IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bit/bsrysr/v8y2017i1p30-42n3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting – a Stakeholder’s Perspective Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Litfin Thorsten

    (University of Applied Science Osnabrueck, Faculty of Management, Culture and Technology (Lingen Campus), Osnabrueck, Germany)

  • Meeh-Bunse Gunther

    (University of Applied Science Osnabrueck, Faculty of Management, Culture and Technology (Lingen Campus), Osnabrueck, Germany)

  • Luer Katja

    (University of Applied Science Osnabrueck, Faculty of Management, Culture and Technology (Lingen Campus), Osnabrueck, Germany)

  • Teckert Özlem

    (University of Applied Science Osnabrueck, Faculty of Management, Culture and Technology (Lingen Campus), Osnabrueck, Germany)

Abstract

Background: International financial reporting standards have constantly been facing fast-growing significant development. This has mainly been driven by the aim of better serving the needs of the investors. Awareness that corporate financial reporting provides short-sighted information and measures has been rising among politicians, in the society and on the financial markets. Therefore, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) reporting as a form of non-financial reporting has made it to limelight. Various reporting types developed, but the type of reporting is hardly codified. Objective: The goal of this paper is to identify the superior CSR reporting type from a stakeholder’s perspective. After identifying and analyzing central guidelines on CSR reporting and presenting different approaches, the authors will apply a positive-empirical methodology. Methods/Approach: In this first innovative joint attempt, eye-tracking technology is combined with a questionnaire for approaching CSR quality. Results: This study demonstrates the validity of the used methodology for the analysis of search and information browsing behavior in various types of sustainability reports. Conclusions: Overall our findings indicate that the reporting type "reference sustainability report" may not be advisable from a stakeholder’s perspective.

Suggested Citation

  • Litfin Thorsten & Meeh-Bunse Gunther & Luer Katja & Teckert Özlem, 2017. "Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting – a Stakeholder’s Perspective Approach," Business Systems Research, Sciendo, vol. 8(1), pages 30-42, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bit:bsrysr:v:8:y:2017:i:1:p:30-42:n:3
    DOI: 10.1515/bsrj-2017-0003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/bsrj-2017-0003
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/bsrj-2017-0003?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert G. Eccles & Michael P. Krzus & Jean Rogers & George Serafeim, 2012. "The Need for Sector-Specific Materiality and Sustainability Reporting Standards," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 24(2), pages 65-71, June.
    2. Kolk, Ans, 2010. "Trajectories of sustainability reporting by MNCs," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 367-374, October.
    3. Robert G. Eccles & George Serafeim & Michael P. Krzus, 2011. "Market Interest in Nonfinancial Information," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 23(4), pages 113-127, December.
    4. Robert G. Eccles & Michael P. Krzus & George Serafeim, 2011. "Market Interest in Nonfinancial Information," Harvard Business School Working Papers 12-018, Harvard Business School.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Litfin, Thorsten & Meeh-Bunse, Gunther & Luer, Katja & Teckert, Özlem, 2016. "Perception of Sustainability Reporting – an Attempt by Means of Eye-Tracking," Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference (2016), Rovinj, Croatia, in: Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference, Rovinj, Croatia, 8-9 September 2016, pages 344-351, IRENET - Society for Advancing Innovation and Research in Economy, Zagreb.
    2. Remmer Sassen & Anne-Kathrin Hinze & Inga Hardeck, 2016. "Impact of ESG factors on firm risk in Europe," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 86(8), pages 867-904, November.
    3. Adelaide Martins & Delfina Gomes & Manuel Castelo Branco, 2020. "Managing Corporate Social and Environmental Disclosure: An Accountability vs. Impression Management Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Li, Shihan & Liu, Qingfu & Lu, Lei & Zheng, Kaixin, 2022. "Green policy and corporate social responsibility: Empirical analysis of the Green Credit Guidelines in China," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    5. Ferrell, Allen & Liang, Hao & Renneboog, Luc, 2016. "Socially responsible firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(3), pages 585-606.
    6. Kar Yee Lo & Calvin Lee Kwan, 2017. "The Effect of Environmental, Social, Governance and Sustainability Initiatives on Stock Value – Examining Market Response to Initiatives Undertaken by Listed Companies," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(6), pages 606-619, November.
    7. Misani, Nicola & Pogutz, Stefano, 2015. "Unraveling the effects of environmental outcomes and processes on financial performance: A non-linear approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 150-160.
    8. Hirunyawipada, Tanawat & Xiong, Guiyang, 2018. "Corporate environmental commitment and financial performance: Moderating effects of marketing and operations capabilities," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 22-31.
    9. Jody Grewal & Clarissa Hauptmann & George Serafeim, 2021. "Material Sustainability Information and Stock Price Informativeness," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 513-544, July.
    10. Wong, Jin Boon & Zhang, Qin, 2022. "Stock market reactions to adverse ESG disclosure via media channels," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    11. Emanuele Teti & Alberto Dell'Acqua & Paolo Bonsi, 2022. "Detangling the role of environmental, social, and governance factors on M&A performance," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 1768-1781, September.
    12. Marina Trpeska & Zorica Bozinovska Lazarevska & Atanasko Atanasovski, 2016. "Towards Integrated Reporting: Analysis Of Information Published On The Companies’ Websites That Could Be Part Of The Integrated Reporting," Journal Articles, Center For Economic Analyses, pages 73-89, December.
    13. Imke Rhoden & Christopher Stephen Ball & Stefan Vögele & Wilhelm Kuckshinrichs, 2023. "Minding the gap‐relating disclosure to contexts of sustainability reporting in the automotive industry," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(2), pages 846-857, March.
    14. Lorenzo Dal Maso & Giovanni Liberatore & Francesco Mazzi, 2017. "Value Relevance of Stakeholder Engagement: The Influence of National Culture," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(1), pages 44-56, January.
    15. El Ghoul, Sadok & Fu, Zhengwei & Guedhami, Omrane & Kim, Yongwon, 2024. "Do insiders profit from public environmental information? Evidence from insider trading," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    16. Ferrell, Allen & Liang, Hao & Renneboog, Luc, 2016. "Socially responsible firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(3), pages 585-606.
    17. Trinks, Arjan & Mulder, Machiel & Scholtens, Bert, 2020. "An Efficiency Perspective on Carbon Emissions and Financial Performance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    18. Azmi, Wajahat & Hassan, M. Kabir & Houston, Reza & Karim, Mohammad Sydul, 2021. "ESG activities and banking performance: International evidence from emerging economies," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    19. Tantawy Moussa & Amir Allam & Said Elbanna & Ahmed Bani‐Mustafa, 2020. "Can board environmental orientation improve U.S. firms' carbon performance? The mediating role of carbon strategy," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 72-86, January.
    20. Wang, Juan & Li, Jing & Zhang, Qingjun, 2021. "Does carbon efficiency improve financial performance? Evidence from Chinese firms," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).

    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:bit:bsrysr:v:8:y:2017:i:1:p:30-42:n:3. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    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.