非财务风险披露实践:来自沙特阿拉伯上市公司的证据

Faizah Alsulami
{"title":"非财务风险披露实践:来自沙特阿拉伯上市公司的证据","authors":"Faizah Alsulami","doi":"10.22495/cbsrv4i4art12","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study employs content analysis to analyse non-financial risk disclosure (NFRD) practices within the annual reports of Saudi listed companies over eight years (2010–2017). The data gathered shows that the levels of average NFRD are moderate. The descriptive results show that the average level of NFRD in the sample is 35.33%. This number is much lower than that reported in other studies elsewhere (Elamer et al., 2020; Konishi & Ali, 2007; Ntim et al., 2013). For example, Linsley and Shrives (2006) and Rajab and Handley-Schachler (2009) find that the mean of risk disclosure is 78 and 95 sentences for UK listed firms, respectively. Konishi and Ali (2007) report that Japanese companies offer 47 risk sentences on average. Thus, NFRD in Saudi Arabia appears to be smaller compared to other studies. The low level of NFRD in Saudi Arabia could be mainly clarified by the absence of enforcement. Throughout the study, there were no compulsory requirements for Saudi listed companies to offer information regarding risk or non-financial risk in their annual reports. The rise in the categories of risk-non-financial risk disclosures is more pronounced in the process risk where process risk disclosure grew from 27 (33%) in 2010 to 41 (50%) in 2017. Product, legal, and ethical risk disclosure appeared to be the most frequently disclosed risk, while the Shariah risk is significantly lower. The lack of Shariah risk disclosure can be explained by the fact that only two sectors substantially apply Shariah contracts such as Murabaha, Ijarah, and Istisnaa into their operations. The results of this study have the potential to support those preparing financial reports in firms, as well as regulators to enhance corporate NFRD practices and help investors and other key stakeholders.","PeriodicalId":496541,"journal":{"name":"Corporate and business strategy review","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Non-financial risk disclosure practice: Evidence from Saudi Arabian listed companies\",\"authors\":\"Faizah Alsulami\",\"doi\":\"10.22495/cbsrv4i4art12\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study employs content analysis to analyse non-financial risk disclosure (NFRD) practices within the annual reports of Saudi listed companies over eight years (2010–2017). The data gathered shows that the levels of average NFRD are moderate. The descriptive results show that the average level of NFRD in the sample is 35.33%. This number is much lower than that reported in other studies elsewhere (Elamer et al., 2020; Konishi & Ali, 2007; Ntim et al., 2013). For example, Linsley and Shrives (2006) and Rajab and Handley-Schachler (2009) find that the mean of risk disclosure is 78 and 95 sentences for UK listed firms, respectively. Konishi and Ali (2007) report that Japanese companies offer 47 risk sentences on average. Thus, NFRD in Saudi Arabia appears to be smaller compared to other studies. The low level of NFRD in Saudi Arabia could be mainly clarified by the absence of enforcement. Throughout the study, there were no compulsory requirements for Saudi listed companies to offer information regarding risk or non-financial risk in their annual reports. The rise in the categories of risk-non-financial risk disclosures is more pronounced in the process risk where process risk disclosure grew from 27 (33%) in 2010 to 41 (50%) in 2017. Product, legal, and ethical risk disclosure appeared to be the most frequently disclosed risk, while the Shariah risk is significantly lower. The lack of Shariah risk disclosure can be explained by the fact that only two sectors substantially apply Shariah contracts such as Murabaha, Ijarah, and Istisnaa into their operations. The results of this study have the potential to support those preparing financial reports in firms, as well as regulators to enhance corporate NFRD practices and help investors and other key stakeholders.\",\"PeriodicalId\":496541,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Corporate and business strategy review\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Corporate and business strategy review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22495/cbsrv4i4art12\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corporate and business strategy review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22495/cbsrv4i4art12","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究采用内容分析法对沙特上市公司2010-2017年八年间年报中的非财务风险披露(NFRD)做法进行分析。收集的数据显示,NFRD的平均水平是中等的。描述性结果表明,样本中NFRD的平均水平为35.33%。这个数字远低于其他地方的其他研究报告(Elamer et al., 2020;Konishi,阿里,2007;Ntim et al., 2013)。例如,Linsley and Shrives(2006)和Rajab and Handley-Schachler(2009)发现,英国上市公司的风险披露均值分别为78句和95句。Konishi和Ali(2007)报告称,日本公司平均提供47个风险判决。因此,与其他研究相比,沙特阿拉伯的NFRD似乎较小。沙特阿拉伯的非自然灾害预防水平低,主要可以通过缺乏执法来加以澄清。在整个研究过程中,并没有强制性要求沙特上市公司在年度报告中提供有关风险或非财务风险的信息。风险-非财务风险披露类别的增加在流程风险中更为明显,流程风险披露从2010年的27项(33%)增加到2017年的41项(50%)。产品、法律和道德风险披露似乎是最常披露的风险,而伊斯兰教风险则明显较低。伊斯兰教法风险披露的缺乏可以用以下事实来解释:只有两个部门(如Murabaha、Ijarah和Istisnaa)在其运营中实质性地应用了伊斯兰教法合同。本研究的结果有可能支持公司财务报告编制人员以及监管机构加强公司NFRD实践,并帮助投资者和其他关键利益相关者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Non-financial risk disclosure practice: Evidence from Saudi Arabian listed companies
This study employs content analysis to analyse non-financial risk disclosure (NFRD) practices within the annual reports of Saudi listed companies over eight years (2010–2017). The data gathered shows that the levels of average NFRD are moderate. The descriptive results show that the average level of NFRD in the sample is 35.33%. This number is much lower than that reported in other studies elsewhere (Elamer et al., 2020; Konishi & Ali, 2007; Ntim et al., 2013). For example, Linsley and Shrives (2006) and Rajab and Handley-Schachler (2009) find that the mean of risk disclosure is 78 and 95 sentences for UK listed firms, respectively. Konishi and Ali (2007) report that Japanese companies offer 47 risk sentences on average. Thus, NFRD in Saudi Arabia appears to be smaller compared to other studies. The low level of NFRD in Saudi Arabia could be mainly clarified by the absence of enforcement. Throughout the study, there were no compulsory requirements for Saudi listed companies to offer information regarding risk or non-financial risk in their annual reports. The rise in the categories of risk-non-financial risk disclosures is more pronounced in the process risk where process risk disclosure grew from 27 (33%) in 2010 to 41 (50%) in 2017. Product, legal, and ethical risk disclosure appeared to be the most frequently disclosed risk, while the Shariah risk is significantly lower. The lack of Shariah risk disclosure can be explained by the fact that only two sectors substantially apply Shariah contracts such as Murabaha, Ijarah, and Istisnaa into their operations. The results of this study have the potential to support those preparing financial reports in firms, as well as regulators to enhance corporate NFRD practices and help investors and other key stakeholders.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信