PurposeThe global interest in climate change makes carbon information important for decision-making. This study examines to what extent companies voluntarily disclose and manage greenhouse gas (GHG) information and whether board diversity and industry type explain variations in the level of disclosure and management of GHG information.Design/methodology/approachCross-sectional data analysis is used for the Financial Stock Exchange 350 (UK FTSE 350) in 2017. Disclosure of GHG information is measured using the scores of the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), whereas board diversity is measured using gender diversity, board tenure and board skills. The control variables include firm size, leverage, industry type, board meetings, board size, board independence and CEO duality. Ordinal logistic regression (OLR) is used for data analysis.FindingsThe results indicate that representation of female directors in the board of directors positively influences disclosure and management of GHG information. Conversely, a high percentage of directors with a financial and industrial background negatively affects GHG information, while board tenure has no significant effect on GHG information. Concerning the control variables, only firm size and industry type are significant in their relationships to GHG information.Research limitations/implicationsThe main limitation of the study is investigating only few variables of board diversity. Future studies could investigate other variables such as cultural diversity and age diversity. Furthermore, cross-sectional data analysis cannot capture the dynamic casual impact between the determinants of disclosure and management of GHG information. Future studies could use long-term data, which may yield results that are more significant.Originality/valueThe study emphasizes the importance of the role of female directors in ensuring more transparency toward climate change activities. The findings of this study could be of interest to policymakers and stakeholders and could be used to take initiatives to reduce gender bias and increase the percentage of women in the boardroom. It is also likely to be beneficial for investors and stakeholders to evaluate carbon footprint of businesses and to assess the extent to which they meet their environmental responsibility.

No abstract

Purpose This study aims to investigate the relationship between the attributes of corporate boards in UK companies and their tendency to assure their corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports. Design/methodology/approach From the agency theory perspective, the authors examine the impact of board attributes on the assurance of CSR reports for the Financial Times Stock Exchange (FTSE) 350 during 2016–2019. The authors used annual integrated reports, companies’ websites and Thomson Reuters Eikon database for data collection and the logistic regression for data analysis. Findings The results confirm that some board attributes significantly influence a company’s decision to assure its CSR reports. While board size, board tenure, the presence of female board members and female executive directors and Chief Executive Officers (CEOs)’ global working experience positively contribute to CSR assurance (CSRA) decisions, the chairman’s independence negatively contributes to it. However, board independence, board meetings and board financial expertise demonstrate no effect on the CSRA decision. Research limitations/implications The authors focus on some attributes of board members, but the authors did not consider board diversity in its broader meaning. Moreover, the effect of board committees and their attributes on CSRA was not addressed. The authors also did not consider the impact of scope, the quality level of assurance service and the differences between assurance providers on companies’ decisions to neither undertake CSRA nor choose between assurance providers. Practical implications The study provides insights into the increasing demand on voluntary assurance to boost the credibility of CSR reports and the role of the board of directors (BOD) in taking this initiative. The findings highlight the importance of board diversity (e.g. gender) in improving transparency and sustainability reporting, which can help policymakers and regulators in shaping future governance policies. Additionally, the findings refer to a drawback in the UK Corporate Governance Code regarding the chairman’s independence, which requires corrective actions from the Financial Reporting Council. The findings raise concern over the small share of audit firms in the assurance service market, despite the growing demand for these services in the UK, which may require more attention to these services from the audit firms. Social implications Companies are increasingly pressurized, especially after the COVID-19 pandemic, to discharge their accountability to stakeholders and to act in a socially responsible manner in their business activities. CSR reporting is one of the main tools that companies use to communicate their social activities. Understanding the determinants of voluntary CSRA helps to increase the credibility of CSR reports and the favorable response to social pressure. Originality/value The authors add empirical evidence to the limited literature on CSRA about the role of the BOD in undertaking companies’ social responsibility, improving CSR reporting and reducing information asymmetry. It also highlights the significance of maintaining a balanced BOD in terms of gender, experience and tenure, in minimizing the risk of perpetuating non-transparent integrated reporting.

Many researchers have endeavoured to explore the factors that influence the choice of students to major in accounting. To this end, and by using the theory of reasoned action (TRA), this study contributes to the accounting education literature by providing empirical evidence on the relationship between selected intrinsic and extrinsic factors and the choice of students to major in accounting in a fast-developing country, Qatar. Using mixed methods for data collection and analysis; a questionnaire survey along with semi-structured interviews; the findings of the current study confirm the propositions of the TRA that student's decision to major in accounting is shaped by attitudinal factors (personal interests, perception of accounting education including introductory course, and the perception of job prospects), as well as subjective norms factors (influence of instructor and the social influence from family and peers).

Purpose This study aims to investigate the relationship between board diversity and financial performance from a wide perspective, including multiple dimensions of board diversity. Design/methodology/approach The cross-sectional design of the FTSE 350 companies in the period of 2013–2019 was adopted in this study. Data were collected using the Thomson Reuters Eikon and BoardEx databases and analyzed via ordinary least Squares (OLS) regression. Findings Both gender and skill diversity positively affect financial performance. However, other dimensions of diversity, including board tenure, education and network, have no significant influence on financial performance. On the other hand, nationality diversity negatively affects financial performance, and the gender diversity of executive directors negatively affects market-based performance. The results remain unchanged after considering endogeneity concerns and using alternative measures of financial performance. Practical implications This study provides useful insights into the importance of board diversity and its implications for firm performance, which can help in the development of future regulations and policies, such as female representation on the board. The findings can also guide companies toward the best way of diversifying their boardrooms in different aspects. Originality/value This study extensively investigates board diversity, including gender, tenure, skill and education, network and nationality, using the lens of the resource dependency theory. It also extends the scope of the study to examine some characteristics of executive directors, including gender and age. The evidence is provided from one of the leading countries in regulating corporate governance (CG), i.e. the UK.