IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i4p1093-d207303.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating the Intra-Industry Comparability of Sustainability Reports: The Case of the Oil and Gas Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Andrea Cardoni

    () (Department of Economics, University of Perugia, Via Alessandro Pascoli, 20, 06123 Perugia PG, Italy)

  • Evgeniia Kiseleva

    () (Department of Economics, University of Perugia, Via Alessandro Pascoli, 20, 06123 Perugia PG, Italy)

  • Simone Terzani

    () (Department of Economics, University of Perugia, Via Alessandro Pascoli, 20, 06123 Perugia PG, Italy)

Abstract

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) data are in high demand in financial markets. However, the ESG data provided by companies do not allow for use in the investment decision-making process. The main limiting point for this is a lack of comparability across companies. This paper analyzes the problem of comparability with the aim to evaluate the intra-industry comparability of sustainability reports, framing the analysis on Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Standards and discussing the results with the support of legitimacy and stakeholder theories. Drawing upon stakeholder and legitimacy theories, as well as financial and sustainability accounting concepts, we propose a theoretical framework of comparability and a methodology to evaluate the level of comparability on a sector-specific basis. The methodological approach adopted in this study is broadly qualitative, with the use of a multiple-stages model. Based on the example of one industry, we discovered that, despite comparability being mostly relevant to the listed companies from the oil and gas sector, the sustainability reports of these companies are still not comparable. Our findings reveal that, despite the availability of a large amount of ESG data and the existence of sustainability frameworks, the problem of comparability is still relevant even for companies that are theoretically most inclined to be comparable.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrea Cardoni & Evgeniia Kiseleva & Simone Terzani, 2019. "Evaluating the Intra-Industry Comparability of Sustainability Reports: The Case of the Oil and Gas Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(4), pages 1-23, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:4:p:1093-:d:207303
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/4/1093/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/4/1093/
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gus De Franco & S.P. Kothari & Rodrigo S. Verdi, 2011. "The Benefits of Financial Statement Comparability," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(4), pages 895-931, September.
    2. 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.
    3. Cowen, Scott S. & Ferreri, Linda B. & Parker, Lee D., 1987. "The impact of corporate characteristics on social responsibility disclosure: A typology and frequency-based analysis," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 111-122, March.
    4. Dang, Chongyu & (Frank) Li, Zhichuan & Yang, Chen, 2018. "Measuring firm size in empirical corporate finance," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 159-176.
    5. El Hedi Arouri, Mohamed & Jouini, Jamel & Nguyen, Duc Khuong, 2011. "Volatility spillovers between oil prices and stock sector returns: Implications for portfolio management," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1387-1405.
    6. Craig Deegan & Marita Shelly, 2014. "Corporate Social Responsibilities: Alternative Perspectives About the Need to Legislate," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 121(4), pages 499-526, June.
    7. Frank Li & Tao Li & Dylan Minor, 2016. "CEO power, corporate social responsibility, and firm value:a test of agency theory," International Journal of Managerial Finance, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 12(5), pages 611-628, October.
    8. Maria Baldini & Lorenzo Dal Maso & Giovanni Liberatore & Francesco Mazzi & Simone Terzani, 2018. "Role of Country- and Firm-Level Determinants in Environmental, Social, and Governance Disclosure," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(1), pages 79-98, June.
    9. Patrycja Hąbek & Radosław Wolniak, 2016. "Assessing the quality of corporate social responsibility reports: the case of reporting practices in selected European Union member states," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 399-420, January.
    10. Arifur Khan & Mohammad Muttakin & Javed Siddiqui, 2013. "Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosures: Evidence from an Emerging Economy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 114(2), pages 207-223, May.
    11. Cascino, Stefano & Gassen, Joachim, 2015. "What drives the comparability effect of mandatory IFRS adoption?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 57682, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Cristian Carini & Laura Rocca & Monica Veneziani & Claudio Teodori, 2018. "Ex-Ante Impact Assessment of Sustainability Information–The Directive 2014/95," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 10(2), pages 1-24, February.
    13. Luis Escobar & Harrie Vredenburg, 2011. "Multinational Oil Companies and the Adoption of Sustainable Development: A Resource-Based and Institutional Theory Interpretation of Adoption Heterogeneity," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 98(1), pages 39-65, January.
    14. Gerald J. Lobo & Michael Neel & Adrienne Rhodes, 2018. "Accounting comparability and relative performance evaluation in CEO compensation," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 1137-1176, September.
    15. Patten, Dennis M., 2005. "The accuracy of financial report projections of future environmental capital expenditures: a research note," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 457-468, July.
    16. Patrycja Hąbek & Radosław Wolniak, 2016. "Assessing the quality of corporate social responsibility reports: the case of reporting practices in selected European Union member states," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 399-420, January.
    17. Mohammad Jizi & Aly Salama & Robert Dixon & Rebecca Stratling, 2014. "Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure: Evidence from the US Banking Sector," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 125(4), pages 601-615, December.
    18. Riley, Richard Jr. & Pearson, Timothy A. & Trompeter, Greg, 2003. "The value relevance of non-financial performance variables and accounting information: the case of the airline industry," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 231-254.
    19. Stefano Cascino & Joachim Gassen, 2012. "Comparability Effects of Mandatory IFRS Adoption," SFB 649 Discussion Papers SFB649DP2012-009, Sonderforschungsbereich 649, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany.
    20. Andrew Park & Curtis Ravenel, 2013. "Integrating Sustainability Into Capital Markets: Bloomberg LP And ESG's Quantitative Legitimacy," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 25(3), pages 62-67, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    sustainability reports; ESG information; GRI framework; comparability; oil and gas;

    JEL classification:

    • Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics
    • Q0 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General
    • Q2 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q3 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:4:p:1093-:d:207303. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (XML Conversion Team). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com/ .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.