Materiality of Environmental and Social Reporting: Insights from Minority Stakeholders

Q2 Business, Management and Accounting
H. Maama, K. Appiah, M. Doorasamy
{"title":"Materiality of Environmental and Social Reporting: Insights from Minority Stakeholders","authors":"H. Maama, K. Appiah, M. Doorasamy","doi":"10.1080/0969160X.2021.2006074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\n Previous studies have found incomplete evidence of firms’ social and environmental accounting practices because they did not shed light on how the information needs of minority stakeholders were met. This study examined whether firms provide disclosures on environmental and social issues that are considered material by minority stakeholders. Specifically, the study sampled the views of these stakeholders on the materiality of the firms’ environmental and social disclosures. The study used both the Kruskal–Wallis test and Sample t-test to compare the information needs of these stakeholders with the reporting practices of sampled firms. The content analysis approach was used to extract relevant data from the annual and sustainability reports of thirty-five (35) Ghanaian listed firms from 2017 to 2018. The study further employed questionnaires to sample the views of 300 stakeholders on the environmental and social responsibility information that need to be reported by the firms. The study demonstrated that the stakeholders were interested in the social and environmental activities of firms. The evidence showed a statistically significant difference between the social and environmental information disclosed by the firms and what the stakeholders needed. Whilst the stakeholders needed more environmental and social disclosures, the companies reported less of those. The evidence further suggested that legitimacy theory drives the disclosure of environmental and social information by firms in Ghana. The firms must incorporate the views of the minority stakeholders when determining the materiality of information to disclose. The study demonstrated the extent to which firms were aware of and cared about what is significant to their stakeholders.","PeriodicalId":38053,"journal":{"name":"Social and Environmental Accountability Journal","volume":"42 1","pages":"184 - 207"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social and Environmental Accountability Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2021.2006074","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

ABSTRACT Previous studies have found incomplete evidence of firms’ social and environmental accounting practices because they did not shed light on how the information needs of minority stakeholders were met. This study examined whether firms provide disclosures on environmental and social issues that are considered material by minority stakeholders. Specifically, the study sampled the views of these stakeholders on the materiality of the firms’ environmental and social disclosures. The study used both the Kruskal–Wallis test and Sample t-test to compare the information needs of these stakeholders with the reporting practices of sampled firms. The content analysis approach was used to extract relevant data from the annual and sustainability reports of thirty-five (35) Ghanaian listed firms from 2017 to 2018. The study further employed questionnaires to sample the views of 300 stakeholders on the environmental and social responsibility information that need to be reported by the firms. The study demonstrated that the stakeholders were interested in the social and environmental activities of firms. The evidence showed a statistically significant difference between the social and environmental information disclosed by the firms and what the stakeholders needed. Whilst the stakeholders needed more environmental and social disclosures, the companies reported less of those. The evidence further suggested that legitimacy theory drives the disclosure of environmental and social information by firms in Ghana. The firms must incorporate the views of the minority stakeholders when determining the materiality of information to disclose. The study demonstrated the extent to which firms were aware of and cared about what is significant to their stakeholders.
环境和社会报告的重要性:来自少数利益相关者的见解
先前的研究发现,企业社会和环境会计实践的证据不完整,因为它们没有阐明少数利益相关者的信息需求是如何得到满足的。本研究考察了公司是否对少数股东认为重要的环境和社会问题进行了披露。具体而言,该研究抽样了这些利益相关者对公司环境和社会披露的重要性的看法。该研究使用了Kruskal-Wallis检验和样本t检验来比较这些利益相关者的信息需求与样本公司的报告实践。本文采用内容分析法,从35家加纳上市公司2017 - 2018年的年报和可持续发展报告中提取相关数据。本研究进一步采用问卷调查的方式,对300名利益相关者对企业需要报告的环境和社会责任信息的看法进行抽样调查。研究表明,利益相关者对企业的社会和环境活动感兴趣。证据表明,企业披露的社会和环境信息与利益相关者的需求之间存在统计学上的显著差异。虽然利益相关者需要更多的环境和社会信息披露,但这些公司的报告却很少。证据进一步表明,合法性理论推动了加纳企业的环境和社会信息披露。公司在确定要披露的信息的重要性时,必须考虑少数股东的意见。该研究证明了企业意识到并关心对其利益相关者重要的事情的程度。
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
Social and Environmental Accountability Journal
Social and Environmental Accountability Journal Business, Management and Accounting-Accounting
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: Social and Environmental Accountability Journal (SEAJ) is the official Journal of The Centre for Social and Environmental Accounting Research. It is a predominantly refereed Journal committed to the creation of a new academic literature in the broad field of social, environmental and sustainable development accounting, accountability, reporting and auditing. The Journal provides a forum for a wide range of different forms of academic and academic-related communications whose aim is to balance honesty and scholarly rigour with directness, clarity, policy-relevance and novelty. SEAJ welcomes all contributions that fulfil the criteria of the journal, including empirical papers, review papers and essays, manuscripts reporting or proposing engagement, commentaries and polemics, and reviews of articles or books. A key feature of SEAJ is that papers are shorter than the word length typically anticipated in academic journals in the social sciences. A clearer breakdown of the proposed word length for each type of paper in SEAJ can be found here.
×
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