ENVIRONMENTAL DISCLOSURE: DOES REGULATION SOLVE THE LACK OF COMPARABILITY AND OBJECTIVITY?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11606/rco.v7i17.56667Keywords:
Regulation, Environmental disclosure, Objectivity, ComparabilityAbstract
The main aim in this research was to investigate the impact of regulation on environmental disclosure (ED). Lack of objectivity and comparability have been indicated in earlier studies as the main limitations of companies’ ED and understanding how regulation can influence these limitations is fundamental for the advancement of discussions about the need to regulate these practices or not. Environmental information was analyzed in the annual reports for the year 2007 of 120 companies of equivalent size, from the oil and natural gas sector, in four countries with cultural similarities: the United States, Canada, England and Australia. To classify the data, a scale was used that was adapted from two studies on environmental disclosure, the study by Clarkson et al (2008) and by Wiseman (1982). To analyze the regulatory differences, existing studies were used in which this survey was previously undertaken. The results showed that, in countless with more extensive and specific regulatory mechanisms with greater enforcement power, environmental disclosure practices are more objective and comparable, that is, regulation can be one of the solutions to improve companies’ environmental disclosure.Downloads
References
Adams, C. A. (2004). The ethical, social and environmental
reporting-performance portrayal gap. Accounting,
Auditing & Accountability Journal. 17(5), 731-757.
Aerts, W., Cormier, D. & Magnan, M. (2006) Intra-industry imitation in corporate environmental
reporting: An international perspective. Journal of
Accounting and Public Policy. 25, 299-331.
Alciatore, M., Dee, C. & Easton, P. (2004) Changes in
environmental regulation and reporting: the case of
the petroleum industry from 1989 to 1998. Journal
of Accounting and Public Policy. 23, 295-304.
Beets, D.S. & Souther, C.C. (1999). Corporate
Environmental Reports: The Need for Standards and
an Environmental Assurance Service. Accounting
Horizons. 3(2), 129-145.
Buhr, N. (2007). Histories of and Rationales for
Sustainability Reporting. In: Unerman, J.,
Bebbington, J. & O’Dwyer, B.(Editores).
Sustainability, Accounting and Accountability. New
York: Routledge. Cap. 3, 57-69.
Buhr, N. & Freefman, M. (1996). A Comparison of
Mandated and Voluntary Environmental Disclosure:
The Case of Canada and United States. Critical
Perspectives in Accounting Conference. New York.
Clarkson, P. M., Li, Y., Richardson, G.D., Vasvari,
F.P. (2008) Revisiting the relation between
environmental performance and environmental
disclosure: An empirical analysis. Accounting,
Organizations and Society. 33, 303-327.
Cormier, D. & Gordon, I. M. (2001). An examination
of social and environmental reporting strategies.
Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal.
14(5), 587-616.
Cormier, D, Magnan, M. & Velthoven, V. B. (2005).
Environmental Disclosure Quality in Large German
Companies: Economic Incentives, Public Pressure
or Institutional Conditions? European Accounting
Review. 14(1), 3-39.
Costa, R.S. & Marion, J.C. (2007, janeiro/abril). A
uniformidade na evidenciação das informações
ambientais. Revista de Contabilidade & Finanças
da USP, (43), 20-33.
Cowan, S. & Gadenne, D. (2005). Australian corporate
environmental reporting: a comparative analysis of
disclosure practices across voluntary and mandatory
disclosure systems. Journal of Accounting &
Organizational Change. 2(1), 165-179.
Deegan, C. & Gordon, B. (1996). A study of the
environmental disclosures practices of Australian
corporations. Accounting and Business Research.
187-199.
Deegan, C. & Rankin, M. (1996). Do Australian
companies report environmental news objectively?
An analysis of environmental disclosures by firms
prosecuted successfully by the Environmental
Protection Authority. Accounting, Auditing &
Accountability Journal. 9(2), 50-67.
Defond, M, Hu, X., Hung, M. & Li, S. (2011). The impact
of mandatory IFRS adoption on foreign mutual
fund ownership: The role of comparability. Journal
of Accounting and Economics. 51, 240-258.
Freedman, M. & Stagliano, A.J. (2007). Some new evidence on the effectiveness of authoritative
environmental reporting guidance. Advances in
Public Interest Accounting. 13, 1–15.
Freedman, M. & Wasley, C. (1990). The association
between environmental performance and
environmental disclosure in annual reports and
10K. Advances in Public Interest Accounting. 3,
183-193.
Frost, G.R. (2007). The introduction of mandatory
environmental reporting guidelines: Australian
evidence. Abacus. 43(2).
Gallhofer, S. & Haslam, J. (1997). The direction of green
accounting policy: critical reflections. Accounting,
Auditing & Accountability Journal, 10(2).
Gamble, G.O., Hsu, K., Jackson, C. & Tollerson, C.D.
(1996). Environmental disclosures in annual reports:
an international perspective. The International
Journal of Accounting. 31(3), 293-331.
Gao, S. S., Heravi, S. & Xiao, J. Z. (2005). Determinants
of corporate social and environmental reporting in
Hong Kong: a research note. Accounting Forum.
29, 233-242.
Gray, R. & Bebbington, J. (2001). Accounting for the
Environment. 2 ed. London: Sage.
Gray, R., Javad, M., Power, D. M. & Sinclair, C. D. (2001,
abril/maio). Social and Environmental Disclosure
and Corporate Characteristics: A Research Note
and Extention. Journal of Business Finance &
Accounting. 28(3) e (4).
Gray, R., Kouhy, R. & Lavers, S. (1995). Corporate
Social and Environmental Reporting: A Review
of the Literature and a Longitudinal Study of UK
Disclosure. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability
Journal. 8(2), 47-77.
Gray, R., Owen, D. & Adams, C. (1996). Accounting
& Accountability: Changes and Challenges in
Corporate Social and Environmental Reporting.
Londres: Prentice Hall.
Global Reporting Initiative. (Gri). (2009). The
Amsterdam Declaration on Transparency and
Reporting. Recuperado em 09 de janeiro de 2011, de
http://www.globalreporting.org/CurrentPriorities/
AmsterdamDeclaration/.
Gunningham, N., Grabosky, P. & SinclairR, D. (1998).
Smart Regulation: Designing Environmental
Policy. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.
Guthrie, J., Cuganesan, S. & Ward, L. (2008). Industry
specific social and environmental reporting: The
Australian Food and Beverage Industry. Accounting
Forum. 32, 1-15.
Harte, G. & Owen, D. (1991). Environmental
Disclosures in the Annual Reports of British
Companies: A Research Note. Accounting, Auditing
& Accountability Journal. 4(3), 51-61.
Hackston, D. & Milne, M. J. (1996). Some determinants
of social and environmental disclosures in New
Zealand companies. Accounting, Auditing &
Accountability Journal. 9(1), 77-108.
Halme, M. & Huse, M. (1997). The influence of
corporate governance, industry and country factors
on environmental reporting. Scandinavian Journal
of Management. 13(2), 137-157.
Holgaard, J.E. & Jorgensen, T. H. (2005). A Decade of
Mandatory Environmental Reporting in Denmark.
European Environment. 15, 362-373.
Holland, L. & Foo, B.Y. (2003). Differences in
environmental reporting practices in the UK and
the US: the legal and regulatory context. The British
Accounting Review. 35, 1-18.
Ilinitch, A. Y., Soderstrom, N. S. & Thomas, T. E. (1998).
Measuring corporate environmental performance.
Journal of Accounting and Public Policy. 17.
International Institute for Industrial Environmental
Economics - IIIEE. Corporate environmental
reporting: review of policy action in Europe. Lund
University. 2002. Recuperado em 24 de agos. de
2007, de .
Jorgensen, B. N. & Soderstrom, N. S. (2007).
Environmental disclosures within legal and
accounting contexts an international perspective.
Columbia business school / Chazen Web Journal.
15.
Keeble, J. J., Topiol, S. & Berkeley, S. (2003). Using
Indicators to Measure Sustainability Performance at
a Corporate and Project Level. Journal of Business
Ethics. 44, 149-158.
Kpmg – International and Sustainability ltd. United
Nations Environment Programme (Unep). (2006).
Carrots and sticks for starters: current trends and
approaches in voluntary and mandatory standards
for sustainability reporting. London. Recuperado
em 03 de jun. de 2008, de
sustainability.com>.
Leuz, C. & Wysocki, P. (2008). Economic consequences
of financial reporting and disclosure regulation: A
review and suggestions for future research. Social
Science Research Network. 16 Recuperado em fev
de 2012, de www.ssrn.com.
Larrinaga, C., Carrasco, F., Correa, C., Llena, F.
& Moneva, J. M. (2002). Accountability and
accounting regulation: the case of the spanish
environmental disclosure standard. The European
Accounting Review. 11(4), 723-740.
Moser, D. V. & Martin, P. R. (2012, maio). A Broader
Perspective on Corporate Social Responsibility
Research in Accounting. The Accounting Review.
87(3), 797-806.
Mussoi, A. & Van Bellen, H. M. (2010). Evidenciação
Ambiental: Uma Comparação do Nível de Evidenciação entre os Relatórios de Empresas
Brasileiras. RCO – Revista de Contabilidade e
Organizações. FEA-RP/USP. 4(9),55-78.
Nober, C. & Parker, R. (2008). Comparative
International Accounting. 10 ed. Cambrige:
Printice Hall.
Nyquist, S. (2003). The legislation of environmental
disclosure in three nordic contries – a comparison.
Business Strategy and the Environment, 12, 12-
25.
Power, M. (1991). Auditing and Environmental
Expertise: Between Protest and
Professionalization. Accounting, Auditing &
Accountability Journal. 4(3).
Repetto, R., Macskimming, A. & Isunza, G. C.
(2002). Environmental Disclosure Requirements
in the Securities Regulations and Financial
Accounting Standards of Canada, Mexico and the
United States. Commission for Environmental
Cooperation. 2002. Recuperado em 10 de maio
de 2008, de .
Ribeiro, A. M., Bellen, H. M. V & Carvalho, L. N. G.
(2011). Regulamentar Faz Diferença? O Caso da
Evidenciação Ambiental. Revista Contabilidade
e Finanças [online]. 22(56), 137-154. ISSN
1808-057X
Roberts, C. B. (1991). Environmental Disclosures: A
Note on Reporting Practices in Mainland Europe.
Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal.
4(3).
Skillius, A. & Wennberg, U. (1998). Continuity,
credibility and comparability: key challenges
for corporate environmental performance
measurement and communication. The
International Institute for Industrial
Environmental Economics at Lund University.
1998. Recuperado de 20 de janeiro de 2008, de
<http://reports.eea.europa.eu/ESS09/en/ccc.pdf>
Stigler, G. J. (1971). The Theory of Economic
Regulation. The Bell Journal of Economics and
Management Science. 2(1), Spring, 3-21.
Trotman, K. T. & Bradley, G. W. (1981). Association
between social responsibility disclosure and
characteristics of companies. Accounting,
Organizations and Society. 6(4), 355-362.
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
(UNCTAD). (1997). Environmental financial
accounting and reporting at the corporate level.
New York: United Nations.
Wiseman, J. (1982). An evaluation of environmental
disclosures made in corporate annual reports.
Accounting, Organization and Society, 7(1), 553-
563.
Zerk, J. A. (2006). Multinationals and Corporate Social
Responsibility: Limitations and Opportunities
in International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
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.
