Corporate Sustainability Reporting and Financial Performance
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review and Hypothesis Development
3. Data and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
- the formal reporting mechanisms, reflecting the levels of commitment to corporate social responsibility, and the financial annual reports may become tools for the interested parties;
- CSR reporting reflects corporate social responsibility practices, and it could also act to enhance public image and promote efficient CSR practices;
- manipulating financial results is not a new practice, but pro-active approaches to monitoring financial and non-financial performance are increasingly placing more weight on social and sustainability issues; and
- the impact of the CSR reporting instruments on the performance of the organization’s management varies depending on the size of the organization and the sector of activity.
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Batista, A.A.S.; Francisco, A.C. Organizational Sustainability Practices: A Study of the Firms Listed by the Corporate Sustainability Index. Sustainability 2018, 10, 226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sweeney, L.; Coughlan, J. Do different industries report Corporate Social Responsibility differently? An investigation through the lens of stakeholder theory. J. Mark. Commun. 2008, 14, 113–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Li, Z.F. Mutual monitoring and corporate governance. J. Bank. Financ. 2014, 45, 255–269. [Google Scholar]
- Grigorescu, A.; Maer-Matei, M.M.; Mocanu, C.; Zamfir, A.M. Key Drivers and Skills Needed for Innovative Companies Focused on Sustainability. Sustainability 2020, 12, 102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- McWilliams, A.; Siegel, D. Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance: Correlation or Misspecification? Strateg. Manag. J. 2000, 21, 603–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hahn, R.; Kühnen, M. Determinants of sustainability reporting: A review of results, trends, theory, and opportunities in an expanding field of research. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 59, 5–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morioka, S.N.; de Carvalho, M.M. A systematic literature review towards a conceptual framework for integrating sustainability performance into business. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 136, 134–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bundy, J.; Shropshire, C.; Buchholtz, A.K. Strategic cognition and issue salience: Toward an explanation of firm responsiveness to stakeholder concerns. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2013, 38, 352–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lozano, R. A holistic perspective on corporate sustainability drivers. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2015, 22, 32–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Köppl, P.; Neureiter, M. Corporate Social Responsibility—Guidelines and Concepts in the Management of Corporate Social Responsibility; Linde Verlag: Wien, Austria, 2004; pp. 293–314. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, L.; Feldmann, A.; Tang, O. The relationship between disclosures of corporate social performance and financial performance: Evidences from GRI reports in manufacturing industry. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2015, 170, 445–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sen, S.; Bhattacharya, C.B.; Korschun, D. The Role of Corporate Social Responsibility in Strengthening Multiple Stakeholder Relationships: A Field Experiment. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2006, 34, 158–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perrini, F.; Tencati, A. Sustainability and stakeholder management: The need for new corporate performance evaluation and reporting systems. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2006, 15, 296–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bae, S.M.; Masud, M.A.K.; Kim, J.D. A Cross-Country Investigation of Corporate Governance and Corporate Sustainability Disclosure: A Signaling Theory Perspective. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jindrichovska, I.; Purcarea, I. CSR and environmental reporting in the Czech Republic and Romania: Country comparison of rules and practices. Account. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2011, 10, 202. [Google Scholar]
- Cooper, S.M.; Owen, D.L. Corporate social reporting and stakeholder accountability: The missing link. Account. Organ. Soc. 2007, 32, 649–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Socoliuc, M.; Grosu, V.; Hlaciuc, E.; Stanciu, S. Analysis of Social Responsibility and Reporting Methods of Romanian Companies in the Countries of the European Union. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kocmanová, A.; Docˇekalová, P.M.; Škapa, S.; Smolíková, L. Measuring Corporate Sustainability and Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance Value Added. Sustainability 2016, 8, 945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Means, G. The Modern Corporation and Private Property; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Global Reporting Initiative. Report or Explain: A Smart EU Policy Approach to Non-Financial Information Disclosure; GRI: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- EY. Value of Sustainability Reporting: A Study by EY and Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship; EY: Boston, MA, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Mocan, M.; Rus, S.; Draghici, A.; Ivascu, L.; Turi, A. Impact of corporate social responsibility practices on the banking industry in Romania. Procdia Econ. Financ. 2015, 23, 712–716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dobre, E.; Stanila, G.O.; Brad, L. The Influence of Environmental and Social Performance on Financial Performance: Evidence from Romania’s Listed Entities. Sustainability 2015, 7, 2513–2553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jianu, I.; Ţurlea, C.; Guşatu, I. The Reporting and Sustainable Business Marketing. Sustainability 2016, 8, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hategan, C.D.; Sirghi, N.; Curea-Pitorac, R.I.; Hategan, V.P. Doing well or doing good: The relationship between corporate social responsibility and profit in Romanian companies. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Berrone, P.; Gomez-Mejia, L.R. Environmental performance and executive compensation: An integrated agency-institutional perspective. Acad. Manag. J. 2009, 52, 103–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garcia, S.; Cintra, Y.; de Torres, R.C.S.R.; Lima, F.G. Corporate sustainability management: A proposed multi-criteria model to support balanced decision-making. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 136, 181–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, C.; Fu, Q.A. Win-Win Outcome between Corporate Environmental Performance and Corporate Value: From the Perspective of Stakeholders. Sustainability 2019, 11, 921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Liang, H.; Renneboog, L. Corporate Donations and Shareholder Value; Finance Working Paper; European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI): Brussels, Belgium, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, T.-K.; Yan, M.-R. The Corporate Shared Value for Sustainable Development: An Ecosystem Perspective. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pirtea, M.; Botoc, C.; Jurcut, C. Risk and return analysis: Evidence from emerging markets. Transform. Bus. Econ. 2014, 13, 637–647. [Google Scholar]
- Zamfir, A.M.; Mocanu, C.; Grigorescu, A. Circular economy and decision models among European SMEs. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ouvrard, S.; Jasimuddin, S.M.; Spiga, A. Does Sustainability Push to Reshape Business Models? Evidence from the European Wine Industry. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nosratabadi, S.; Pinter, G.; Mosavi, A.; Semperger, S. Sustainable Banking; Evaluation of the European Business Models. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Van Marrewijk, M.; Werre, M. Multiple levels of corporate sustainability. J. Bus. Ethics 2003, 44, 107–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, M.W.; Shen, C.H. Corporate social responsibility in the banking industry: Motives and financial performance. J. Bank. Financ. 2013, 37, 3529–3547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thijssens, T.; Bollen, L.; Hassink, H. Managing sustainability reporting: Many ways to publish exemplary reports. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 136, 86–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hussain, N.; Rigoni, U.; Orij, R.P. Corporate Governance and Sustainability Performance: Analysis of Triple Bottom Line Performance. J. Bus. Ethics 2018, 149, 411–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manes-Rossi, F.; Tiron-Tudor, A.; Nicolò, G.; Zanellato, G. Ensuring More Sustainable Reporting in Europe Using Non-Financial Disclosure—De Facto and De Jure Evidence. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hawrysz, L.; Foltys, J. Environmental Aspects of Social Responsibility of Public Sector Organizations. Sustainability 2016, 8, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sutopo, B.; Kot, S.; Adiati, A.K.; Ardila, L.N. Sustainability Reporting and Value Relevance of Financial Statements. Sustainability 2018, 10, 678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ceulemans, K.; Lozano, R.; Alonso-Almeida, M.M. Sustainability Reporting in Higher Education: Interconnecting the Reporting Process and Organisational Change Management for Sustainability. Sustainability 2015, 7, 8881–8903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gușe, R.G.; Almășan, A.; Circa, C.; Dumitru, M. The role of the stakeholders in the institutionalization of the CSR reporting in Romania. Account. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2016, 15, 304. [Google Scholar]
- An, Y.; Davey, H.; Harun, H. Sustainability Reporting at a New Zealand Public University: A Longitudinal Analysis. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zou, H.L.; Zeng, S.X.; Xie, L.N.; Zeng, R.C. Are Top Executives Rewarded for Environmental Performance? The Role of the Board of Directors in the Context of China. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. Int. J. 2015, 21, 1542–1565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maj, J. Embedding Diversity in Sustainability Reporting. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Makni, R.; Francoeur, C.; Bellavance, F. Causality between corporate social performance and financial performance: Evidence from Canadian firms. J. Bus. Ethics 2009, 89, 409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alcorn, S.; Alcorn, M. Benefit Corporations: A New Formula for Social Change; Associations Now: Washington, DC, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Higgins, C.; Coffey, B. Improving how sustainability reports drive change: A critical discourse analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 136, 18–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Latridis, G.E. Environmental disclosure quality: Evidence on environmental performance, corporate governance and value relevance. Emerg. Mark. Rev. 2013, 14, 55–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, W.; Du, J.; Zhang, W. Corporate Social Responsibility Information Disclosure and Innovation Sustainability: Evidence from China. Sustainability 2020, 12, 409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cormier, D.; Aerts, W.; Ledoux, M.J.; Magnan, M. Attributes of social and human capital disclosure and information asymmetry between managers and investors. Can. J. Adm. Sci. 2009, 26, 71–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dhaliwal, D.S.; Li, O.Z.; Tsang, A.; Yang, Y.G. Voluntary nonfinancial disclosure and the cost of equity capital: The initiation of corporate social responsibility reporting. Account. Rev. 2011, 86, 59–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Truant, E.; Corazza, L.; Scagnelli, S.D. Sustainability and Risk Disclosure: An Exploratory Study on Sustainability Reports. Sustainability 2017, 9, 636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yu, Y.; Huang, J.; Luo, N. Can More Environmental Information Disclosure Lead to Higher Eco-Efficiency? Evidence from China. Sustainability 2018, 10, 528. [Google Scholar]
- Orlitzky, M.; Swanson, D.L. Assessing Stakeholder Satisfaction: Toward a Supplemental Measure of Corporate Social Performance as Reputation. Corp. Reput. Rev. 2012, 15, 119–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buchan, D. New directions in social impact assessment: Conceptual and methodological advances. Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais. 2012, 30, 137–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Grieco, C. Assessing Social Impact of Social Enterprises: Does One Size Really Fit All; Springer Briefs in Business; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; ISBN 978-3-319-15314-8. [Google Scholar]
- Cameron, J. Social Accounting: A Practical Guide for Small Community Organisations and Enterprises; Centre for Urban and Regional Studies: Birmingham, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Costa, E.; Pesci, C. Social impact measurement: Why do stakeholders matter? Sustain. Account. Manag. Policy J. 2016, 7, 99–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bice, S. Bridging corporate social responsibility and social impact assessment. Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais. 2015, 33, 160–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schneider, A.; Meins, E. Two Dimensions of Corporate Sustainability Assessment: Towards a Comprehensive Framework. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2012, 21, 211–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- GRI. 2018. Available online: https://www.globalreporting.org/information/news-and-press-center/newsarchive/Pages/2018.aspx (accessed on 20 November 2019).
- Wood, D.J. Social issues in management: Theory and research in corporate social performance. J. Manag. 1991, 17, 383–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giroud, X.; Mueller, H.M. Corporate governance, product market competition, and equity prices. J. Financ. 2011, 66, 563–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Santoyo-Castelazo, E.; Azapagic, A. Sustainability assessment of energy systems: Integrating environmental, economic and social aspects. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 80, 119–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frost, G.; Jones, S.; Loftus, J.; Laan, S. A Survey of Sustainability Reporting Practices of Australian Reporting Entities. Aust. Account. Rev. 2005, 15, 89–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Korka, M. Corporate social responsibility in Romania: From theory to practice. Transit. Stud. Rev. 2005, 12, 47–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Knechel, W.; Vanstraelen, A. The relationship between auditor tenure and audit quality implied by going concern opinions. Audit. J. Pract. Theory 2007, 26, 113–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fülöp, M.T. Audit in Corporate Governance; Alma Mater Publishing House: Cluj-Napoca, Romania, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Rodgers, W.; Fayi, S.A. Ethical pathways of internal audit reporting lines. Account. Forum 2018, 43, 220–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khurana, I.; Raman, K. Litigation risk and the financial reporting credibility of Big 4 versus non-Big 4 audits: Evidence from Anglo-American countries. Account. Rev. 2004, 79, 473–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lozano, R.; Nummert, B.; Ceulemans, K. Elucidating the relationship between Sustainability Reporting and Organisational Change Management for Sustainability. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 125, 168–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kang, H.-H.; Liu, S.-B. Corporate social responsibility and corporate performance: A quantile regression approach. Qual. Quant. 2014, 48, 3311–3325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heinze, D.; Sibary, S.; Sikula, S. Andrew, Relations among corporate social responsibility, financial soundness, and investment value in 22 manufacturing industry groups. Ethics Behav. 1999, 9, 331–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cupertino, S.; Consolandi, C.; Vercelli, A. Corporate Social Performance, Financialization, and Real Investment in US Manufacturing Firms. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dang, C.; Li, Z.F.; Yang, C. Measuring firm size in empirical corporate finance. J. Bank. Financ. 2018, 86, 159–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cui, J.; Jo, H.; Na, H. Does corporate social responsibility affect information asymmetry? J. Bus. Ethics 2018, 148, 549–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morioka, S.N.; Carvalho, M.M. Measuring sustainability in practice: Exploring the inclusion of sustainability into corporate performance systems in Brazilian case studies. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 136, 123–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elena Windolph, S.; Schaltegger, S.; Herzig, C. Implementing corporate sustainability: What drives the application of sustainability management tools in Germany? Sustain. Account. Manag. Policy J. 2014, 5, 378–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- National Institute of Statistics of Romania. Available online: https://insse.ro/cms/en (accessed on 20 May 2019).
- Munteanu, I.; Grigorescu, A.; Condrea, E.; Pelinescu, E. Convergent Insights for Sustainable Development and Ethical Cohesion: An Empirical Study on Corporate Governance in Romanian Public Entities. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Khan, A.; Muttakin, M.B.; Siddiqui, J. Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility disclosures: Evidence from an emerging economy. J. Bus. Ethics 2013, 114, 207–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simnett, R.; Vanstraelen, A.; Fong Chua, W. Assurance on sustainability reports: An international comparison. Account. Rev. 2009, 84, 937–967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Masud, M.A.K.; Nurunnabi, M.; Bae, S.M. The effects of corporate governance on environmental sustainability reporting: Empirical evidence from South Asian countries. Asian J. Sustain. Soc. Responsib. 2018, 3, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Izzo, M.F.; Ciaburri, M.; Tiscini, R. The Challenge of Sustainable Development Goal Reporting: The First Evidence from Italian Listed Companies. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Age Interval in Years | Managers | Percentage (%) |
---|---|---|
<25 | 73 | 22.81 |
25–30 | 77 | 24.06 |
30–40 | 88 | 27.50 |
40–50 | 65 | 20.31 |
50–60 | 17 | 5.32 |
Total | 320 | 100.0 |
Region | ||
South-East Region | 50 | 15.62 |
Central Region | 65 | 20.31 |
South Region | 42 | 13.12 |
North-East Region | 40 | 12.50 |
North-West Region | 48 | 15.00 |
West Region | 37 | 11.57 |
South-West Region | 38 | 11.88 |
Total | 320 | 100.0 |
Variables | Definition | Number of Items |
---|---|---|
Dependent variable | ||
Corporate sustainability index (Y) | 8 | |
Independent variable | ||
Corporate reputation (β1) | The internal evaluation of Reputation Quotient instrument [22,56] | 7 |
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) behavior (β2) | CSR behavior refers to the behavioral aspects of CSR and demonstrates a consideration of the CSR reporting instruments [2,20] | 6 |
CSR communication instruments (β3) | Ways in which organizations make their CSR projects known [8,73] | 5 |
Financial transparency (β4) | The extent to which financial reports reveal the index of the audit committee towards those using the financial reports [11,70,72] | 6 |
Social impact assessment (β5) | Include the social | 5 |
factors from Global Reporting | ||
Initiative and return on investment [57,61] | ||
Control variables | ||
Return on assets (ROA) (β6) | Calculated as the ratio between the company’s net profit and total assets [76,77] | 7 |
Organization size (β7) | Category to which it belongs | 7 |
Environmental performance (β8) | The effects of the investment in CSR on the natural environment [19,64,65] | 7 |
Variables | N | Mean | SD | Factor Loading | Cronbach Alpha | AVE | CR |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Corporate reputation (β1) | 320 | 4.48 | 1.468 | 0.54 | 0.58 | 0.35 | 0.63 |
CSR behavior (β2) | 320 | 4.72 | 1.572 | 0.58 | 0.67 | 0.32 | 0.38 |
CSR communication instruments (β3) | 320 | 2.76 | 0.276 | 0.55 | 0.58 | 0.52 | 0.71 |
Financial transparency (β4) | 320 | 3.74 | 0.532 | 0.46 | 0.69 | 0.22 | 0.52 |
Social impact assessment (β5) | 320 | 2.68 | 0.146 | 0.28 | 0.58 | 0.34 | 0.60 |
ROA (β6) | 320 | 2.56 | 0.245 | 0.48 | 0.68 | 0.32 | 0.61 |
Organization size (β7) | 320 | 3.18 | 0.269 | 0.52 | 0.59 | 0.52 | 0.72 |
Environmental performance (β8) | 320 | 2.47 | 0.181 | 0.44 | 0.62 | 0.52 | 0.68 |
Hypotheses | Path | Standard Coefficient | Critical Ratio | Result | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1 | CSR behavior | Financial performance | 0.48 | 6.74 | Supported |
H2 | Corporate reputation | Financial performance | 0.22 | 5.62 | Supported |
H3 | Social impact assessment | Financial performance | 0.18 | 4.44 | Supported |
H4 | Environmental performance | CSR behavior | 0.14 | 3.99 | Supported |
H5 | Financial transparency | CSR behavior | 0.38 | 6.14 | Supported |
H6 | CSR communication instruments | Financial performance | 0.17 | 4.72 | Supported |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Oncioiu, I.; Petrescu, A.-G.; Bîlcan, F.-R.; Petrescu, M.; Popescu, D.-M.; Anghel, E. Corporate Sustainability Reporting and Financial Performance. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4297. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104297
Oncioiu I, Petrescu A-G, Bîlcan F-R, Petrescu M, Popescu D-M, Anghel E. Corporate Sustainability Reporting and Financial Performance. Sustainability. 2020; 12(10):4297. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104297
Chicago/Turabian StyleOncioiu, Ionica, Anca-Gabriela Petrescu, Florentina-Raluca Bîlcan, Marius Petrescu, Delia-Mioara Popescu, and Elena Anghel. 2020. "Corporate Sustainability Reporting and Financial Performance" Sustainability 12, no. 10: 4297. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104297