IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rbs/ijbrss/v8y2019i3p111-121.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Audit Committee Characteristics on Environmental and Social Disclosures:Evidence from Turkey

Author

Listed:
  • Ali Altug Bicer

    (Departmant of Accounting and Auditing, Faculty of Business Administration,Istanbul Commerce University, Istanbul, Turkey.)

  • Imad Mohamed Feneir

    (Departmant of Accounting,The Higher Institute for Administrative and Financial Sciences, Benghazi, Libya.)

Abstract

The main reasons for corporate participation in environmental and social disclosure are stability, development, and continuity through participation in protecting the environment and optimizing the use of available resources. As well as the company practices and participation in society of the most important means to create a good image of the company in the community. There is a rise demand for companies to take accountability for their environmental and societal impacts. A core role of the Audit Committee (AC) is to help the board of directors in overseeing the company's reporting policy and oversees the quality of financial reporting in the company. This study examined the impact of audit committee characteristics on the level of environmental and social disclosures in listed banks in Borsa Istanbul. The results of the study showed that there is no statistically significant relationship between the characteristics of the audit committee and the environmental and social disclosures. Consequently, these characteristics have no effect on the volume or type of disclosure and their inability to predict them. Key Words:Audit Committe, AC Size, AC Meetings, AC Expertise, Environmental Disclosure, Social Disclosure

Suggested Citation

  • Ali Altug Bicer & Imad Mohamed Feneir, 2019. "The Impact of Audit Committee Characteristics on Environmental and Social Disclosures:Evidence from Turkey," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 8(3), pages 111-121, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:rbs:ijbrss:v:8:y:2019:i:3:p:111-121
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ssbfnet.com/ojs/index.php/ijrbs/article/view/262/252
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.ssbfnet.com/ojs/index.php/ijrbs/article/view/262
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Niamh M. Brennan & Jill Solomon, 2008. "Corporate governance, accountability and mechanisms of accountability: an overview," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 21(7), pages 885-906, September.
    2. Ans Kolk & Jonatan Pinkse, 2010. "The integration of corporate governance in corporate social responsibility disclosures," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(1), pages 15-26, January.
    3. Ranjith Appuhami & Shamim Tashakor, 2017. "The Impact of Audit Committee Characteristics on CSR Disclosure: An Analysis of Australian Firms," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 27(4), pages 400-420, December.
    4. Nekhili, Mehdi & Nagati, Haithem & Chtioui, Tawhid & Rebolledo, Claudia, 2017. "Corporate social responsibility disclosure and market value: Family versus nonfamily firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 41-52.
    5. Amanda Ball & David L. Owen & Rob Gray, 2000. "External transparency or internal capture? The role of third‐party statements in adding value to corporate environmental reports1," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(1), pages 1-23, January.
    6. Jing Li & Richard Pike & Roszaini Haniffa, 2008. "Intellectual capital disclosure and corporate governance structure in UK firms," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(2), pages 137-159.
    7. Dima Jamali & Asem M. Safieddine & Myriam Rabbath, 2008. "Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsibility Synergies and Interrelationships," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(5), pages 443-459, September.
    8. Irene Karamanou & Nikos Vafeas, 2005. "The Association between Corporate Boards, Audit Committees, and Management Earnings Forecasts: An Empirical Analysis," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 453-486, June.
    9. Chen, Gongmeng & Firth, Michael & Gao, Daniel N. & Rui, Oliver M., 2006. "Ownership structure, corporate governance, and fraud: Evidence from China," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 424-448, June.
    10. Nekhili, Mehdi & Nagati, Haithem & Chtioui, Tawhid & Rebolledo, Claudia, 2017. "Corporate social responsibility disclosure and market value: Family versus nonfamily firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 41-52.
    11. Z. Jun Lin & Jason Z. Xiao & Qingliang Tang, 2008. "The roles, responsibilities and characteristics of audit committee in China," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 21(5), pages 721-751, June.
    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. Selena Aureli & Mara Del Baldo & Rosa Lombardi & Fabio Nappo, 2020. "Nonfinancial reporting regulation and challenges in sustainability disclosure and corporate governance practices," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2392-2403, September.
    2. Aladdin Dwekat & Elies Seguí‐Mas & Guillermina Tormo‐Carbó & Pedro Carmona, 2020. "Corporate Governance Configurations and Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure: Qualitative Comparative Analysis of Audit Committee and Board characteristics," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(6), pages 2879-2892, November.
    3. 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.
    4. Hamed, Ruba Subhi & Al-Shattarat, Basiem Khalil & Al-Shattarat, Wasim Khalil & Hussainey, Khaled, 2022. "The impact of introducing new regulations on the quality of CSR reporting: Evidence from the UK," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    5. Mohammad Jizi, 2017. "The Influence of Board Composition on Sustainable Development Disclosure," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(5), pages 640-655, July.
    6. Junhui Wang & Jerry Sun, 2022. "The role of audit committees in social responsibility and environmental disclosures: evidence from Chinese energy sector," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 19(1), pages 113-128, March.
    7. Laura Bini & Francesco Giunta & Rebecca Miccini & Lorenzo Simoni, 2023. "Corporate governance quality and non-financial KPI disclosure comparability: UK evidence," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 27(1), pages 43-74, March.
    8. Amin, Marian H. & Mohamed, Ehab K.A. & Elragal, Ahmed, 2021. "CSR disclosure on Twitter: Evidence from the UK," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    9. Shujun Ding & Chunxin Jia & Yuanshun Li & Zhenyu Wu, 2010. "Reactivity and Passivity After Enforcement Actions: Better Late Than Never," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 95(2), pages 337-359, September.
    10. Sumaia Ayesh Qaderi & Turki Raji Alhmoud & Belal Ali Abdulraheem Ghaleb, 2020. "Audit Committee Features and CSR Disclosure: Additional Evidence From an Emerging Market," International Journal of Financial Research, International Journal of Financial Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 11(5), pages 226-237, October.
    11. Nooraisah Katmon & Omar Al-Farooque, 2019. "The Reciprocal Relationship Between Earnings Management, Disclosure Quality and Board Independence: UK Evidence," Research in World Economy, Research in World Economy, Sciedu Press, vol. 10(5), pages 63-80, December.
    12. Marco Allegrini & Giulio Greco, 2013. "Corporate boards, audit committees and voluntary disclosure: evidence from Italian Listed Companies," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 17(1), pages 187-216, February.
    13. Bablu Kumar Dhar & Sabrina Maria Sarkar & Foster K. Ayittey, 2022. "Impact of social responsibility disclosure between implementation of green accounting and sustainable development: A study on heavily polluting companies in Bangladesh," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(1), pages 71-78, January.
    14. Hasmanezan Hassan & Najihah Marha Yaacob, 2019. "Corporate Governance Mechanisms and Intellectual Capital Efficiency: Evidence from Malaysia," International Journal of Economics and Finance, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(1), pages 83-95, January.
    15. Barbara Grabinska & Dorota Kedzior & Marcin Kedzior & Konrad Grabinski, 2021. "The Impact of CSR on the Capital Structure of High-Tech Companies in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-20, May.
    16. Hsin-Yi Huang & Chih-Kang Lien & Feng-Chen Lin & I-Ting Tsai, 2023. "Whether Family-owned Enterprises Affect the Correlation between the Extent of export and the Acquisition of the Third-party Assurance of the Corporate Social Responsibility Reports," Journal of Applied Finance & Banking, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 13(1), pages 1-1.
    17. Jara, Mauricio & López-Iturriaga, Félix J. & Torres, Juan Pablo, 2021. "Firm value and pyramidal structures: New evidence for family firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 399-412.
    18. Chidiebele Innocent Onyali & Chinedu Uchenna Okerekeoti, 2018. "Board Heterogeneity and Corporate Performance of Firms in Nigeria," International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, vol. 8(3), pages 103-117, July.
    19. Mingyuan Guo & Yanfang Hu & Yu Zhang & Fuge Tian, 2019. "State-Owned Shareholding and CSR: Do Multiple Financing Methods Matter?—Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-15, March.
    20. María Consuelo Pucheta‐Martínez & Isabel Gallego‐Álvarez, 2018. "Environmental reporting policy and corporate structures: An international analysis," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(5), pages 788-798, September.

    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:rbs:ijbrss:v:8:y:2019:i:3:p:111-121. 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: Umit Hacioglu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ssbffea.html .

    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.