The impact of corporate social disclosure on investment behavior: A cross-national study

Corporate social responsibility and the cost of corporate bonds

“…Maignan and Ferrell (2003) find significant differences in consumer evaluation of corporate responsibility between the United States, France, and Germany. Van der Laan Smith et al (2010) also report systematic cross-national differences in investment response to CSR disclosure. Thus, the significant differences in institutional environment and culture between the United States and European countries suggest that the results of Menz (2010) do not necessarily hold in the U.S. bond market.…”

Corporate Sustainability Management and Its Market Benefits

“…For example, some researchers argue that CSM incurs additional costs in the course of complying with the social or environmental regulations, and therefore does not positively affect firm value (Vance, 1975 [28]; Brammer et al, 2006 [29]). Furthermore, the market effect of CSM activities can vary across different countries (van der Laan Smith et al, 2010 [30]).…”

Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting as Substantive and Symbolic Behavior: A Multilevel Theoretical Analysis

“…As previously mentioned, research in CSR reporting (e.g., Archel et al 2009;Belal and Roberts 2010;Criado-Jim enez et al 2008;Elijido-Ten et al 2010;Mahadeo et al 2011;Orij 2010;Tilling and Tilt 2010;van der Laan Smith et al 2010) has relied on two main perspectives (Gray et al 1996;Hooghiemstra 2000): legitimacy theory (Dowling and Pfeffer 1975;Preston and Post 1975;Suchman 1995) and stakeholder theory (Freeman 1984;Freeman et al 2010). Additionally, research has utilized the corporate communication perspective (van Riel and Fombrun 2007) as a supporting approach (Hooghiemstra 2000).…”

“…C orporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting has gained widespread acceptance, to the extent that it is considered "the de facto law for business" (KPMG International Cooperative 2011). Research on CSR reporting (e.g., Archel et al 2009;Belal and Roberts 2010;Criado-Jim enez et al 2008;Elijido-Ten et al 2010;Mahadeo et al 2011;Orij 2010;Tilling and Tilt 2010;van der Laan Smith et al 2010) examines reporting behavior using three fundamental perspectives: legitimacy theory (Dowling and Pfeffer 1975;Preston and Post 1975;Suchman 1995), stakeholder theory (Freeman 1984;Freeman, Harrison, Wicks, Parmar and de Colle, 2010), and the corporate communication perspective (van Riel and Fombrun 2007). These perspectives generally suggest that a corporation participates in CSR reporting to strengthen its legitimacy, enhance its reputation, and build a competitive advantage (Hooghiemstra 2000).…”