persuasion Games ◽  
Alternative Theories

The purpose of this study is to investigate the value-relevance of corporate sustainability disclosure through integrated reporting. Sustainability disclosure is subject to managers’ discretion. Besides, it is often hardly verifiable. In this respect, integrated reporting could provide the means for a verifiable disclosure, otherwise, in the jargon of game theory, it could be considered as a cheap talk. This paper investigates which of these hypotheses is most likely to occur in reality. In order to do this, a simple theoretical framework is introduced, where sustainability of corporate performances is modelled as a tail-risk for shareholders. Costless signaling games (cheap talk) and persuasion games are reviewed within this context, in order to derive competing theories of sustainability disclosure’s value relevance through integrated reporting. These alternative theories are tested empirically consistent with the theoretical framework presented, in order to identify key-parameters. In this respect, a systematic textual analysis (artificial intelligence) of integrated reports was employed as to build a synthetic measure of sustainability disclosure. The application of this methodology on a sample of European listed companies showed that sustainability disclosure through integrated reporting has no effect on market-valuations, confirming the null hypothesis of integrated reporting resulting in a cheap talk’s babbling equilibrium.

The Association between Sustainability Governance Characteristics and the Assurance of Corporate Sustainability Reports

2014 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 163-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary F. Peters ◽  
Andrea M. Romi
Keyword(s):  
Value Relevance ◽  
Corporate Sustainability ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Internal Auditors ◽  
Corporate Governance Mechanisms ◽  
Assurance Services ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
Contextual Characteristics ◽  
Sustainability Reports ◽  
Sustainability Report

SUMMARY This study provides evidence on whether sustainability-oriented corporate governance mechanisms impact the voluntary assurance of corporate sustainability reports. Specifically, we consider the presence and characteristics of environmental committees on the Board of Directors and a Chief Sustainability Officer (CSO) among the management team. When examining assurance services, we make a distinction between those services performed by professional accountants, consultants, and internal auditors. We find that the presence of a CSO is positively associated with corporate sustainability report assurance services, and this association increases when the CSO has sustainability expertise. Supporting the position that some firms establish sustainability-related governance merely to conform to socially desired behavior, we find that only those environmental committees containing directors with related expertise influence the likelihood of adopting sustainability assurance. Presently, environmental committees with greater expertise appear to prefer the higher-quality assurance services of professional accounting firms. Expert CSOs, on the other hand, prefer assurance services from their peers with sustainability expertise, as evidenced by their choice to employ consultants. When analyzing firms' environmental contextual characteristics, we find that firms employing a CSO and exhibiting poor environmental performance, relative to other firms in their industry, prefer to report sustainability results without assurance. While we do find that larger firms in the U.S. are significantly less likely to employ assurance, this result decreases over time. Further, we provide initial evidence that the value-relevance of sustainability assurance is increasing with time.

scholarly journals Why “Less is More” in Non-Financial Reporting Initiatives: Concrete Steps Towards Supporting Sustainability

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Georgina Tsagas ◽  
Charlotte Villiers
Keyword(s):  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Corporate Sustainability ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Integrated Reporting ◽  
Less Is More ◽  
Csr Reporting ◽  
Corporate Reporting ◽  
Long Run ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Key Aspects

AbstractCalls are repeatedly made on corporations to respond to the challenges facing the planet from a sustainable development perspective and governments take solace in the idea that corporations' transparency on their corporate activity in relation to sustainability through voluntary reporting is adequately addressing the problem. In practice, however, reporting is failing to deliver truly sustainable results. The article considers the following questions: how does the varied reporting landscape in the field of non-financial reporting impede the objectives of fostering corporations' sustainable practices and which initiative, among the options available, may best meet the sustainability objectives after a decluttering of the landscape takes place?The article argues that the varied corporate reporting landscape constitutes a key obstacle to fostering sustainable corporate behaviour, insofar as the flexible and please all approach followed in the context of corporate sustainability reporting offers little to no real incentive to companies to behave more sustainably and ultimately pleases none in the long run. The case made is that “less is more” in non-financial reporting initiatives and hence the article calls for a revision of key aspects of the European Non-Financial Reporting Directive, which, as is argued, is more likely to achieve the furtherance of sustainable corporate behaviour. Although the different reporting requirements offer the benefits of focussing on different corporate goals and activities, targeting different audiences and allowing for a level of flexibility that respects the individual risks to sustainability associated with each industry, the end result is a landscape that lacks overall consistency and comparability of measurements and accountabilities, making accountability more, rather than less, difficult to achieve.The article acknowledges the existence of several variances relating to the notion of sustainability per se, which continues to remain a contested concept and variances between companies and industries in relation to how each is operating sustainably or unsustainably respectively. Such variances have so far inhibited the legislator from easily outlining through tailored legislation the individual risks to global sustainability in an all-encompassing manner. The end product is a chaotic system of financial reporting, CSR reporting, non-financial reporting and integrated reporting and little progress to increase comparability and credibility in order for companies to be held accountable and to behave in ways that do not harm the planet. A “clean up” of the varied initiatives in the terrain of non-financial reporting is recommended.

scholarly journals Approaches on the Screening Methods for Materiality in Sustainability Reporting

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 3233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susie Wu ◽  
Changliang Shao ◽  
Jiquan Chen
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Sustainability ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Social Sustainability ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Global Reporting Initiative ◽  
Screening Methods ◽  
Comparison Study ◽  
Life Cycle Perspective ◽  
Sustainability Disclosure ◽  
Different Levels

Recent decades have seen a surge in corporate sustainability reports (SRs); their proliferation, however, does not ensure effective and consistent reporting on materiality. To improve the completeness, consistency and uniformity of SRs, this study aims at providing a review on the definition and identification of materiality and to propose screening methods for materiality assessments using publicly available resources. We found that most acknowledged standards and initiatives diverge in their definitions and approaches towards materiality. Four screening methods are proposed, including two that are directly usable: (1) Sustainability Accounting Standards Board Materiality Map™ and (2) Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Sustainability Topics for Sectors; and two involving more desktop research: (3) GRI’s Sustainability Disclosure Database and (4) modeling from a life-cycle perspective. The second and third approaches are tested through a comparison study for the apparel and energy industries in selected regions using content analysis. The results indicate that the two approaches, with different levels of complexity, yield inconsistency in obtaining the most (i.e., the top three) material topics. The GRI’s Sustainability Disclosure Database is recommended for practitioners due to its balanced disclosure on management, economic, environmental and social sustainability themes.

scholarly journals A Reference Model of Sustainability Disclosure based on four Sustainability Stock Indexes

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hong Yuh Ching ◽  
Thiago Toste ◽  
Renan Tardelli
Keyword(s):  
Reference Model ◽  
Corporate Sustainability ◽  
Positive Signal ◽  
Socially Responsible ◽  
Responsible Investment ◽  
Sustainability Index ◽  
Fund Managers ◽  
Sustainability Disclosure ◽  
Dow Jones Sustainability Index ◽  
Stock Indexes

The study proposes to develop a reference model of sustainability disclosure based on the models and requirements of four sustainability indexes - Dow Jones Sustainability Index, Corporate Sustainability Index ISE, Frankfurt STOXX and Financial Times FTSE ESG. The approach employed to develop the model is a qualitative analysis of the complementarity among the Stock indexes above mentioned alongside a literature review on sustainability disclosure frameworks. There is no consensus around what should be measured and how. Yet, there is no study in the literature that has ever discussed the models of the sustainability stock indexes and the respective data required in each one of them or compared these models and their requirements. The present study attempts to fulfill this gap by examining the initiatives and requirements of four prominent sustainability indexes. This study contributes to the sustainability responsible investment literature. The inclusion of a firm in a sustainability index can be perceived as a positive signal by investors and this can be explained by signaling theory. This analysis can help investors and/or socially responsible fund managers to screen the stocks against this reference model and determine those firms that are more adherent to it.

scholarly journals Independent board of directors and corporate sustainability: A South African and Nigerian perspective

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-68
Author(s):  
Collins Ngwakwe ◽  
Fortune Ganda ◽  
Oladele John Akinyomi
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Sustainable Development ◽  
South African ◽  
Stock Exchange ◽  
Corporate Sustainability ◽  
Annual Reports ◽  
Independent Directors ◽  
Environmental Reporting ◽  
Sustainability Disclosure

This paper examined the stance of independent directors on corporate sustainable development initiative in South Africa and Nigeria. This has become apposite considering the role of independent directors in corporate strategic decisions and performance. It is believed that independent boards strive to direct corporate decisions to protect the investors and thus improve financial performance. Given that sustainability initiative is currently occupying a vital strategic position in protecting firms against inherent and imminent climate change and financial risks, the paper undertakes a survey of South African and Nigerian companies to ascertain the role of independent directors on corporate sustainable development initiatives. Using a mix method of primary and secondary data analysis, the paper finds that independent boards in both countries of study understand the importance of sustainability; however a pragmatic stance on sustainability is more visible in South Africa where independent boards are members of and/or participate in nominating corporate sustainability committees. The paper suggests the need for improved detailed disclosure on sustainability in the Nigerian corporate annual reports; the Nigerian Stock Exchange may boost this initiative by establishing a social and environmental reporting index supported by an annual survey of company sustainability disclosure. It also suggests the need to include sustainability awareness and interest in the metrics that are used in the appointment of independent boards in Nigerian companies

Financial analysts' reaction to voluntary integrated reporting: cross-sectional variation in institutional enforcement contexts

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesca Rossignoli ◽  
Riccardo Stacchezzini ◽  
Alessandro Lai
Keyword(s):  
Institutional Setting ◽  
Institutional Characteristics ◽  
Unique Contribution ◽  
Integrated Reporting ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Institutional Settings ◽  
Country Level ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Sustainability Disclosure ◽  
Moderating Role

PurposeEuropean countries are likely to increasingly adopt integrated reporting (IR) voluntarily, after the 2014/95/EU Directive is revised and other initiatives are implemented. Therefore, the present study provides insights on the relevance of IR in voluntary contexts by exploring analysts' reactions to the release of integrated reports in diverse institutional settings.Design/methodology/approachDrawing on voluntary disclosure theory, a quantitative empirical research method is used to explore the moderating role of country-level institutional characteristics on the associations between voluntary IR release and analyst forecast accuracy and dispersion.FindingsIR informativeness is not uniform in the voluntary context and institutional settings play a moderating role. IR release is associated with increased consensus among analyst forecasts. However, in countries with weak institutional enforcement, a reverse association is detected, indicating that analysts rely largely on IR where the institutional setting strongly protects investors. Although a strong institutional setting boosts the IR release usefulness in terms of accuracy, it creates noise in analyst consensus.Research limitations/implicationsAcademics can appreciate the usefulness of voluntary IR across the institutional enforcement contexts.Practical implicationsManagers can use these findings to understand opportunities offered by IR voluntary release. The study recommends that policymakers, standard setters and regulators strengthen the institutional enforcement of sustainability disclosure.Originality/valueThis study is a unique contribution to recent calls for research on the effects of nonfinancial disclosure regulation and on IR “impacts”. It shows on the international scale that IR usefulness for analysts is moderated by institutional patterns, not country-level institutional characteristics.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document