nach oben

Erschienen in:

23.02.2017 | Original Paper

Corporate social responsibility disclosure and information asymmetry: the role of family ownership

verfasst von: Jennifer Martínez-Ferrero, Lázaro Rodríguez-Ariza, Isabel-María García-Sánchez, Beatriz Cuadrado-Ballesteros

Erschienen in: Review of Managerial Science | Ausgabe 4/2018

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This study considers the moderating role of family ownership, taking into account information differences between family and minority investors, and corroborates the existence of a two-way relation between CSR disclosure and information asymmetry. Our analysis of international corporate financial data for the period 2003–2009 shows there is an adverse selection effect by which family owners take advantage of insider information, thus attenuating any reduction of information asymmetry achieved by CSR disclosure.

Vorheriger Artikel Tweaking the entrepreneurial orientation–performance relationship in family firms: the effect of control mechanisms and family-related goals

Nächster Artikel How do sustainability reports from the Nordic and the Mediterranean European countries compare

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

According to GRI guidelines, information about CSR should be: global, i.e. reporting on all aspects of the company (financial, economic, sustainability, etc.); comparable, so it must be numeric and monetary; and harmonised so that all parties can understand the information, regardless of where the company is located.

Thomson One Analytics delivers a broad range of financial content. This database of finance data integrates Datastream, Worldscope, Extel, I/B/E/S, Compustat, IDC Pricing and A-T Financial News. It is provided by Thomson Reuters.

The Forbes Global 2000 is a comprehensive list of the world’s largest, most powerful public companies, as measured by revenues, profits, assets and market value.

See https://www.globalreporting.org/standards.

Agarwal P (2007) Institutional ownership and stock liquidity. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1029395

Akerlof GA (1970) The market for ‘lemons’: quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Q J Econ 84(3):488–500CrossRef

Arellano M, Bond S (1991) Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Rev Econ Stud 58(2):277–297CrossRef

Ascioglu A, Hegde SP, Krishnan GV, McDermott JB (2012) Earnings management and market liquidity. Rev Quant Financ Acc 38(2):257–274CrossRef

Balakrishnan K, Billings MB, Kelly B, Ljungqvist A (2014) Shaping liquidity: on the causal effects of voluntary disclosure. J Finance 69(5):2237–2278CrossRef

Ball R, Shivakumar L (2006) The role of accruals in asymmetrically timely gain and loss recognition. J Acc Res 44(2):207–242CrossRef

Baum C, Schaffer M, Stillman S (2003) Instrumental variables and GMM: estimation and testing. Stata J 3(1):1–31

Ben-Amar W, Boujenoui A (2008) Transparence de l’information au sujet des pratiques de gouvernance d’entreprise au Canada. Comptabilité-Contrôle-Audit 14(1):169–190CrossRef

Benavides-Velasco CA, Quintana-García C, Guzmán-Parra VF (2013) Trends in family business research. Small Bus Econ 40:41–57CrossRef

Berger PG, Hann RN (2007) Segment profitability and the proprietary and agency costs of disclosure. Acc Rev 82(4):869–906CrossRef

Berrone P, Cruz C, Gómez Mejía LR, LarrazaKintana M (2010) Socio-emotional wealth and corporate responses to institutional pressures: do family-controlled firms pollute less? Adm Sci Q 55(1):82–113CrossRef

Blanco-Peláez B (2010) Segment disclosure, cost of capital and investment efficiency. Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain

Botosan CA, Stanford M (2005) Managers’ motives to withhold segment disclosures and the effect of SFAS No. 131 on analysts’ information environment. Acc Rev 80(3):751–772CrossRef

Brenes ER, Madrigal K, Requena B (2011) Corporate governance and family business performance. J Bus Res 64(3):280–285CrossRef

Brown S, Hillegeist SA (2007) How disclosure quality affects the level of information asymmetry. Rev Acc Stud 12(2–3):443–477CrossRef

Chau WF (2006) Extended performance reporting: a review of empirical studies. Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia. Sydney, New South Wales

Chau G, Gray S (2002) Ownership structure and corporate voluntary disclosure in Hong Kong and Singapore. Int J Acc 37(2002):247–265CrossRef

Chau G, Gray SJ (2010) Family ownership, board independence and voluntary disclosure: evidence from Hong Kong. J Int Acc Audit Tax 19:93–109CrossRef

Chau G, Leung P (2006) The impact of board composition and family ownership on audit committee formation: evidence from Hong Kong. J Int Acc Audit Tax 15(1):1–15CrossRef

Chen CJ, Jaggi B (2001) Association between independent non-executive directors, family control and financial disclosures in Hong Kong. J Acc Public Policy 19(4):285–310CrossRef

Chen S, Chen X, Cheng Q (2008) Do family firms provide more or less voluntary disclosure? J Acc Res 46(3):499–536CrossRef

Cheng B, Ioannou I, Serafeim G (2011) Corporate social responsibility and access to finance. Strateg Manag J 35(1):1–23CrossRef

Chi J (2005) Understanding the endogeneity between firm value and shareholder rights. Financ Manage 34(4):65–76CrossRef

Cho Ch, Patten D (2007) The role of environment disclosures as tools of legitimacy: a research note. Acc Organ Soc 32:639–647CrossRef

Cho SY, Lee C, Pfeiffer RJ (2013) Corporate social responsibility performance and information asymmetry. J Acc Public Policy 32:71–83CrossRef

Chrisman JJ, Chua JH, Litz RA (2004) Comparing the agency costs of family and non-family firms: conceptual issues and exploratory evidence. Entrep Theory Pract 28(4):335–354CrossRef

Chua J, Chrisman JJ, Sharma P (1999) Defining the family business by behavior. Entrep Theory Pract, Summer 19–39

Clarkson PM, Li Y, Richardson GD, Vasvari FP (2008) Revisiting the relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: an empirical analysis. Acc Organ Soc 33(4):303–327CrossRef

Cohen J, Holder-Webb L, Nath L, Wood D (2011) Retail investors’ perceptions of the decision-usefulness of economic performance, governance, and corporate social responsibility disclosures. Behav Res Acc 23(1):303–327CrossRef

Cohen J, Holder-Webb L, Nath L, Wood D (2012) Corporate reporting of nonfinancial leading indicators of economic performance and sustainability. Acc Horiz 26(1):65–90CrossRef

Cormier D, Ledoux MJ (2011) The informational contribution of social and environmental disclosures for investors. Manag Decis 49(8):1276–1304CrossRef

Cormier D, Ledoux MJ, Magnan M, Aerts W (2010) Corporate governance and information asymmetry between managers and investors. Corp Gov Int J Bus Soc 10(5):574–589

Cuadrado-Ballesteros B, Rodríguez-Ariza L, García-Sánchez IM (2015) The role of independent directors at family firms in relation to corporate social responsibility disclosures. Int Bus Rev 24:890–901CrossRef

Cui J, Jo H, Na H (2016) Does corporate social responsibility affect information asymmetry? J Bus Ethics. doi:10.1007/s10551-015-3003-8

Dahya J, Dimitrov O, McConnell JJ (2008) Dominant shareholders, corporate boards, and corporate value: a cross-country analysis. J Financ Econ 87(1):73–100CrossRef

Dechow PM, Dichev ID (2002) The quality of accruals and earnings: the role of accrual estimation errors. Acc Rev 77(s-1):35–59CrossRef

Dhaliwal DS, Radhakrishnan S, Tsang A, Yang YG (2012) Nonfinancial disclosure and analyst forecast accuracy: international evidence on corporate social responsibility disclosure. Acc Rev 87(3):723–759CrossRef

Dhaliwal D, Li OZ, Tsang A, Yang YG (2014) Corporate social responsibility disclosure and the cost of equity capital: the roles of stakeholder orientation and financial transparency. J Acc Public Policy 33(4):328–355CrossRef

Diamond DW, Verrecchia RE (1991) Disclosure, liquidity, and the cost of capital. J Finance 46(4):1325–1359CrossRef

Diebecker J, Sommer F (2016) The impact of corporate sustainability performance on information asymmetry: the role of institutional differences. Rev Manag Sci 11(2):471–517CrossRef

Dye RA (1986) Proprietary and nonproprietary disclosures. J Bus 59:331–366CrossRef

Elliott RK, Jacobson PD (1994) Costs and benefits of business information disclosure. Acc Horiz 8:80

Eng LL, Mak YT (2003) Corporate governance and voluntary disclosure. J Acc Publ Policy 22(4):325–345CrossRef

Fan JPH, Wong TJ (2002) Corporate ownership structure and the informativeness of accounting earnings in East Asia. J Acc Econ 33(3):401–425CrossRef

Gamper-Rabindran S (2006) Did the EPA’s voluntary industrial toxics program reduce emissions? A GIS analysis of distributional impacts and by-media analysis of substitution. J Environ Econ Manag 52(1):391–410CrossRef

García-Sánchez IM, Cuadrado-Ballesteros B, Sepulveda C (2014) Does media pressure moderate CSR disclosures by external directors? Manag Decis 52(6):1014–1045CrossRef

Grossman SJ, Hart OD (1980) Takeover bids, the free-rider problem, and the theory of the corporation. Bell J Econ 11(1):42–64CrossRef

Hansen L (1982) Large sample properties of generalized method of moments estimators. Econometrica 50(3):1029–1054CrossRef

Harris MS (1998) The association between competition and managers’ business segment reporting decisions. J Acc Res 36:111–128CrossRef

Healy PM, Palepu KG (2001) Information asymmetry, corporate disclosure, and the capital markets: a review of the empirical disclosure literature. J Acc Econ 31(1):405–440CrossRef

Ho SM, Wong KS (2001) A study of the relationship between corporate governance structures and the extent of voluntary disclosure. J Acc Audit Tax 10(1):139–156CrossRef

Hogner RH (1982) Corporate social reporting: eight decades of development at US Steel. Res Corp Perform Policy 4(1):243–250

Hope OK, Thomas WB (2008) Managerial empire building and firm disclosure. J Acc Res 46(3):591–626CrossRef

Jensen MC, Meckling WH (1976) Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. J Financ Econ 3(4):305–360CrossRef

Jones J (1991) Earnings management during import relief investigations. J Acc Res 29:193–228CrossRef

Jung WO, Kwon YK (1988) Disclosure when the market is unsure of information endowment of managers. J Acc Res. 26(1):146–153CrossRef

Kashmiri S, Mahajan V (2010) What’s in a name? An analysis of the strategic behavior of family firms. Int J Res Mark 27(3):271–280CrossRef

Kim O, Verrecchia RE (1994) Market liquidity and volume around earnings announcements. J Acc Econ 17(1):41–67CrossRef

Klein P, Shapiro D, Young J (2005) Corporate governance, family ownership and firm value: the Canadian evidence. Corp Gov Int Rev 13(6):769–784CrossRef

La Porta R, Lopez-de-Silanes F, Shleifer A (2002) Government ownership of banks. J Finance 57(1):265–301CrossRef

Lakhal F (2008) Stock market liquidity and information asymmetry around voluntary earnings disclosures: new evidence from France. Int J Manag Finance 4(1):60–75

Lam K, Mok HM, Cheung I, Yam HC (1994) Family groupings on performance of portfolio selection in the Hong Kong stock market. J Bank Finance 18(4):725–742CrossRef

Lambert R, Leuz C, Verrecchia RE (2007) Accounting information, disclosure, and the cost of capital. J Acc Res 45(2):385–420CrossRef

Landry S, Deslandes M, Fortin A (2013) Tax aggressiveness, corporate social responsibility, and ownership structure. J Acc Ethics Public Policy 14(3):611–645

Lang MH, Lundholm RJ (1996) Corporate disclosure policy and analyst behavior. Acc Rev 71(4):467–492

Lang MH, Lundholm RJ (2000) Voluntary disclosure and equity offerings: reducing information asymmetry or hyping the stock? Contemp Acc Res 17(4):623–662CrossRef

Legendre S, Coderre F (2012) Determinants of GRI G3 application levels: the case of the Fortune Global 500. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 20(3):182–192CrossRef

Leuz C, Verrecchia RE (2000) The economic consequences of increased disclosure. J Acc Res 38:91–136CrossRef

Lopatta K, Buchholz F, Kaspereit T (2016) Asymmetric information and corporate social responsibility. Bus Soc 55(3):458–488CrossRef

Marquardt C, Wiedman CI (1998) Voluntary disclosure, information asymmetry, and insider selling through secondary equity offerings. Contemp Acc Res 15(4):505–537CrossRef

Martínez-Ferrero J, Ruiz-Cano D, García-Sánchez IM (2016) The causal link between CSR disclosure and information asymmetry: the moderating role of the stakeholder protection context. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 23:319–332CrossRef

Materne CF, Debicki BJ, Kellermanns FW, Chrisman JJ (2013) Family business research in the new millennium: an assessment of individual and institutional productivity, 2001–2009. Handbook of research on family business. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham

Maury B (2006) Family ownership and firm performance: empirical evidence from Western European corporations. J Corp Finance 12(2):321–341CrossRef

Milgrom PR (1981) Good news and bad news: Representation theorems and applications. Bell J Econ 12(2):380–391CrossRef

Mio C (2010) Corporate social reporting in Italian multi-utility companies: an empirical analysis. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 17(5):247–271CrossRef

Mok HM, Lam K, Cheung I (1992) Family control and return covariation in Hong Kong’s common stocks. J Bus Finance Acc 19(2):277–293CrossRef

Nikolaeva R, Bicho M (2011) The role of institutional and reputational factors in the voluntary adoption of corporate social responsibility reporting standards. J Acad Mark Sci 39(1):136–157CrossRef

Pérez-Batres LA, van Miller V, Pisani MJ, Henriques I, Renau-Sepulveda JA (2012) Why do firms engage in national sustainability programs and transparent sustainability reporting? Evidence from Mexico’s clean industry program. Manag Int Rev 52:107–136CrossRef

Pindado J, Requejo I (2015) Panel data: a methodology for model specification and testing. In: Wiley encyclopedia of management (vol 4; Finance). doi:10.1002/9781118785317.weom040013

Pindado J, Requejo I, de la Torre C (2008) Does family ownership impact positively on firm value? Empirical evidence from Western Europe. University of Salamanca, Working paper 02/08

Prado-Lorenzo JM, Gallego-Álvarez I, García-Sánchez IM (2009) Stakeholder engagement and corporate social responsibility reporting: the ownership structure effect. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 16(2):94–107CrossRef

Richardson AJ, Welker M (2001) Social disclosure, financial disclosure and the cost of capital. Acc Organ Soc 26(7–8):597–616. doi:10.1016/S0361-3682(01)00025-3 CrossRef

Roodman D (2009) How to do xtabond2: an introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata. Stata J 9(1):86–136

Samaha K, Dahawy K, Hussainey K, Stapleton P (2012) The extent of corporate governance disclosure and its determinants in a developing market: the case of Egypt. Adv Acc 28(1):168–178CrossRef

Shanker MC, Astrachan JH (1996) Myths and realities: family businesses’ contribution to the US Economy—a framework for assessing family business statistics. Family Bus Rev 9(2):107–123CrossRef

Sharma P (2004) An overview of the field of family business studies: current status and directions for the future. Family Bus Rev 17(1):1–36CrossRef

Verrecchia RE (1983) Discretionary disclosure. J Acc Econ 5:179–194CrossRef

Willis A (2003) The role of the global reporting initiative’s sustainability reporting guidelines in the social screening of investments. J Bus Ethics 43:233–237CrossRef

Wooldridge JM (2010) Econometric analysis of cross-section and panel data. The MIT Press, Cambridge

Titel: Corporate social responsibility disclosure and information asymmetry: the role of family ownership
verfasst von: Jennifer Martínez-Ferrero
Lázaro Rodríguez-Ariza
Isabel-María García-Sánchez
Beatriz Cuadrado-Ballesteros
Publikationsdatum: 23.02.2017
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Review of Managerial Science / Ausgabe 4/2018
Print ISSN: 1863-6683
Elektronische ISSN: 1863-6691
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-017-0232-5

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2018

What innovation managers really do: a multiple-case investigation into the informal role profiles of innovation managers

Tweaking the entrepreneurial orientation–performance relationship in family firms: the effect of control mechanisms and family-related goals

In search for the ideal coopetition partner: an experimental study

How do sustainability reports from the Nordic and the Mediterranean European countries compare

Assessing the effects of responsible leadership and ethical conflict on behavioral intention

Brand image and equity: the mediating role of brand equity drivers and moderating effects of product type and word of mouth

Premium Partner