Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 140, Issue 4, pp 787–805 | Cite as

An Evaluation of the Quality of Corporate Social Responsibility Reports by Some of the World’s Largest Financial Institutions

  • S. Prakash Sethi
  • Terrence F. Martell
  • Mert Demir
Article

Abstract

This study investigates the variations in the quality and comprehensiveness of 104 corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports published by the world’s largest financial institutions in 2012. Using a novel measure of CSR report quality, we examine the impact of certain national, legal, and firm-level factors that might explain differences in the overall quality and extent of coverage of various issues in these reports. Our findings show that legal factors and CSR environment in a firm’s country of headquarters play an important role in firms’ CSR reporting quality. Common law countries exhibit systematically higher overall CSR reporting quality than code law countries. Countries with higher CSR standards, policies, and regulations in place also produce significantly higher quality CSR reports. Firm size, on the other hand, has no major impact on the overall quality of CSR reports. In further analysis of the individual aspects of CSR disclosures, namely environment, philanthropy, bribery and corruption, and integrity assurance, we document that larger firms report at a higher quality on philanthropy and bribery and corruption. Bribery and corruption is reported at a higher quality in countries with common law tradition, high-quality legal regimes, and high CSR standards and regulations in place. We also observe higher quality integrity assurance in common law countries. CSR-minded countries and countries with low-quality legal environment also report on philanthropy at a higher quality. Finally, we offer guidelines for companies toward improving the quality of their reports, and suggestions for scholars and researchers for further avenues of research.

Keywords

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports Environment social and governance (ESG) CSR monitor Global financial institutions Country-of-origin effect (EOC) GRI ISO 26000 Bribery and corruption Philanthropy 

Notes

Funding

The funding for this project was provided by the Weissman Center for International Business and is gratefully acknowledged.

References

  1. AccountAbility. (2005). National Corporate Responsibility Index. AccountAbility: London http://www.accountability.org/about-us/publications/responsible-4.html.
  2. Aldama, L., & Zicari, A. (2012). Value-added reporting as a tool for sustainability: A Latin American experience. Corporate Governance, 12(4), 485–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Attig, N., Boubakri, N., El Ghoul, S., &Guedhami, O. (2014). Firm internationalization and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 1–27.Google Scholar
  4. Azzone, G., Manzini, R., & Noci, G. (1996). Evolutionary trend in environmental reporting. Business Strategy and the Environment, 5, 219–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ball, R., Kothari, S., & Robin, A. (2000). The effect of international institutional factors on properties of accounting earnings. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 29, 1–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berthelot, S., Cormier, D., & Magnan, M. (2003). Environmental disclosure research: Review and synthesis. Journal of Accounting Literature, 22, 1–44.Google Scholar
  7. Bowen, F. (2000). Environmental visibility: A trigger of green organizational response? Business Strategy and the Environment, 9(2), 92–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brammer, S., & Pavelin, S. (2004). Building a good reputation. European Management Journal, 22(6), 704–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Branco, M. C., & Rodrigues, L. L. (2008). Factors influencing social responsibility disclosure by Portuguese companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(4), 685–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bravo, R., Matute, J., & Pina, J. (2012). Corporate social responsibility as a vehicle to reveal the corporate identity: A study focused on the websites of Spanish financial entities. Journal of Business Ethics, 107, 129–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brown, J., & Fraser, M. (2006). Approaches and perspectives in social and environmental accounting: An overview of the conceptual landscape. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15(2), 103–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Callado-Muñoz, F., & González, N. (2011). Does it pay to be socially responsible? Evidence from Spain’s retail banking sector. European Financial Management, 17(4), 755–787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Campbell, J. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32, 946–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Carnevale, C., & Mazzuca, M. (2014). Sustainability report and bank valuation: Evidence from European stock markets. Business Ethics, 23(1), 69–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carnevale, C., Mazzuca, M., & Venturini, S. (2012). Corporate social reporting in European banks: The effects on a firm’s market value. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 19, 159–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chih, H.-L., Chih, H.-H., & Chen, T.-Y. (2010). On the determinants of corporate social responsibility: International evidence on the financial industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 93, 115–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cormier, D., Gordon, I. M., & Magnan, M. (2004). Corporate environmental disclosure: Contrasting management’s perceptions with reality. Journalof Business Ethics, 49, 143–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cowen, S., Fererri, L., & Parker, L. (1987). The impact of corporate characteristics on social responsibility disclosure: A typology and frequency-based analysis. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 12(2), 111–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. De la Cuesta-González, M., Muñoz-Torres, M. J., & Fernández-Izquierdo, M. A. (2006). Analysis of social performance in the Spanish financial industry through public data: A proposal. Journal of Business Ethics, 69(3), 289–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Deegan, C. (2002). Introduction: The legitimizing effect of social and environmental disclosures-A theoretical foundation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(3), 282–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Deegan, C., Rankin, M., & Tobin, J. (2002). An examination of the corporate social and environmental disclosures of BHP from 1983-1997: A test of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(3), 312–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Delmas, M. A., & Burbano, V. C. (2011). The Drivers of Greenwashing. California Management Review, 54(1), 64–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Eccles, R., & Armbrester, K. (2011). Integrated reporting in the cloud. IESE Insight, 8(1), 13–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Eccles, R. G., & Krzus, M. P. (2010). One report: Integrated reporting for a sustainable strategy. New York: Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  25. Fekrat, M., Inclan, C., & Petroni, D. (1996). Corporate environmental disclosures: competitive disclosure hypothesis using 1991 annual report data. The International Journal of Accounting, 31(2), 175–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. For Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), please see: Global Reporting Initiative (2014), GRI and ISO 26000: How to use the GRI Guidelines in conjunction with ISO 26000. https://www.globalreporting.org/resourcelibrary/How-To-Use-the-GRI-Guidelines-In-Conjunction-With-ISO26000.pdf.
  27. Gamble, G., Hsu, K., Jackson, C., & Tollerson, C. (1996). Environmental disclosures in annual reports: an international perspective. The International Journal of Accounting, 31(3), 293–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Governance, & Accountability Institute, I. (2014). Flash report: 72 % of S&P 500 companies now publishing sustainability/responsibility reports | Sustainability update. Retrieved from http://ga-institute.com/Sustainability-Update/2014/06/03/flash-report-72-of-sp-500-companies-now-publishing-sustainability-responsibility-reports/.
  29. Gujarati, D. (2003). Basic econometrics. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  30. Hibbitt, C. J. (2004). External environmental disclosure and reporting by large European companies: An economic, social, and political analysis of managerial behaviour. Rozenberg Publishers.Google Scholar
  31. International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC). (2011). Towards integrated reporting: Communicating value in the 21st century. New York, NY: IIRC.Google Scholar
  32. International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2010). ISO26000 Guidance Standard on Social Responsibility, Reference No. ISO 26000, Geneva.Google Scholar
  33. Jaggi, B., & Low, P. Y. (2000). Impact of culture, market forces, and legal system on financial disclosures. The International Journal of Accounting, 35(4), 495–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jensen, J. C., & Berg, N. (2012). Determinants of traditional sustainability reporting versus integrated reporting. An institutionalist approach. Business Strategy and the Environment, 21(5), 299–316.Google Scholar
  35. Jizi, M., 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, 601–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. KPMG, Center for Corporate Governance in Africa, Global Reporting Initiative, & United Nations Environment Programme. (2013). Carrots and sticks: Sustainability reporting policies worldwide—today’s best practice, tomorrow’s trends. Retrieved from https://www.globalreporting.org/resourcelibrary/carrots-and-sticks.pdf.
  37. La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1997). Legal determinants of external finance. Journal of Finance, 52(3), 1131–1150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1998). Law and finance. The Journal of Political Economy, 106(6), 1113–1155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lee, T. M., & Hutchison, P. D. (2005). The decision to disclose environmental information: A research review and agenda. Advances in Accounting, 21, 83–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. López de Silanes, F., La Porta, R., & Shleifer, A. (1999). Corporate ownership around the world. Journal of Finance, 54(2), 471–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Macve, R., & Chen, X. (2010). The “equator principles”: A success for voluntary codes? Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal, 23(7), 890–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Meek, G., Roberts, C., & Gray, S. (1995). Factors influencing voluntary annual report disclosures by US, UKand continental european multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 26, 555–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Moratis, L., & Cochius, T. (2011). ISO 26000: The business guide to the new standard on social responsibility. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  44. Murphy, C., & Yates, J. (2009). The international organization for standardization (ISO): Global governance through voluntary consensus. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. Palazzo, G., & Richter, U. (2005). CSR business as usual? The case of the tobacco industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 61(4), 387–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Patten, D. (1992). Exposure, legitimacy and social disclosure. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 10(4), 297–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Preston, L. E., & O’Bannon, D. P. (1997). The corporate social-financial performance relationship: A typology and analysis. Business and Society, 36(4), 419–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schaltegger, S., & Wagner, M. (2011). Sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability innovation: categories and interactions. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20(4), 222–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schepers, D. (2011). The equator principles: A promise in progress? Corporate Governance, 11(1), 90–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Scholtens, B. (2009). Corporate social responsibility in the international banking industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 86, 159–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Smith, J., Adhikari, A., & Tondkar, R. (2005). Exploring differences in social disclosures internationally: A stakeholder perspective. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 24, 123–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Trotman, K., & Bradley, G. (1981). Associations between social responsibility disclosure and characteristics of companies. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 6(4), 355–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Watts, R., & Zimmerman, J. (1978). Towards a positive theory of the determination of accounting standards. The Accounting Review, 53, 112–134.Google Scholar
  55. Weissman Center for International Business. (2014). The CSR-Sustainability monitor. (Tech. Rep.). Weissman Center for International Business. Retrieved from http://www.csrsmonitor.org.
  56. Willis, A. (2010). Integrated reporting in a disconnected world? The macro measurement challenge. The landscape of integrated reporting. Reflections and next stops, 22–24.Google Scholar
  57. Wu, M.-W., & Shen, C.-H. (2013). Corporate social responsibility in the banking industry: Motives and financial performance. Journal of Banking & Finance, 37(9), 3529–3547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Prakash Sethi
    • 1
  • Terrence F. Martell
    • 1
  • Mert Demir
    • 1
  1. 1.Weissman Center for International Business, Baruch CollegeThe City University of New YorkNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations