This paper investigates the factors that drive high levels of corporate sustainability performance ("CSP"), as proxied by membership of the Dow Jones Sustainability World Index. Using a stakeholder framework, we examine the incentives for US firms to invest in sustainability principles and develop a number of hypotheses that relate "CSP" to firm-specific characteristics. Our results indicate that leading "CSP" firms are significantly larger, have higher levels of growth and a higher return on equity than conventional firms. Contrary to our predictions, leading "CSP" firms do not have greater free cash flows or lower leverage than other firms. Copyright (c) The Authors. Journal compilation (c) 2009 AFAANZ.

This paper explores the relation between sustainability performance and sustainability disclosure within the Australian extractive industries. The study utilizes Ullmann's (1985) stakeholder framework, which depicts sustainability disclosure and performance as two components of management strategy for dealing with stakeholder demands. Consistent with this framework, we predict a positive performance-disclosure relation. Extending prior research that has utilized problematic environmental performance indices such as CEP indices or toxic emissions levels, we develop a sustainability performance index based on the International Finance Corporation's Measuring Sustainability Framework (2001). Using data from 339 mining and energy firms listed on the Australian Securities Exchange in 2006, we find that corporate sustainability performance is strongly associated with disclosure as expected. Sustainability disclosure is also greater for firms with a proactive communication strategy as manifested through press release activity. Finally, asset age and firm size are both positively associated with sustainability, consistent with predictions from the stakeholder framework.

We examine chief executive officer remuneration disclosure in Australia from 1998 to 2004. Disclosure was first required by the "Company Law Review Act 1998" ("CLRA98"). Despite "CLRA98"'s clear intentions, firms generally failed to comply until the requirements were formalized by "Director and Executive Disclosures by Disclosing Entities" ("AASB1046"), issued in 2004. For a sample of 124 firms, we find significant improvements in disclosure concurrent both with "CLRA98" and "AASB1046". We also find firm size, corporate governance, auditor quality, cross-listing status and public scrutiny to be significant explanations of disclosure. Our results indicate that high quality disclosures will only come about through detailed, black letter requirements and that principle-based legislation involving interpretative discretion is unlikely to produce the desired level of disclosure. Copyright (c) The Authors Journal compilation (c) 2006 AFAANZ.

No abstract

No abstract