THE VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURE OF SUSTAINABLE INFORMATION: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SPANISH AND BRAZILIAN COMPANIES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11606/rco.v7i17.56690Keywords:
CSR, Institutional theory, Brazil, Spain, GRIAbstract
The current importance of sustainability in the corporate field has made CSR practices a key aspect to achieve social legitimacy and fulfil social expectations. In this context, disclosure is considered as a tool to inform stakeholders about the activities undertaken and thereby attaining social conformity. Nevertheless, the different economic and social contexts may lead to differences both in the practices and in the disclosure, according to the Institutional Theory. This study focuses on the potential differences that may arise among companies from Brazil and Spain, concerning the disclosure of information about CSR. Moreover, we analyze the influence of some factors on the disclosure, such as corporate size, profitability and growth opportunities. Our evidence is in line with the Institutional Theory, obtaining significant differences among Brazilian and Spanish companies, as for the disclosure of CSR practices. Also, our findings emphasize the role played by public visibility in the development of higher-quality information.
Downloads
References
Adams, C.A. (2002). Internal organisational factors
influencing corporate social and ethical reporting.
Accounting, Auditing and Accountability, 15(2),
223-250.
Adams, C.A., Hill, W.Y., & Roberts, C.B. (1995).
Environmental employee and ethical reporting
in Europe. ACCA Research Report 41, Chartered
Association of Certified Accountants, London.
Archel, P. (2003). La divulgación de la información social
y medioambiental en la gran empresa española en el
período 1994-1998: Situación actual y perspectivas.
Revista Española de Financiación y Contabilidad,
32 (117), p. 571-601.
Archel, P., & Lizarraga, F. (2001). Algunos determinantes de la información medioambiental divulgada
por las empresas españolas cotizadas. Revista de
Contabilidad, 44 (7), p. 129-153.
Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas – ABNT.
(2004). NBR 16001: responsabilidade social,
sistemas da gestão e requisitos. Rio de Janeiro:
ABNT.
Baughn, C.C., Bodie, N.L., & McIntosh, J.C. (2007).
Corporate social and environmental responsibility
in Asian countries and other geographical regions.
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management, 14 (4), p. 189 – 205.
Belkaoui, A., & Karpik, P. (1989). Determinants of the
corporate decision to disclose social information.
Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 2
(1), p. 36-51.
Braga, J. P., & Salotti, B. M. (2008). Relação entre
nível de disclosure ambiental e características
corporativas de empresas no Brasil. In: Congresso
USP de Controladoria e Contabilidade 2008, São
Paulo. Anais. São Paulo: FEA/USP.
Buhr, N., & Friedman, M. (2001). Culture, institutional
factors and differences in environmental disclosure
between Canada and The United States. Critical
Perspectives on Accounting, 12 (3): 293-322.
Calixto, L. (2007). “Uma análise da evidenciação
ambiental de companhias brasileiras – de 1997 a
2005”. UnB Contábil – UnB, Brasília, vol. 10, n.1,
jan/jun.
Clarkson, P.M., Li, Y., Richardson, G., &Vasvari,
F. (2008). Revisiting the relation between
environmental performance and environmental
disclosure: An empirical analysis, Accounting,
Organizations and Society, 33, p. 303-327.
Costa, R.S., & Marion, J. C. (2007). A uniformidade na
evidenciação das informações ambientais. Revista
de Contabilidade e Finanças, USP, São Paulo, n.
43, p. 20 – 33. Jan/abr.
Cowen, S., Ferreri, L., & Parker, L.D. (1987). The impact
of corporate characteristics on social responsibility
disclosure: A typology and frequency-based
analysis. Accounting, Organizations and Society,
12 (2), p. 111-122.
Cunha, J. V. A., & Ribeiro, M. (2008). Divulgação
voluntária de informações de natureza social:
um estudo nas empresas brasileiras. Revista de
Administração - Eletrônica, v.1, n.1.
Deegan, C., & Gordon, B. (1996). A study of the
environmental disclosure practices of Australian
corporations. Accounting and Business Research,
26 (3), p. 187-199.
DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1983). The Iron Cage
Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective
Rationality in Organisational Fields, American
Sociological Review, 48, pp. 147-160.
Dowling, J. & Pfeffer, J. (1975). Organisational
Legitimacy: Social Values and Organisational
Behaviour. The Pacific Sociological Review, 18 (1),
pp. 122-136.
Fekrat, M.A., Inclan, C., & Petroni, D. (1996). Corporate
environmental disclosures: Competitive disclosure
hypothesis using annual report data. International
Journal of Accounting, 31 (2), p. 175–195.
Ferreira, Zilneide O. (2011) O investimento direto externo
espanhol no Brasil e as relações hispano-brasileiras
(1995-2005). Revista Bibliográfica de Geografía y
Ciencias Sociales. Universidad de Bracelona. Vol.
XVII, n. 970.
França, A. S. T., Favoretto, J. R., & Braga, S. S.(2011).
Estratégias de responsabilidade social das empresas
na internet: Uma análise comparativa dos conteúdos
dos websites corporativos, Revista de Gestão Social
e Ambiental, v. 5, n. 3, p. 150-167, set./dez. 2011.
Freedman, M., & Jaggi B. (1988). An analysis of the
association between pollution disclosure and
economic performance. Accounting, Auditing and
Accountability Journal, 1 (2), p. 43-58.
Freedman, M., & Stagliano, A.J. (1992). European
unification, accounting harmonization, and
social disclosures, The International Journal of
Accounting, 27, p. 112–122.
Galaskiewicz, J. (1991). Making corporate actor
accountable: Institution-building in MinneapolisSt.Paul, en Powell, W.W. y DiMaggio, P.J. (eds),
The new institutionalism in organizational analysis.
University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
Gamble, G.O., Hsu, K., & Tollerson, C.D. (1996).
Environmental disclosures in annual reports: An
international perspective. The International Journal
of Accounting, 31 (3), p. 293–331.
García-Sánchez, I.M., Rodríguez Domínguez, L., &
Gallego Alvarez, I. (2011). Corporate governance
and strategic information on the Internet: A study
of Spanish listed companies. Accounting Auditing
& Accountability Journal, 24 (4), p. 471-501.
Global Reporting Initiative – GRI. Sustainability report.
Available in http://www.globalreporting.org.
Access in 18/04/12.
Gray, S.J. 1998. Towards a theory of cultural influence
on the development of accounting systems
internationally. Abacus. 24: 1-15.
Gray, R., Walters, D., Bebbington, J., & Thompson, I.
(1995). The greening of enterprise: an exploration
of the (non) role of environmental accounting
and environmental accountants in organizational
change. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 6 (3),
pp. 211-239.
Gray, R. H., Javad, M., Power, D., & Sinclair, C.D. (2001).
Social and environmental disclosures and corporate
characteristics: A research note and extension.
Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 28 (3
and 4), p. 327-356.
Guthrie, J., & Parker, L.D. (1989). Corporate social
reporting; a rebuttal of legitimacy theory. Accounting
and Business Research, 19(76), p. 343-352.
Hackston, D., & Milne, M.J. (1996). Some determinants
of social and environmental disclosures in New
Zealand companies. Accounting, Auditing and
Accountability Journal, 9 (1), p. 77-108.
Haniffa, R.M., & Cooke, T.E. (2005). The impact
of culture and governance on corporate social
reporting. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy,
24, p. 391-430.
Institute of Social And Ethical Accountability. AA
1000 Series of standards. Available in http://www.
accountability21.net/aa1000/default.asp. Access in
16/04/12.
Instituto Brasileiro de Análises Econômicas E Sociais
– Ibase. Balanço social. Available in http://www.
ibase.org.br/index.php. Access in 16/04/12.
Instituto Ethos de Empresas e Responsabilidade
Social (2006). – Ethos. Responsabilidade social
empresarial nos processos gerenciais e nas cadeias
de valor. São Paulo: Ethos.
Larrinaga-González, C. (2007). Sustainability Reporting:
Insights from Neoinstitutional Theory, in
Unerman, J., Bebbington, J., & O’Dwyer, B. (eds),
Sustainability, Accounting and Accountability,
Routledge, Abingdon.
Leite, L.C.Q.C (2011). Responsabilidade Social
Corporativa Como Estratégia De Negócio: modelos
conceituais e exemplos ilustrativos. Dissertação de
Mestrado. Escola de Administração de Empresas de
São Paulo/FGV.
Leite Filho, G.A, Prates, L.A, & Guimarães, T.N. (2009).
Análise dos níveis de evidenciação dos relatórios
de sustentabilidade das empresas brasileiras A+ do
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) no ano de 2007.
Revista de Contabilidade e Organizações, 3 (7), pp.
43-59.
Marcuccio, M. & Steccolini, I. (2005). Social and
Environmental Reporting in Local Governments: A
New Italian Fashion. Public Management Review, 7
(2), pp. 155-176.
Meek, G. K., Roberts, C. B., & Gray, S. J. 1995. Factors
Influencing Voluntary Annual Report Disclosure by
U.S., U.K. and Continental European Multinational
Corporations. Journal of International Business
Studies, 26: 555–572.
Meyer, J.W. & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized
organizations: Formal structure as myth and
ceremony, in Powell, W. y DiMaggio, P.J. (eds),
The new institutionalism in organizational analysis.
University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
Meyer, J.W., & Scott, W.R. (1983). Organizational
environments: Ritual and rationality”, Sage,
Beverly Hills, CA.
Milani Filho, M.A.F. (2008). Responsabilidade Social e
Investimento Social Privado: entre o discurso e a
evidenciação. Revista Contabilidade & Finanças, v.
19, p. 89-101.
Murcia, F.D. (2009). Disclosure Social e Ambiental:
Análise das Pesquisas Científicas Veiculadas em
Periódicos de Língua Inglesa. Contabilidade Vista
& Revista, v. 20, p. 15-40.
Mussari, R., & Monfardini, P. (2010). Practices of
Social Reporting in Public Sector and Non-Profit
Organizations. Public Management Review, 12 (4),
pp. 487-92.
Mussoi, A., & Van Bellen, H. M. (2010). Evidenciação
ambiental: uma comparação do nível de
evidenciação de empresas brasileiras. Revista de
Contabilidade e Organizações, 4 (9), pp. 55-78.
Neu D., Warsame, H., & Pedwell, K. (1998). Managing
public impressions: Environmental disclosures
in annual reports, Accounting, Organizations and
Society, 23(3), p. 265-282.
Nikolaeva, R. & Bicho, M. 2011. The role of institutional
and reputational factors in the voluntary adoption of
corporate social responsibility reporting standards,
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39
(1), p. 136-157.
Niskala, M., & Pretes, M. (1995). Environmental
reporting in Finland: A note on the use of annual
reports. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20
(6), p. 457-466.
Nossa, V. (2002). Disclosure ambiental: uma análise do
conteúdo dos relatórios ambientais de empresas do
setor de papel e celulose em nível internacional.
Tese de Doutorado. Faculdade de Economia,
Administração e Contabilidade. USP.
Ochoa, E., & Aranguren, N. (2005). Divulgación
de información social y medioambiental. Un
estudio empírico de las empresas del IBEX 35,
Comunicación presentada al XIII Congreso AECA,
Oviedo.
Oliveira, J.A.P. (2005, jan./jul). Uma avaliação dos
balanços sociais das 500 maiores. Revista de
Administração Eletrônica, v. 4, n. 1.
Oliver, C. (1997). Sustainable competitive advantage:
Combining institutional and resource based view.
Strategic Management Journal, 18 (9), pp. 697-713.
Patten, D. (1991). Exposure, legitimacy and social
disclosure. Journal of Accounting and Public
Policy, 10 (4), p. 297-308.
Prado-Lorenzo, J.M., & García-Sánchez, I.M. 2010.
The role of the board of directors in disseminating
relevant information on greenhouse gases, Journal of Business Ethics, 97, p. 391-424.
Prado-Lorenzo, J.M., Gallego-Álvarez, I., & GarcíaSánchez, I.M. 2009. Stakeholder engagement
and corporate social responsibility reporting:
the ownership structure effect, Corporate Social
Responsibility and Environmental Management,
16(2), p. 94-107.
Roberts, R.W. (1992). Determinants of corporate
social responsibility disclosure: an application of
stakeholder theory. Accounting, Organizations and
Society, 17 (6), p. 595-612.
Rover, S. Borba, J.A., & Murcia, F.D. (2009).
Características do Disclosure Ambiental de
Empresas Brasileiras Potencialmente Poluidoras:
análise das demonstrações financeiras e dos
relatórios de sustentabilidade do período de 2005
a 2007. Revista Contemporânea de Economia e
Gestão, Vol. 7, No 1.
Scott, W.R. (1987): “The Adolescence of Institutional
Theory”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 32 (4),
pp. 493-511.
Social Accountability Institute – SAI. SA 8000
Certification. Available in: http://www.sa-intl.org/.
Access in 17/04/12.
Souza, J. A., & Costa, T. M.T (2012). Responsabilidade
social empresarial e desenvolvimento sustentável:
conceitos, práticas e desafios para a contabilidade.
Organizações em Contexto, São Bernardo do
Campo. V. 8, n. 15, jan.-jun.
Spicer, BH. (1978). Investors, corporate social
performance and information disclosure: an
empirical study. Accounting Review, 53 (1), pp.
94–111.
The World Bank. Available in: http://data.worldbank.org.
Access in 29/10/12.
Trotman, K.T., & Bradley, G.W. (1981). Associations
between social responsibility disclosure and
characteristics of companies. Accounting,
Organizations and Society, 6 (4), p. 355-362.
Van der Laan Smith, J., Adhikari, A., & Tondkar, R.H.
2005. Exploring differences in social disclosure
internationally: A stakeholder perspective, Journal
of Accounting and Public Policy, 24, p. 123-151.
Watts. R.L., & Zimmerman. J.L. (1978). Towards a
Positive Theory of the Determination of Accounting
Standards. The Accounting Review, 53 (1), p. 112-
134.
Williams, C.A., 1999. The Securities and Exchange
Commission and corporate social transparency.
Harvard Law Review 112, p. 1197–1311.
Williams, M.S., & Wern Pei, C.H. 1999. Corporate social
disclosures by listed companies on their web sites:
An international comparison. The International
Journal of Accounting, 34 (3), p. 389–419.
Xiao, J.Z., Gao, S.S., Heravi, S., & Cheung, Y.C.Q. 2005.
The impact of social and economic development on
corporate social and environmental disclosure in
Hong Kong and the UK. Advances in International
Accounting, 18, p. 219–243.
Zukin, S., & DiMaggio, P. (1990): Structures of Capital:
The Social Organization of the Economy, Cambridge
University Press.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
The RCO adopts the Free Open Access policy, under the standard Creative Commons agreement (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). The agreement provides that:
- Submission of text authorizes its publication and implies commitment that the same material is not being submitted to another journal. The original is considered definitive.
- Authors retain the copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which allows the sharing of the work with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are authorized to take additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g. publish in an institutional repository or as a book chapter), with necessary recognition of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are allowed and encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on their personal page) before or during the editorial process, as this can generate productive changes as well as increase the impact and citation of published work (See The Effect of Free Access).
- The journal does not pay copyright to the authors of the published texts.
- The journal's copyright holder, except those already agreed in the Free Open Access Agreement (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), is the Accounting Department of the Faculty of Economics, Administration and Accounting of Ribeirão Preto of the University of São Paulo.
No submission or publication fees are charged.
Up to 4 authors per article are accepted. Exceptionally duly justified cases may be reviewed by the Executive Committee of the RCO. Exceptional cases are considered as: multi-institutional projects; manuscripts resulting from the collaboration of research groups; or involving large teams for evidence collection, construction of primary data, and comparative experiments.
It is recommended that the authorship be ordered by contribution of each of the individuals listed as authors, especially in the design and planning of the research project, in obtaining or analyzing and interpreting data, and writing. Authors must declare the actual contributions of each author, filling the letter to the editor, at the beginning of the submission, taking responsibility for the information given.
Authors are allowed to change throughout the evaluation process and prior to the publication of the manuscript. The Authors should indicate the composition and final order of authorship in the document signed by all those involved when accepted for publication. If the composition and authoring order is different than previously reported in the system, all previously listed authors should be in agreement.
In the case of identification of authorship without merit or contribution (ghost, guest or gift authorship), the RCO follows the procedure recommended by COPE.
