The environmental implications of corporate economic activities have led to growing demands for firms and their boards to adopt sustainable strategies and to disseminate more useful information about their activities and impacts on environment. This paper investigates the impact of board's corporate social responsibility (CSR) strategy and orientation on the quantity and quality of environmental sustainability disclosure in UK listed firms. We find that effective board CSR strategy and CSR-oriented directors have a positive and significant impact on the quality of environmental sustainability disclosure, but not on the quantity. Our findings also suggest that the existence of a CSR committee and issuance of a stand-alone CSR report are positively and significantly related to environmental sustainability disclosure. When we distinguish between firms with high and low environmental risk, we find that the board CSR/sustainability practices that affect the quantity (quality) of environmental sustainability disclosure appear to be driven more by highly (lowly) environmentally sensitive firms. These results suggest that the board CSR/sustainability practices play an important role in ensuring a firm's legitimacy and accountability towards stakeholders. Our findings shed new light on this under-researched area and could be of interest to companies, policy-makers and other stakeholders.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide a multidimensional model for assessing the quality of corporate environmental reporting (CER) incorporating both preparer- and user-based views. Design/methodology/approach As opposed to frequently used researcher-chosen proxies, the authors used an online questionnaire asking preparers and users how they assess the quality of a company’s environmental report. Findings The analysis of the responses of 177 users and 86 preparers shows that quantity was not perceived as the most significant element in determining quality. Besides quantity, the respondents also perceived information types, measures used, themes disclosed, adopting reporting guidelines, inclusion of assurance statement and the use of visual tools as significant dimensions/features of reporting quality. Research limitations/implications The online questionnaire has some limitations, especially in terms of researcher being absent to clarify meanings and, hence, possibilities that respondents may misinterpret the questionnaire elements. Practical implications Considering that robust, reliable measurement of reporting quality is difficult, preparers, standard setters and policy makers need multidimensional quality models that incorporate both users’ perceptions of quality and preparers’ pragmatic understanding of the quality delivery process. These will make the preparers informed of whether their disclosure may be falling short of users’ expectations. Originality/value Amid, increasing complexity of CER, the research contributes to the growing body of literature on assessing the quality of CER by developing a less subjective, multidimensional, preparer–user-based quality model. This innovative quality model goes beyond the traditional quality models, subjective author-based quality measures. Focussing on the three dimensions of reporting quality – content, credibility and communication – it also offers a high-level resolution of meaning of CER quality.

No abstract

Assessing the quality of information disclosed by companies is a complex task. Accounting studies usually rely on analysing the content of corporate reports using measures to obtain a proxy for the information reported by companies. However, there is no consensus about the best design for these measures. The objective of the current paper is to investigate if there are significant differences in the results generated from seven alternative measures for assessing the quality of FTSE100 environmental sustainability reporting. Seven measures/indices have been used to assess disclosure quality. The three unidimensional measures include two “quantity measures” and one “scope measure” that measure the volume and width/coverage of information, respectively. Three compound measures are adopted from the literature, and the final measure is a multidimensional quality model, based on the results of a questionnaire ascertaining the perceptions of 86 preparers and 177 users of annual report (AR) and/stand‐alone corporate responsibility report (CRR). Although the results of the empirical analysis indicate that the measures are significantly correlated, the choice of a specific method can result in the very different ranking of companies. The evidence presented indicates that the choice of measure is of key importance.

]. This paper may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Springer terms and conditions for self-archiving. addressing questions such as: how can we take our belief of "Eco-Islam" to actually guide behaviours and outcomes? And in which business contexts are these behavioural principles more immediately applicable? To achieve this, we have undertaken qualitative research to analyse the content (i.e. verses) of the holy Qur'an. Our findings yield a framework that proposes key

]. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Accounting Education and Routledge Taylor & Francis Group terms and conditions for self-archiving.

Although an increasing number of companies have publicly declared environmental targets (ETs), scant research has been conducted in this area. This study, therefore, investigates the extent of corporate environmental targets disclosure (ETD) and empirically examines whether environmental governance and performance influence the ETD of companies in the U.K.during the 2005-2013 period. We find that firms show a large degree of variability and inconsistency in their reporting of ETs. The results indicate that U.K. firms, particularly those with high environmental sensitivity, tend to disclose symbolic soft or semi-hard ETs to manage stakeholder perceptions and legitimize their existence. Moreover, Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) guidelines, sustainability committees, and sustainability assurance show positive relationships with ETD. We also find that U.K. firms that perform well environmentally are likely to set and disclose hard ETs. These results support stakeholder, legitimacy, and impression management theories. We suggest that there is a need for regulations that will not only enhance the usefulness of ETD but also encourage companies to take serious proactive action to reduce negative environmental impacts, possibly creating 'win-win' solutions. Our findings have important implications for policy-makers and various stakeholder groups.

This paper develops the multiple-theoretical framework of legitimacy, stakeholders, and voluntary perspective to assess the adoption of Vietnamese listed firms to the 17 United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The paper’s primary objective is to use content analysis to discover the status quo of the SDGs practices of the largest 100 Vietnamese listed firms on the two biggest Vietnamese stock exchanges (Ho Chi Minh Stock Exchange–HOSE and Hanoi Stock Exchange–HNX). By drawing a unique framework, the paper contributes to the extant literature review of SDG-related research. Our research framework enables corporate decision-makers significantly access corporate SDG adoptions and the implementation process. With the direct pressure of stakeholders, high environmental sensitivity industries are keen on disclosing SDG-related information. Notwithstanding, the findings reveal that Vietnamese listed firms indicate “green talks” in their corporate reporting rather than “green actions”. Thus, our findings encourage firms to engage in SDGs through substantive sustainability strategies and need greater attention from governments, practitioners, and policymakers.