Author
Listed:
- Zabihollah Rezaee
- Mohammad Alipour
- Omid Faraji
- Mehrdad Ghanbari
- Babak Jamshidinavid
Abstract
Purpose - The purpose of this article is to investigate the relationship between environmental disclosure quality (EDQ) and risk and to further examine whether corporate governance (CG) practices moderate this relationship. Design/methodology/approach - This study uses a set of unique, hand collected data (from 2011 to 2016) to measure EDQ for a sample of 762 firm-years Iranian listed companies. Ordinary least squares regression analysis is performed in testing hypotheses after controlling for a variety of firm, industry and year effects. Moreover, several analyses are performed to establish the robustness of the findings. Findings - The results indicate a negative association between EDQ and firm risk. While board independence moderates this relationship, other CG practices such as CEO duality and board size do not show any effects on the relationship between EDQ and risk. The results remain robust after performing sensitivity tests and under various specifications, including the fixed-effects panel data and Heckman two-stage regressions. Research limitations/implications - Results are from a sample of firms from one country. Practical implications - The results have implications for policymakers, legislators and corporate executives, as environmental initiatives are gaining more attention worldwide. Social implications - Sustainability initiatives in the areas of environmental and social performance and disclosure are gaining global attention. This study addresses the link between firm risk and EDQ. Originality/value - This study contributes to the literature by shedding light on the relationship between corporate risk-taking and EDQ in the context of a developing economy.
Suggested Citation
Zabihollah Rezaee & Mohammad Alipour & Omid Faraji & Mehrdad Ghanbari & Babak Jamshidinavid, 2020.
"Environmental disclosure quality and risk: the moderating effect of corporate governance,"
Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 12(4), pages 733-766, June.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:sampjp:sampj-10-2018-0269
DOI: 10.1108/SAMPJ-10-2018-0269
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:sampjp:sampj-10-2018-0269. 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.