Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Determinants of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure Ratings by Spanish Listed Firms

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to analyze whether a number of firm and industry characteristics, as well as media exposure, are potential determinants of corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure practices by Spanish listed firms. Empirical studies have shown that CSR disclosure activism varies across companies, industries, and time (Gray et al., Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 8(2), 47–77, 1995; Journal of Business Finance & Accounting 28(3/4), 327–356, 2001; Hackston and Milne, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 9(1), 77–108, 1996; Cormier and Magnan, Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting 1(2), 171–195, 2003; Cormier et al., European Accounting Review 14(1), 3–39, 2005), which is usually justified by reference to several theoretical constructs, such as the legitimacy, stakeholder, and agency theories. Our findings evidence that firms with higher CSR ratings present a statistically significant larger size and a higher media exposure, and belong to more environmentally sensitive industries, as compared to firms with lower CSR ratings. However, neither profitability nor leverage seem to explain differences in CSR disclosure practices between Spanish listed firms. The most influential variable for explaining firms’ variation in CSR ratings is media exposure, followed by size and industry. Therefore, it seems that the legitimacy theory, as captured by those variables related to public or social visibility, is the most relevant theory for explaining CSR disclosure practices of Spanish listed firms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, C.A., Hill, W.Y., & Roberts, C.B. (1998). Corporate Social Reporting Practices in Western Europe: Legitimating Corporate Behaviour. The British Accounting Review, 30(1), 1–21. doi:10.1006/bare.1997.0060

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adrem, A. H.: 1999, Essays on Disclosure Practices in Sweden – Causes and Effects (Lund University Press)

  • Archel, P. (2003). La divulgación de la información social y medioambiental de la gran empresa española en el período 1994–1998: situación actual y perspectivas. Revista Española de Financiación y Contabilidad, 117, 571–601.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archel, P., & Lizarraga, F. (2001). Algunos determinantes de la información medioambiental divulgada por las empresas españolas cotizadas. Revista de Contabilidad, 4(7), 129–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bansal, P., & Clelland, I. (2004). Talking trash: legitimacy, impression management and unsystematic risk in the context of the natural environment. Academy of Management Journal, 47(1), 93–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bansal, P., & Roth, K. (2000). Why companies go green: a model of ecological responsiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 717–736. doi:10.2307/1556363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belkaoui, A., & Karpik, P.G. (1989). Determinants of the Corporate Decision to Disclose Social Information. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 2(1), 36–51. doi:10.1108/09513578910132240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bewley, K., & Li, Y. (2000). Disclosure of Environmental Information by Canadian Manufacturing Companies: A Voluntary Disclosure Perspective. Advances in Environmental Accounting and Management, 1, 201–226. doi:10.1016/S1479-3598(00)01011-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blacconiere, W.G., & Northcut, W.D. (1997). Environmental information and market reactions to environmental legislation. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 12(Spring), 149–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blacconiere, W.G., & Patten, D.M. (1994). Environmental disclosures, regulatory costs and changes in firm value. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 18(3), 357–377. doi:10.1016/0165-4101(94)90026-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, F. (2000). Environmental visibility: a trigger of green organizational response? Business Strategy and the Environment, 9(2), 92-107. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0836(200003/04)9:2<92::AID-BSE230>3.0.CO;2-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S., & Pavelin, S. (2008). Factors Influencing the Quality of Corporate Environmental Disclosure. Business Strategy and the Environment, 17, 120–136. doi:10.1002/bse.506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, N., & Deegan, C. (1998). The public disclosure of environmental performance information –a dual test of media agenda setting theory and legitimacy theory. Accounting and Business Review, 29(1), 21–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D.J. (2000). Legitimacy Theory or Managerial Reality Construction? Corporate Social Disclosure in Marks and Spencer, Plc Corporate Reports 1969–1997. Accounting Forum, 24(1), 80–100. doi:10.1111/1467-6303.00030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carmona, S. and F. Carrasco: 1988, ‹Información de contenido social y estados contables: Una aproximación empírica y algunas consideraciones teóricas’, Actualidad Financiera noviembre, 2175–2192

  • CEC: 2001, Green Paper: Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility (COM), 366 final

  • Clarke, J., & Gibson-Sweet, M. (1999). ‹The Use of Corporate Social Disclosures in the Management of Reputation and Legitimacy: A Cross Sectoral Analysis of UK Top 100 Companies’, Business Ethics. European Review (Chichester, England), 8(1), 5–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, T.E. (1989). Voluntary Corporate Disclosure by Swedish Companies. Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting, 1(2), 171–195. doi:10.1111/j.1467-646X.1989.tb00009.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cormier, D., & Magnan, M. (2003). Environmental Reporting Management: A Continental European Perspective. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 22(1), 43–62. doi:10.1016/S0278-4254(02)00085-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cormier, D., Gordon, I.M., & Magnan, M. (2004). ‹Corporate Environmental Disclosure: Contrasting Management’s Perceptions with Reality’. Journal of Business Ethics, 49(2), 143–165. doi:10.1023/B:BUSI.0000015844.86206.b9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cormier, D., Magnan, M., & Van Velthoven, B. (2005). Environmental Disclosure Quality in Large German Companies: Economic Incentives, Public Pressures or Institutional Conditions? European Accounting Review, 14(1), 3–39. doi:10.1080/0963818042000339617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowen, S.S., Ferreri, L.B., & Parker, L.D. (1987). The impact of corporate characteristics on social responsibility disclosure: a typology and frequency-based analysis. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 12(2), 111–122. doi:10.1016/0361-3682(87)90001-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, L., & Christopher, T. (2002). Governance Disclosures and Firm Characteristics of Listed Australian Mining Companies. International Journal of Business Studies, 10(1), 37–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C. (2002). The Legitimising Effect of Social and Environmental Disclosures –A Theoretical Foundation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(3), 282–311. doi:10.1108/09513570210435852

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C., & Gordon, B. (1996). A study of the environmental disclosure practices of Australian corporations. Accounting and Business Review, 26(3), 187–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C., & Rankin, M. (1996). ‹Do Australian Companies Report Environmental News Objectively? An Analysis of Environmental Disclosures by Firms Prosecuted Successfully by the Environmental Protection Authority’. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 9(2), 50–67. doi:10.1108/09513579610116358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P.J., & Powell, W.W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160. doi:10.2307/2095101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dowling, J., & Pfeffer, J. (1975). ‹Organisational legitimacy: Social values and organisational behaviour’, Pacific Sociological Review, 18(1), 122–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • García-Ayuso, M., & Larrinaga, C. (2003). Environmental disclosure in Spain:corporate characteristics and media exposure. Revista Española de Financiación y Contabilidad, 115, 184–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giner, B. (1997). The influence of company characteristics and accounting regulation on information disclosed by Spanish firms. European Accounting Review, 6(1), 45–68. doi:10.1080/096381897336863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey, P.C., & Hatch, N.W. (2007). Researching Corporate Social Responsibility: An Agenda for the 21st Century. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(1), 87–98. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9080-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, A., Maher, J., & Northcut, W.D. (2000). Environmental liability information and bond ratings. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 15(2), 93–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R., Kouhy, R., & Lavers, S. (1995). Corporate Social and Environmental Reporting: A Review of the Literature and A Longitudinal Study of UK Disclosure. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 8(2), 47–77. doi:10.1108/09513579510146996

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R.H., Owen, D., & Adams, C.(1996). Accounting and Accountability. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R., Javad, M., Power, D.M., & Sinclair, C.D. (2001). Social and environmental disclosure and corporate characteristics: a research note and extension. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 28(3/4), 327–356. doi:10.1111/1468-5957.00376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J., & Parker, L. (1989). Corporate social reporting: a rebuttal of legitimacy theory. Accounting and Business Review, 19(3), 343–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hackston, D., & Milne, M.J. (1996). Some Determinants of Social and Environmental Disclosures in New Zealand Companies. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 9(1), 77–108. doi:10.1108/09513579610109987

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamid, F.Z.A. (2004). ‹Corporate social disclosure by banks and finance companies: Malaysian evidence’. Corporate Ownership & Control, 1(4), 118–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haniffa, R.M., & Cooke, T.E. (2005). ‹The impact of culture and governance on corporate social reporting’. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 24(5), 391–430. doi:10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2005.06.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henriques, I. and P. Sadorsky: 1996, ‹The Role of Information in Coordinating Environmental Issues’, in Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings (Cincinnati, OH), pp. 1–30.

  • Hoffman, A.J. (1999). Institutional evolution and change: environmentalism and the U.S. chemical industry. Management Journal, 42(4), 351–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooghiemstra, R. (2000). Corporate communication and impression management: New perspectives why companies engage in corporate social reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 27(1/2), 55–68. doi:10.1023/A:1006400707757

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hossain, M., Tan, L.M., & Adams, M. (1994). Voluntary disclosure in an emerging capital market: Some empirical evidence from companies listed on Kuala Lumpur stock exchange. The International Journal of Accounting, 29(4), 334–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hossain, M., Perera, M.H.B., & Rahman, A.R. (1995). ‹Voluntary Disclosure in the Annual Reports of New Zealand Companies’. Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting, 6(1), 69–87. doi:10.1111/j.1467-646X.1995.tb00050.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchings, G. and D. W. Taylor: 2000, ‹The Intra-Industry Capital Market and Corporate Reporting Effects of the BHP Ok Tedi Environmental Event’, Asian Review of Accounting 8(Special Issue), 33–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Ismail, K.N., & Chandler, R. (2005). Disclosure in the quarterly reports of Malaysian companies. Financial Reporting. Regulation and Governance, 4(1), 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H.M., & Yakovleva, N. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in the mining industry: exploring trends in social and environmental disclosure. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(3–4), 271–284. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2004.10.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, P.D., & Zandbergen, P.A. (1995). Ecologically sustainable organizations: an institutional approach. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 1015–1052. doi:10.2307/258964

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M.C., & Meckling, W.H. (1976). Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305–360. doi:10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knox, S., Maklan, S., & French, P. (2006). Corporate Social Responsibility: Exploring Stakeholder Relationships and Programme Reporting across Leading FTSE Companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 61(1), 7–28. doi:10.1007/s10551-005-0303-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolk, A. (2003). ‹Trends in sustainability reporting by the Fortune Global 250’. Business Strategy and the Environment, 12(5), 279–291. doi:10.1002/bse.370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Line, M., Hawley, H., & Krut, R. (2002). Development in global environmental and Social reporting. Corporate Environmental Strategy, 9(1), 69–78. doi:10.1016/S1066-7938(01)00159-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, J.B., Sundgren, A., & Schneeweis, T. (1988). ‹Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Financial Performance’. Academy of Management Journal, 31(4), 854–872. doi:10.2307/256342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J.W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363. doi:10.1086/226550

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milne, M.J. (2002). Positive Accounting Theory, Political Costs and Social Disclosure Analyses: A Critical Look. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 13(3), 369–395. doi:10.1006/cpac.2001.0509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moneva, J. M. and F. Llena: 1996, ‹Análisis de la información sobre responsabilidad social en las empresas industriales que cotizan en Bolsa’, Revista Española de Financiación y Contabilidad XXV(87), 361–401

  • Moneva, J.M., & Llena, F. (2000). Environmental disclosures in the annual reports of large companies in Spain. European Accounting Review, 9(1), 7–29. doi:10.1080/096381800407923

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, S.: 1997, ‹Environmental Pollution and Competitive Advantage: An Exploratory Study of U.S. Industrial-Goods Manufacturers’, in Academy of Management Conference Proceedings, 1997 (Academy of Management, New York)

  • Nasi, J., Nasi, S., Phillips, N., & Zyglidopoulos, S. (1997). ‹The Evolution of Corporate Social Responsiveness’. Business & Society, 36(3), 296–321. doi:10.1177/000765039703600305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ness, K., & Mirza, A. (1991). Corporate Social Disclosure: A Note on the Test of Agency Theory. The British Accounting Review, 23, 211–217. doi:10.1016/0890-8389(91)90081-C

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neu, D., Warsame, H., & Pedwell, K. (1998). Managing Public Impressions: Environmental Disclosures in Annual Reports. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 23(3), 265–282. doi:10.1016/S0361-3682(97)00008-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ng, E.J., & Koh, H.C. (1994). An Agency Theory and Profit Analytic Approach to Corporate Non-Mandatory Disclosure Compliance. Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting, 1(1), 29–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 145–179. doi:10.2307/258610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patten, D.M. (1991). Exposure, Legitimacy, and Social Disclosure. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 10(4), 297–308. doi:10.1016/0278-4254(91)90003-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patten, D.M. (2002a). Give or Take on the Internet: An Examination of the Disclosure Practices of Insurance Firm Web Innovators. Journal of Business Ethics, 36(3), 247–259. doi:10.1023/A:1014009229437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patten, D.M. (2002b). Media Exposure, Public Policy Pressure, and Environmental Disclosure: An Examination of the Impact of Tri Data Availability. Accounting Forum, 26(2), 152–171. doi:10.1111/1467-6303.t01-1-00007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrow, C. 1970, Organizational analysis: A sociological view, Wadsworth, Belmont, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pirsch, J., Gupta, S., & Landreth-Grau, S. (2007). A framework for understanding corporate social responsibility programs as a continuum: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(2), 125–140. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9100-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prencipe, A. (2004). Proprietary Costs and Determinants of Voluntary Segment Disclosure: Evidence from Italian Listed Companies. European Accounting Review, 13(2), 319-340. doi:10.1080/0963818042000204742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Purushothaman, M., Tower, G., Hancock, R., & Taplin, R. (2000). Determinants of Corporate Social Reporting Practices of Listed Singapore Companies. Pacific Accounting Review, 12(2), 101-133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, A.J., & Welker, M. (2001). Social disclosure, financial disclosure and the cost of capital. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 26(7/8), 597–616. doi:10.1016/S0361-3682(01)00025-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robb, S.W.G., Single, L.E., & Zarzeski, M.T. (2001). Nonfi nancial disclosures across Anglo-American countries. Journal of International Accounting, 10(1), 71–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, R.W. (1992). ‹Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: an application of stakeholder theory’. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(6), 595–612. doi:10.1016/0361-3682(92)90015-K

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W.R. (1987). The adolescence of institutional theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32(4), 493–511. doi:10.2307/2392880

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon FL. 1992. Marketing green products in the triad. Columbia Journal of World Business 27(3,4): 268–285

    Google Scholar 

  • Singhvi, S. and H. Desai 1971. An Empirical Analysis of the Quality of Corporate Financial Disclosure.’’ Accounting Review, January 46(1): 129–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ullmann, A.A. (1985). ‹Data in Search of a Theory: A Critical Examination of the Relationships Among Social Performance, Social Disclosure, and Economic Performance of U.S. Firms’. Academy of Management Review, 10(3), 540–557. doi:10.2307/258135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watts, R. L. and J. L. Zimmerman: 1986, Positive Accounting Theory (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ)

  • Woodward, D.G., Edwards, P., & Birkin, F. (1996). ‹Organizational Legitimacy and Stakeholder Information Provision’. British Journal of Management, 7, 329–347. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8551.1996.tb00123.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodward, D., Edwards, P., & Birkin, F. (2001). Some evidence on executives’ views of corporate social responsibility. The British Accounting Review, 33(3), 357–397. doi:10.1006/bare.2001.0165

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This work is part of the research project ECO2008-06238-C02-01/ECON funded by the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science and ERDF.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Technical University of Cartagena, Cartagena, Spain

    Carmelo Reverte

Authors
  1. Carmelo Reverte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carmelo Reverte.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Reverte, C. Determinants of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure Ratings by Spanish Listed Firms. J Bus Ethics 88, 351–366 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9968-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9968-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation