Robin W. Roberts

Corporate social performance, financial performance and institutional ownership in Canadian firms

Abstract This study examines the relationship of corporate social performance (CSP) to financial performance (FP) and institutional ownership. We perform our empirical analyses on a large-sample of publicly held Canadian firms and use a novel independent measure of CSP. Based on tests utilizing four years of panel data, we found no significant relationship between a composite measure of firms’ CSP and FP. However, we found significant relationships between individual measures of firms’ CSP regarding environmental and international activities and FP. Our findings indicate a significant relationship between firms’ composite CSP measure and the number of institutions investing in firms’ stock. In addition, we found significant relationships between firms’ CSP ratings regarding their international activities and product quality and the number of institutions investing in firms’ stock. These findings, while subject to the limitations inherent in the use of specific CSP measures, provide mixed support for the business case for CSP.

Environmental reporting on the internet by America's Toxic 100: Legitimacy and self-presentation

This study uses Goffmans self-presentation theory to examine corporate website environmental disclosures from an organizational legitimacy perspective. We argue that corporations use Internet reporting and website platforms to project a more socially acceptable environmental management approach to public stakeholders. We argue further that this disclosure activity is often de-coupled from their actual environmental performance. To test these conjectures, we refine and employ a comprehensive disclosure evaluation metric to assess both the content and the presentation of these types of disclosures and utilize a firms Americas Toxic 100 toxic score, a newly developed measure based on the US Environmental Protection Agencys toxics release inventory (TRI) data, to proxy for environmental performance. Based on empirical tests of four size-matched samples, our findings support our conjectures, showing that worse environmental performers provide more extensive disclosure in terms of content and website presentation.

CSR disclosure: the more things change…?

Purpose - – Corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure is receiving increased attention from the mainstream accounting research community. In general, this recently published research has failed to engage significantly with prior CSR-themed studies. The purpose of this paper is threefold. First, it examines whether more recent CSR reporting differs from that of the 1970s. Second, it investigates whether one of the major findings of prior CSR research – that disclosure appears to be largely a function of exposure to legitimacy factors – continues to hold in more recent reporting. Third, it examines whether, as argued within the more recent CSR-themed studies, disclosure is valued by market participants. Design/methodology/approach - – Using Fortune 500 data from the late 1970s (from Ernst & Ernst, 1978) and a more recent sample (2010), the authors identify differences in CSR disclosure by computing adequate measures in terms of disclosure breadth and comparing them for any potential changes in the influence of legitimacy factors between 1977 and 2010. In the second stage of the analysis, the authors use a standard valuation model to compare the association between CSR and firm value between the two time periods. Findings - – The authors first find that the breadth of CSR disclosure increased significantly, with respect to both environmental and social information provision. Second, the authors find that the relationship among legitimacy factors and CSR disclosure does not differ across the two time periods. However, the analysis focusing on environmental disclosure provides evidence that industry membership is less powerfully related to differences in reporting, but only for the weighted disclosure score. Finally, the results indicate that CSR disclosure, in apparent contrast to the arguments of the more recent mainstream investigations, is not positively valued by investors. Research limitations/implications - – The authors explore changes in CSR disclosure only for industrial firms and as such the authors cannot generalize findings to companies in other industries. Similarly, the authors focus only on companies in the USA while different relationships may hold in other countries. Further, the disclosure metrics are limited by the availability of firm-specific information provided by Ernst & Ernst. Limitations aside, however, the findings appear to suggest that the failure of the new wave of CSR research in the mainstream accounting community to acknowledge and consider prior research into social and environmental accounting is potentially troublesome. Specifically, recent CSR disclosure research published in mainstream journals often lends credence to voluntary disclosure arguments that ignore previous contradictory findings and well-established alternative explanations for observed empirical relationships. Practical implications - – This paper provides supporting evidence that the unquestioned acceptance by the new wave of CSR researchers that the disclosure is about informing investors as opposed to being a tool of legitimation and image enhancement makes it less likely that such disclosure will ever move meaningfully toward transparent accountability. Originality/value - – The study suggests that CSR disclosure, while used more extensively today than three decades ago, may still largely be driven by concerns with corporate legitimacy, and still fails to provide information that is relevant for assessing firm value. As such, the failure of the mainstream accounting community to acknowledge this possibility can only hinder the ultimate development of better accountability for all of the impacts of business.

How a Two-Step Approach Discloses Different Determinants of Voluntary Social and Environmental Reporting

Previous research on the determinants of voluntary social and environmental disclosure assumes that the determinants underlying the company’s decision to disclose and the disclosure level are the same. This paper addresses the influence of this assumption on: (i) the operationalization of the dependent variables; (ii) the estimation method; and (iii) the subsequent empirical results, using both a sample of listed Belgian and US firms. Overall, the findings suggest that not distinguishing between the determinants underlying the decision to disclose and the disclosure level may be misleading.

CSR report assurance in the USA: an empirical investigation of determinants and effects

Purpose – The authors aims to examine, first, what factors appear to lead those US companies that do obtain assurance on their CSR reports to do so, and second, whether this assurance appears to be valued by market participants. Design/methodology/approach – The authors use logistic regression analysis to determine what factors explain the choice to seek assurance. For the second stage of the analysis, the authors rely on Aboody et al.s market valuation model to examine the association between CSR report assurance and firm value. Findings – The authors find that industry membership and disclosure extensiveness both appear to influence the choice to attain third-party assurance on CSR reports in the USA. However, the results also indicate that the assurance is not associated with higher market value for report-issuing companies. Research limitations/implications – The authors examine only large firms and limit the investigation to a single year. Further, the authors do not examine market valuation effects...

Vulnerable and exploitable: The need for organisational accountability and transparency in emerging and less developed economies

Abstract The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the papers which appear in this special issue of Accounting Forum. The paper sets out the background and rationale for this special issue, introduces the papers contained within it and discusses their contributions to the literature on social and environmental accounting and accountability in emerging and less developed economies. This discussion is informed by the notions of vulnerability and exploitability. The final section of the paper provides conclusions and directions for future research in this under-researched area.

The contemporary gender agenda of the US public accounting profession: embracing feminism or maintaining empire?

Abstract In this paper we analyze the social relations operating within the contemporary gender agenda of the United States (US) public accounting profession, with the ultimate goal of revealing the role that that agenda plays in the expansion of empire. Competing narratives of globalization are used to support our characterization of the US as a contemporary empire, and to develop the role played by the US profession in that imperial project. A feminist account of the ideology of domesticity serves as a framework to critique the contemporary gender agenda of the US profession, and feminist critiques of globalization and development are used to interpret the gendered nature of the economic agenda that is currently being exported by the US profession and its multinational clients. The analysis leads to conclusions about the involvement of the US profession in facilitating empire and about complexities embedded in the roles held by women in the US public accounting profession.

Managerialism in US universities: implications for the academic accounting profession

Abstract The purpose of this essay is to present a brief, personal commentary on managerialism in US universities and on its effects on the academic accounting profession. I contrast an Enlightenment narrative and a Market narrative as a way to discuss the influences that numeracy, technology, and globalization have on the spread of managerialism within university governance. In addition, I relate these narratives to more complex views of ‘old’ managerialism and ‘neo’-managerialism, and I discuss them within the context of the US accounting academy.

Behind camouflaging: traditional and innovative theoretical perspectives in social and environmental accounting research

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is threefold. First, it examines nuances that specific camouflaging perspectives provide to enhance traditional and widely adopted theories in social and environmental accounting. Second, within research on camouflaging, the paper stimulates multidisciplinarity and cross-fertilization by presenting recent developments in organizational theory that hold promise for enhancing our understanding of camouflaging. Finally, it discusses how the research contributions published in this special issue help advance the notion of corporate camouflaging. Design/methodology/approach – The paper makes use of an extensive literature review and discusses research implications related with the choice of theoretical framework. Findings – The idea of camouflaging may provide narrower and more refined perspective(s) that can help researchers delve deeper into their topic of interest and thereby support potentially substantive contributions to the field. Originality/value – The paper offers ...

In whose interest? A critical examination of public interest appeals made by the public accounting profession in the USA

This paper presents a critical analysis of public interest arguments employed by the USA public accounting profession. We build on prior research that deals with the public accounting professions public interest commitments, specifically Willmott (1990), Parker (1994), Robson et al. (1994), Roberts and Dwyer (1998), and Cooper and Robson (2006), by focusing more specifically on an analysis of the logic, authority, and emotional appeals of the professions rhetoric. In addition, we engage more extensively with functionalist arguments concerning market control over auditor independence and quality. Relying principally on an Aristotelian (Aristotle, Trans. 1954) definition of rhetoric and Toulmins (1969) model of argument, we evaluate the logic, authority and emotional appeal of these claims and present arguments and evidence in rebuttal. Our analysis indicates that, although, public interest claims are not totally void of merit, without consistent ethical performance by accounting professionals, their public interest rhetoric rings hollow, damaging the reputation of the profession as a whole and laying the foundation for further regulatory restrictions.