IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/aaajpp/aaaj-04-2015-2023.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring the quality of corporate environmental reporting

Author

Listed:
  • Akrum Helfaya
  • Mark Whittington
  • Chandana Alawattage

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to provide a multidimensional model for assessing the quality of corporate environmental reporting (CER) incorporating both preparer- and user-based views. Design/methodology/approach - As opposed to frequently used researcher-chosen proxies, the authors used an online questionnaire asking preparers and users how they assess the quality of a company’s environmental report. Findings - The analysis of the responses of 177 users and 86 preparers shows that quantity was not perceived as the most significant element in determining quality. Besides quantity, the respondents also perceived information types, measures used, themes disclosed, adopting reporting guidelines, inclusion of assurance statement and the use of visual tools as significant dimensions/features of reporting quality. Research limitations/implications - The online questionnaire has some limitations, especially in terms of researcher being absent to clarify meanings and, hence, possibilities that respondents may misinterpret the questionnaire elements. Practical implications - Considering that robust, reliable measurement of reporting quality is difficult, preparers, standard setters and policy makers need multidimensional quality models that incorporate both users’ perceptions of quality and preparers’ pragmatic understanding of the quality delivery process. These will make the preparers informed of whether their disclosure may be falling short of users’ expectations. Originality/value - Amid, increasing complexity of CER, the research contributes to the growing body of literature on assessing the quality of CER by developing a less subjective, multidimensional, preparer–user-based quality model. This innovative quality model goes beyond the traditional quality models, subjective author-based quality measures. Focussing on the three dimensions of reporting quality – content, credibility and communication – it also offers a high-level resolution of meaning of CER quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Akrum Helfaya & Mark Whittington & Chandana Alawattage, 2018. "Exploring the quality of corporate environmental reporting," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 32(1), pages 163-193, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-04-2015-2023
    DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-04-2015-2023
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2015-2023/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2015-2023/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2015-2023?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Giorgio Mion, 2020. "Organizations with Impact? A Study on Italian Benefit Corporations Reporting Practices and Reporting Quality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-21, October.
    2. Akrum Helfaya & Mark Whittington, 2019. "Does designing environmental sustainability disclosure quality measures make a difference?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(4), pages 525-541, May.
    3. Balluchi, Federica & Lazzini, Arianna & Torelli, Riccardo, 2020. "Credibility of Environmental Issues in Non-Financial Mandatory Disclosure: Measurement and Determinants," OSF Preprints g73w5, Center for Open Science.
    4. Armando Calabrese & Roberta Costa & Nathan Levialdi & Tamara Menichini & Roberth Andres Villazon Montalvan, 2020. "Does More Mean Better? Exploring the Relationship between Report Completeness and Environmental Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-16, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-04-2015-2023. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.