The Relationship between Sustainability Performance and Sustainability Disclosure – Reconciling Voluntary Disclosure Theory and Legitimacy Theory

Katrin Hummel, Christian Schlick
{"title":"The Relationship between Sustainability Performance and Sustainability Disclosure – Reconciling Voluntary Disclosure Theory and Legitimacy Theory","authors":"Katrin Hummel, Christian Schlick","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2595045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The relationship between sustainability performance and sustainability disclosure remains ambiguous, both theoretically and empirically. Voluntary disclosure theory would suggest that the relationship should be positive, whereas legitimacy theory points toward a negative relationship. However, the empirical evidence regarding this relationship is mixed, which indicates that the two theories are not necessarily contradictory but that they are instead two sides of the same coin. This paper refines the theoretical reasoning associated with the two theories and provides empirical evidence for their reconciliation by moving the focus of inquiry from the quantity of sustainability disclosure toward its quality. Our results reveal that – consistent with voluntary disclosure theory – superior sustainability performers choose high-quality sustainability disclosure to signal their superior performance to the market. In addition, based on legitimacy theory, poor sustainability performers prefer low-quality sustainability disclosure to disguise their true performance and to simultaneously protect their legitimacy. The results remain robust to various additional analyses. Thus, the paper indicates that the two theories dovetail with one another by redirecting the focus toward the quality of sustainability disclosure.","PeriodicalId":388731,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Triple Bottom Line (Topic)","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"341","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SRPN: Triple Bottom Line (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2595045","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 341

Abstract

The relationship between sustainability performance and sustainability disclosure remains ambiguous, both theoretically and empirically. Voluntary disclosure theory would suggest that the relationship should be positive, whereas legitimacy theory points toward a negative relationship. However, the empirical evidence regarding this relationship is mixed, which indicates that the two theories are not necessarily contradictory but that they are instead two sides of the same coin. This paper refines the theoretical reasoning associated with the two theories and provides empirical evidence for their reconciliation by moving the focus of inquiry from the quantity of sustainability disclosure toward its quality. Our results reveal that – consistent with voluntary disclosure theory – superior sustainability performers choose high-quality sustainability disclosure to signal their superior performance to the market. In addition, based on legitimacy theory, poor sustainability performers prefer low-quality sustainability disclosure to disguise their true performance and to simultaneously protect their legitimacy. The results remain robust to various additional analyses. Thus, the paper indicates that the two theories dovetail with one another by redirecting the focus toward the quality of sustainability disclosure.
可持续发展绩效与可持续信息披露的关系——对自愿信息披露理论与合法性理论的调和
可持续性绩效与可持续性信息披露之间的关系在理论上和实证上都是模糊的。自愿披露理论认为这种关系应该是积极的,而合法性理论则认为这种关系是消极的。然而,关于这种关系的经验证据是混杂的,这表明这两种理论并不一定是矛盾的,而是同一枚硬币的两面。本文提炼了与这两种理论相关的理论推理,并通过将探究的焦点从可持续性披露的数量转向其质量,为它们的调和提供了经验证据。我们的研究结果表明,与自愿披露理论一致,优秀的可持续发展绩效者选择高质量的可持续发展信息披露来向市场表明其卓越的绩效。此外,基于合法性理论,低质量的可持续性绩效者倾向于低质量的可持续性披露,以掩盖其真实绩效,同时保护其合法性。结果对各种附加分析仍然是可靠的。因此,本文指出,这两种理论相互吻合,将重点转向可持续性披露的质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信