探讨“申请与解释”制度下公司治理信息披露的质量

IF 5.5 Q1 BUSINESS

Corporate Governance-The International Journal of Business in Society Pub Date : 2023-06-15 DOI:10.1108/cg-07-2022-0297

Yuveshna Gowry, T. Soobaroyen, U. S. Agathee

{"title":"探讨“申请与解释”制度下公司治理信息披露的质量","authors":"Yuveshna Gowry, T. Soobaroyen, U. S. Agathee","doi":"10.1108/cg-07-2022-0297","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis study aims to explore the quality of corporate governance disclosure under an “apply and explain” regime in the context of an emerging economy (Mauritius), following a transition from the traditional “comply or explain” approach within the national code of corporate governance.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe research relies on a content analysis of corporate governance disclosure in 86 annual reports of companies listed on the Stock Exchange of Mauritius for the financial periods 2018–2019 and 2019–2020, one-way analysis of variance tests and draws on the typology of corporate governance explanations developed by Shrives and Brennan (2015), focusing on specificity, location and comprehensiveness dimensions. This paper draws on legitimacy theory and the concepts of substantive and symbolic disclosures to guide the interpretation of the findings.\n\n\nFindings\nFrom a specificity point of view, the disclosure index revealed significant variations, with the highest score being four times the lowest score. With regards to location and comprehensiveness, only around half of companies are making optimum use of a corporate governance report and providing explanations by principles. This paper also illustrated how some firms provided symbolic disclosures. Overall, there are disparities in the application of the code by companies, reflected in a blend of substantive and symbolic disclosures to maintain their legitimacy.\n\n\nOriginality/Implications\nThis study examines “apply and explain” disclosures in a emerging economy in contrast to the “comply or explain” approach studied so far in the literature. Merely professing a “well intended” shift to the “apply and explain” approach does not necessarily lead to improvements in the quality of corporate governance disclosures. Companies, governance professionals and regulatory bodies could formulate disclosure guidance to better underpin the implications of the “apply and explain” approach.\n","PeriodicalId":47880,"journal":{"name":"Corporate Governance-The International Journal of Business in Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring the quality of corporate governance disclosure under an “apply and explain” regime\",\"authors\":\"Yuveshna Gowry, T. Soobaroyen, U. S. Agathee\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/cg-07-2022-0297\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThis study aims to explore the quality of corporate governance disclosure under an “apply and explain” regime in the context of an emerging economy (Mauritius), following a transition from the traditional “comply or explain” approach within the national code of corporate governance.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nThe research relies on a content analysis of corporate governance disclosure in 86 annual reports of companies listed on the Stock Exchange of Mauritius for the financial periods 2018–2019 and 2019–2020, one-way analysis of variance tests and draws on the typology of corporate governance explanations developed by Shrives and Brennan (2015), focusing on specificity, location and comprehensiveness dimensions. This paper draws on legitimacy theory and the concepts of substantive and symbolic disclosures to guide the interpretation of the findings.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nFrom a specificity point of view, the disclosure index revealed significant variations, with the highest score being four times the lowest score. With regards to location and comprehensiveness, only around half of companies are making optimum use of a corporate governance report and providing explanations by principles. This paper also illustrated how some firms provided symbolic disclosures. Overall, there are disparities in the application of the code by companies, reflected in a blend of substantive and symbolic disclosures to maintain their legitimacy.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/Implications\\nThis study examines “apply and explain” disclosures in a emerging economy in contrast to the “comply or explain” approach studied so far in the literature. Merely professing a “well intended” shift to the “apply and explain” approach does not necessarily lead to improvements in the quality of corporate governance disclosures. Companies, governance professionals and regulatory bodies could formulate disclosure guidance to better underpin the implications of the “apply and explain” approach.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":47880,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Corporate Governance-The International Journal of Business in Society\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Corporate Governance-The International Journal of Business in Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/cg-07-2022-0297\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corporate Governance-The International Journal of Business in Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/cg-07-2022-0297","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在探索新兴经济体(毛里求斯)背景下“应用和解释”制度下公司治理披露的质量，在国家公司治理准则中从传统的“遵守或解释”方法过渡到“应用和解释”方法。设计/方法/方法本研究依赖于对毛里求斯证券交易所上市公司的86份年度报告中2018-2019年和2019-2020年财务期间的公司治理披露的内容分析，方差检验的单向分析，并借鉴了Shrives和Brennan(2015)开发的公司治理解释的类型学，重点关注特异性，位置和综合性维度。本文利用合法性理论以及实质性和象征性披露的概念来指导对研究结果的解释。从特异性的角度来看，披露指数显示出显著的差异，最高得分是最低得分的四倍。在地域性和综合性方面，只有一半左右的企业充分利用公司治理报告，并按原则进行解释。本文还说明了一些公司如何提供象征性披露。总体而言，公司对准则的应用存在差异，反映在为维持其合法性而进行的实质性和象征性披露的混合中。本研究考察了新兴经济体的“应用和解释”披露，与文献中迄今为止研究的“遵守或解释”方法形成对比。仅仅宣称“意图良好”地转向“应用和解释”方法，并不一定会改善公司治理披露的质量。公司、治理专业人士和监管机构可以制定披露指南，以更好地支撑“应用和解释”方法的含义。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Exploring the quality of corporate governance disclosure under an “apply and explain” regime

Purpose This study aims to explore the quality of corporate governance disclosure under an “apply and explain” regime in the context of an emerging economy (Mauritius), following a transition from the traditional “comply or explain” approach within the national code of corporate governance. Design/methodology/approach The research relies on a content analysis of corporate governance disclosure in 86 annual reports of companies listed on the Stock Exchange of Mauritius for the financial periods 2018–2019 and 2019–2020, one-way analysis of variance tests and draws on the typology of corporate governance explanations developed by Shrives and Brennan (2015), focusing on specificity, location and comprehensiveness dimensions. This paper draws on legitimacy theory and the concepts of substantive and symbolic disclosures to guide the interpretation of the findings. Findings From a specificity point of view, the disclosure index revealed significant variations, with the highest score being four times the lowest score. With regards to location and comprehensiveness, only around half of companies are making optimum use of a corporate governance report and providing explanations by principles. This paper also illustrated how some firms provided symbolic disclosures. Overall, there are disparities in the application of the code by companies, reflected in a blend of substantive and symbolic disclosures to maintain their legitimacy. Originality/Implications This study examines “apply and explain” disclosures in a emerging economy in contrast to the “comply or explain” approach studied so far in the literature. Merely professing a “well intended” shift to the “apply and explain” approach does not necessarily lead to improvements in the quality of corporate governance disclosures. Companies, governance professionals and regulatory bodies could formulate disclosure guidance to better underpin the implications of the “apply and explain” approach.

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

Corporate Governance-The International Journal of Business in Society BUSINESS-

CiteScore

11.20

自引率

33.90%

发文量

期刊介绍： Providing a consistent source of in-depth information, analysis and advice considering corporate governance on an international scale, Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society focuses on knowledge development, practice and performance standards for scholars and Boards of Directors/ Governors of companies throughout the world. The journal publishes a diverse range of substantive theoretical and methodological debates as well as practical developments in the field of corporate governance worldwide. The journal particularly encourages attention to the impact of changes of business/corporate governance forms and practices on people, and the sustainability of different governance models. Articles that highlight models and structures that advance the interests, dignity and well being of all stakeholders, in a sustainable manner, are particularly welcome. The journal covers a broad spectrum of governance-related themes including: -Effective boardroom performance -Control and regulation -Executive leadership -The role and contribution of external (non-executive) directors -The growing importance of governance in the wake of ever-greater corporate scandals -Redefinitions and reassessments of corporate governance models -The role of business in society -The changing nature of the relationship and responsibilities of the firm towards various stakeholders -The incentives required to encourage more socially- and environmentally-responsible corporate action -The role and impact of local and international regulatory agencies and regimes on corporate behaviour.