This paper studies the effectiveness of a firm's strategy to report on its ESG activities with regard to the extent and direction in which the firm's ESG performance is valued by capital market investors. It is the first to disentangle the moderating effects of different types of ESG reporting on market valuation of ESG performance and to analyze whether following the current integrated reporting trend is worth the effort. Results indicate that ESG performance is valued more strongly and in the (desired) positive direction when firms publish an ESG report, irrespective of its type (stand‐alone or integrated). Furthermore, integrated reporting is associated with superior outcomes compared with a stand‐alone report for composite ESG and corporate governance performance. Our findings are important for corporate managers, as they help to understand market valuation of ESG performance in dependence on the reporting type and provide guidance for formulating and evaluating the reporting strategy. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

No abstract

We investigate the citation frequency of retracted scientific papers in science. For the period of five years before and after retraction, we counted the citations to papers in a sample of over 3,000 retracted, and a matched sample of another 3,000 non-retracted papers. Retraction led to a decrease in average annual citation frequency from about 5 before, to 2 citations after retraction. In contrast, for non-retracted control papers the citation counts were 4, and 5, respectively. Put differently, we found only a limited effect of retraction: retraction decreased citation frequency only by about 60%, as compared to non-retracted papers. Thus, retracted papers often live on. For effective self-correction the scientific enterprise needs to be more effective in removing retracted papers from the scientific record. We discuss recent proposals to do so.

No abstract

No abstract