Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Drivers of Environmental Disclosure and Stakeholder Expectation: Evidence from Taiwan

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article investigates stakeholder expectations associated with corporate environmental disclosure. Several articles have studied the effect that stakeholder pressure has on environmental disclosing strategies. In this article, we extend previous research to an examination of the influence of external, internal, and intermediary stakeholder groups or constituencies in turn to clarify the demands of multiple stakeholders as to firms’ disclosure of sufficient and adequate environmental information. The sample comprised Taiwanese firms listed on the Taiwan Stock Exchange. Our results show that the level of environmental disclosure is significantly affected by stakeholder groups’ demands. External stakeholder groups, such as the government, debtors, and consumers, exert a strong influence over management intentions regarding the extent of environmental disclosure. Internal stakeholder groups, such as shareholders and employees, impose additional pressures on firms to disclose environmental information. As for intermediate stakeholder groups, environmental protection organizations, and accounting firms, these can greatly influence managerial choices regarding their environmental disclosure strategies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aerts, W. and D. Cormier: 2009, ‘Media legitimacy and corporate environmental communication’, Accounting, Organizations and Society 34(1), 1-27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahmed, K. and J. K. Courtis: 1999, ‘Associations between corporate characteristics and disclosure levels in annual reports: A meta-analysis’, The British Accounting Review 31(1), 35-61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alnajjar, F. K.: 2000, ‘Determinants of social responsibility disclosures of U.S. Fortune 500 firms: An application of content analysis’, Advances in Environmental Accounting and Management 1, 163-200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bewley, K., Y. Li: 2000, ‘Disclosure of environmental information by Canadian manufacturing companies: a voluntary disclosure perspective’, Advances in Environmental Accounting & Management 1, 201–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blacconiere, W. G. and D. M. Patten: 1994, ‘Environmental disclosures, regulatory costs, and changes in firm value’, Journal of Accounting and Economics 18(3), 357-377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, R.M., L. Ducharme and D. Shores: 1995. ‘Stakeholders’ implicit claims and accounting method choice’, Journal of Accounting and Economics 20 (3), 255–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S. and S.Pavelin: 2006, ‘Voluntary environmental disclosures by large UK companies’, Journal of Business Finance & Accounting 33(7-8), 1168-1188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, N. and C. Deegan: 1998, ‘The public disclosure of environmental performance information- A dual test of media agenda setting theory and legitimacy theory’, Accounting & Business Research 29(1), 21-41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cho, C. H. and D. M. Patten: 2007, ‘The role of environmental disclosures as tools of legitimacy: A research note’, Accounting, Organizations and Society 32(7-8), 639-647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, P. M., Y. Li, G. D. Richardson and F. P. Vasvari: 2008, ‘Revisiting the relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: An empirical analysis’, Accounting, Organizations and Society 33(4-5), 303-327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, P. M.: 2008, ‘Stakeholder accountability: A field study of the implementation of a governance improvement plan’, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 21(7), 933-953.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cormier, D., I. M. Gordon and M. Magnan: 2004, ‘Corporate environmental disclosure: Contrasting management’s perceptions with reality’, Journal of Business Ethics 49(2), 143-165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cormier, D., M. Magnan: 2003, ‘Environmental reporting management: a European perspective’, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 22, 43–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowen, S. S., L. B. Ferrei and L. D. Parker: 1987, ‘The impact of corporate characteristics on social responsibility disclosure: A typology and frequency-based analysis’, Accounting, Organizations and Society 12(2), 111-122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C.: 2002, ‘Introduction: The legitimising effect of social and environmental disclosures– A theoretical foundation’, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 15(3), 282-311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C. and B. Gordon: 1996, ‘A study of the environmental disclosure practices of Australian corporations’, Accounting & Business Research 26(3), 187-199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C. and M. Rankin: 1996, ‘Do Australian companies report environmental news objectively?: An analysis of environmental disclosures by firms prosecuted successfully by the Environmental Protection Authority’, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 9(2), 50-67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T. and L. E. Preston: 1995, ‘The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications’, Academy of Management Review 20(1), 65-91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eng, L. L. and Y. T. Mak: 2003, ‘Corporate governance and voluntary disclosure’, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 22(4), 325-345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freedman, M. and C. Wasley: 1990, ‘The association between environmental performance and environmental disclosure in annual reports and 10Ks’, Advances in Public Interest Accounting 3, 183-193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E.: 1984, Strategic management: A stakeholder approach (Pitman Publishing Inc, Marshfield, MA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Feeman, R. E., J. E. Harrison and A. C. Wicks: 2007, Managing for stakeholders: Survival, Reputation and Success (Yale University Press, New Haven, CT).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gale, B. T.: 1972, ‘Market share and rate of return’, The Review of Economics & Statistics 54(4), 412-23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R., R. Kouhy and S. Lavers: 1995, ‘Corporate social and environmental reporting: A review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure’, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 8(2), 44-77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gronhaug, K. and T. Fredriksen: 1988, ‘Concentration ratios, strategy and performance: The case of the Norwegian Telecommunications’, Managerial and Decision Economics 19(4), 257-263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halme, M. and M. Huse: 1997, ‘The influence of corporate governance, industry and country factors on environmental reporting’, Scandinavian Journal of Management 13(2), 137-157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, C. W. L. and T. M. Jones: 1992, ‘Stakeholder-agency theory’, Journal of Management Studies 29(2), 131-154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hossain, M., L. M. Tan and M. B. Adams: 1994, ‘Voluntary disclosure in an emerging capital market: some empirical evidence from companies listed on the Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange’, The International Journal of Accounting 29(4), 334-351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingram, R. W. and K. B. Frazier: 1980, ‘Environmental performance and corporate disclosure’, Journal of Accounting Research 18(2), 614-622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ip, P-K.: 2008, ‘Corporate social responsibility and crony capitalism in Taiwan’, Journal of Business Ethics 79(1-2), 167-177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. M.: 1995, ‘Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics’, Academy of Management Review 20(2), 404-437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keim, G. D.: 1978, ‘Managerial behavior and the social responsibility debate: Goals versus constraints’, Academy of Management 21(1), 57-68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Y., G. D. Richardson and D. B. Thornton: 1997, ‘Corporate disclosure of environmental liability information: theory and evidence’, Contemporary Accounting Research 14 (3), 435–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, J., A. Sundgren and T. Schneeweis: 1988, ‘Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance’, Academy of Management Journal 31, 854-872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menon, K. and D. D. Williams: 1991, ‘Auditor credibility and initial public offerings’, The Accounting Review 66(2), 313-332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills, D. and M. Gardner: 1984, ‘Financial profiles and the disclosure of expenditures for socially responsible purposes’, Journal of Business Research 12, 407-424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. K., B. R. Agle and D. J. Wood: 1997, ‘Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts’, Academy of Management Review 22(4), 853-886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neu, D., H. Warsame and K. Pedwell: 1998. ‘Managing public impressions: environmental disclosures in annual reports’, Accounting, Organizations and Society 23 (3), 265–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donovan, G.: 2002, ‘Environmental disclosures in the annual report: Extending the applicability and predictive power of legitimacy theory’, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 15(3), 344-371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, O.: 1999, ‘Japanese Corporate Environmental Disclosure’, Keizai-Kagaku 47(3), 21–37 [in Japanese].

  • Patten, D. M.: 1991, ‘Exposure, legitimacy, and social disclosure’, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 10(4), 297-308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patten, D.M.: 1992. ‘Intra-industry environmental disclosures in response to the Alaskan oil spill: a note on legitimacy theory’, Accounting, Organizations and Society 17 (5), 471–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patten, D. M.: 2002, ‘The relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: A research note’, Accounting, Organizations and Society 27(8), 763-773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, R. W.: 1992, ‘Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An application of stakeholder theory’, Accounting, Organizations and Society 17(6), 595-612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruf, B. M., K. Muralidhar, R. M. Brown, J. J. Janney and K. Paul: 2001, ‘An empirical investigation of the relationship between change in corporate social performance and financial performance: A stakeholder theory perspective’, Journal of Business Ethics 32(2), 143-156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teoh, S. H. and T. J. Wong: 1993, ‘Perceived auditor quality and the earnings response coefficient’, The Accounting Review 68(2), 346-366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toms, J. S.: 2002, ‘Firm resources, quality signals and the determinants of corporate environmental reputation: Some UK evidence’, British Accounting Review 34(3), 257-282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ullmann, A. A.: 1985, ‘Data in search of a theory: A critical examination of the relationships among social performance, social disclosure, and economic performance of U.S. firms’, Academy of Management Review 10(3), 540-557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walden, W. D. and B. N. Schwartz: 1997, ‘Environmental disclosures and public policy pressure’, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 16(2), 125-154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, A. L., W. Hillison and S. E. Morecroft: 2004, ‘Audit quality: A synthesis of theory and empirical evidence’, Journal of Accounting Literature 23(1), 153-193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watts, R. L. and J. L. Zimmerman: 1986, Positive accounting theory (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wernerfelt, B.: 1984, ‘A resource-based view of the firm’, Strategic Management Journal 5(2), 171-180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiseman, J.: 1982, ‘An evaluation of environmental disclosures made in corporate annual reports’, Accounting, Organizations and Society 7(1), 53-63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Accounting, Tamkang University, 151, Ying-Chung Road, Tamsui, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC

    Cheng-Li Huang & Fan-Hua Kung

Authors
  1. Cheng-Li Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fan-Hua Kung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cheng-Li Huang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Huang, CL., Kung, FH. Drivers of Environmental Disclosure and Stakeholder Expectation: Evidence from Taiwan. J Bus Ethics 96, 435–451 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0476-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0476-3

Key words

Search

Navigation