[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
Main Menu
Home::
Journal Information::
About the Journal
Aims& Scopes
Editorial Board ::
Articles archive::
All Issues
Current Issue
Publication Ethics::
For Authors::
Guide for Authors
Submission Form
Peer Review Process::
Reviewers Section
Registration::
Registration Form
Site Facilities::
Site map
Search contents
FAQ
Top 10 contents
Inform to friends
Contact us::
Contact Information
Contact us
::
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
:: Volume 5, Issue 9 (8-2020) ::
aapc 2020, 5(9): 335-369 Back to browse issues page
Investigating the Effect of Audit Committee Characteristics on Sustainability Reporting Level
Mostafa Abdi1 , Saeid Homayoun2 , Mahdi Kazemi Oloum 3
1- Assistant Professor of Accounting, Roozbeh University, Zanjan, Iran(abdi.accounting@yahoo.com)
2- Senior Lecturer in Accounting, Faculty of Education and Business, University of Gavle, Sweden(homayoun@hig.se)
3- Faculty of Economic and Social Sciences, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamadan, Iran(Corresponding author) , Mkolum1361@gmail.com
Abstract:   (5530 Views)
The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of audit committee characteristics on the level of sustainability reporting of companies listed on the stock exchange with emphasis on agency theory, legitimacy theory and stakeholder theory. The data collection method is archival and to test the research hypotheses, the data of 152 companies listed on the stock exchange that were collected during the period 2014 to 2018 have been used. For data analysis, regression with a combined data approach was used. The Global Reporting Initiative's checklist has been used to measure sustainability reporting. The findings indicate that audit committee characteristics (size, independence, financial expertise and gender diversity of the members) have a positive and significant effect on corporate sustainability reporting level. Evidence suggests that the audit committee is effective as a corporate governance mechanism and control tool in improving the reporting quality in general and sustainability reporting in particular enhance to achieve the stakeholders goals. The findings of this study have important results for compilers of requirements and standards, management of companies and stakeholders. The findings of this study show the importance of disclosure requirements for non-financial information (environmental, governance and social information) for legislators and standardizers. The results of this study improve stakeholder awareness of the importance of corporate social responsibility, corporate governance, and environmental information on credit and investment decisions, and encourage companies to disclose sustainable reporting information in order to play their social role.
Keywords: Audit Committee, Corporate Governance, Stakeholders, Sustainability Reporting, Sustainable Development.
Full-Text [PDF 317 kb]   (1779 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special
Received: 2020/03/24 | Accepted: 2020/06/20 | Published: 2020/08/22
References
1. Abbott, L., J. Y. Park, and S. Parker. 2000. The effects of audit committee activity and independence on corporate fraud. Managerial Finance 26 (11): 55-68.
2. Adams, R., J. de Haan., S. Terjesen, and H. van Ees. 2015. Board diversity: moving the field forward. Corporate Governance: An International Review 23 (2): 77-82.
3. Ajinkya, B., S. Bhojraj and P. Sengupta. 2005. The Association Between Outside Directors, Institutional Investors and the Properties of Management Earning Forecast. Journal of Accounting Research 43 (3): 343-376.
4. Al-Shaer, H. and M. Zaman. 2016. Board Gender Diversity and Sustainability Reporting Quality. Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics 12: 210-222.
5. Alderman, H., K. Duncan., S. Kelly and R. McNamara. 2011. Performance of family firms during the global financial crisis: does governance matter?, paper presented in 3rd Conference on Financial Markets and Corporate Governance La Trobe University, Melbourne.
6. Allegrini, M. and G Greco. 2013. Corporate boards, audit committees and voluntary disclosure: evidence from Italian listed companies. Journal of Management & Governance 17(1): 187-216.
7. Appuhami, R. and S Tashakor. 2017. The Impact of Audit Committee Disclosure: An analysis of Australian Firms. Australian Accounting Review 27 (4): 400-420.
8. Badolato, P.G., D.C. Donelson and M. Ege. 2014. Audit committee financial expertise and earnings management: the role of status. Journal of Accounting and Economics 58 (2): 208-230.
9. Barako, D.G., P. Hancock and H.Y. Izan. 2006. Factors influencing voluntary corporate disclosure by Kenyan companies. Corporate Governance: An International Review 14 (2): 107-125.
10. Baxter, P. and J. Cotter. 2009. Audit committees and earnings quality. Accounting & Finance 49 (2): 267-290.
11. Bedard, J. and Y. Gendron. 2010. Strengthening the financial reporting system: can audit committees deliver?. International Journal of Auditing 14(2): 174-210.
12. Bernardi, R.A., D.F. Bean and K.M. Weippert. 2002. Signaling Gender Diversity through Annual Report Pictures: A Research Note on Image Management. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 15(4): 609- 616.
13. Buallay, A., and J. Al-Ajmi. 2019. The role of audit committee attributes in corporate sustainability reporting: Evidence from banks in the Gulf Cooperation Council. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 1-17.
14. Castelo Branco, M. and L. Lima Rodrigues. (2006). Communication of corporate social responsibility by Portuguese banks: a legitimacy theory perspective. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 11 (3): 232-248.
15. Chen, Y., J. Eshleman and J. Soileau. 2016. Board Gender Diversity and Internal Control Weaknesses. Advances in Accounting 32 (1):65-90.
16. Clarkson, P. M., Y. Li, G.D. Richardson and F.P. Vasvari. 2011. Does it Really Pay to Be Green? Determinants and Consequences of Proactive Environmental Strategies. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 30 (2): 122-144.
17. Clarkson, P.M., Y. Li., G.D. Richardson and F.P. Vasvari. 2008. Revisiting the relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: an empirical analysis. Accounting, Organizations and Society 33(4): 303-327.
18. Crifo, P., Escrig - Olmedo, E., and Mottis, N. (2018). Corporate Governance as a Key Driver of Corporate Sustainability in France: The Role of Board Members and Investor Relations. Journal of Business Ethics.
19. Daily, C. M., S. T Certo and D. R. Dalton. 2000. Research notes and communications: International experience in the executive suite: the path to prosperity. Strategic Management Journal 21: 515-523.
20. Fama, E.F. and M. C. Jensen. 1983. Separation of ownership and control. The Journal of Law and Economics 26(2): 301-325.
21. Fatemi, A., M. Glaum and S. Kaiser. 2018. ESG performance and firm value: the moderating role of disclosure. Global Finance Journal 38: 45-64.
22. Frankel, R., S. McVay and M. Soliman. 2011. Non-GAAP earnings and board independence. Review of Accounting Studies 16 (4): 719-744.
23. Freeman, R. E. 1984. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Perspective. Boston: Pitman Publishing. Governance. Accounting & Finance 50 (1): 171-195.
24. Gray, R., K. Kouhy and S. Lavers. 2008. Corporate social and environmental reporting: a review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosures accounting. Auditing and Accountability Journal 8 (2): 47-77.
25. Harjoto, M., I. Laksmana and R. Lee. 2014. Board diversity and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics 1-20.
26. Herzig, C., T. Viere., R. Burritt and S. Schaltegger. 2006. Understanding and supporting management decision-making. South East Asian case studies on environmental management accounting. Stainability Accounting and Reporting, Springer, Dordrecht 491-507.
27. Hoitash, U., R. Hoitash and J.C. Bedard. 2009. Corporate governance and internal control over financial reporting: a comparison of regulatory regimes. The Accounting Review 84 (3): 839-867.
28. Isidro, H., and M. Sobral. 2014. The effects of women on corporate boards on firm value, financial performance, and ethical and social compliance. Journal of Business Ethics1-19.
29. Jensen, M. 2001. Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function. European Financial Management 7 (3): 297–317.
30. Jensen, M. and W. Meckling. 1976. Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics 3 (3): 305-360.
31. Jizi, M.I., A. Salama., R. Dixon and R. Stratling. 2014.Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility disclosure: evidence from the US banking sector. Journal of Business Ethics 125($): 601-615.
32. KPMG. 2011. KPMG international survey of corporate social responsibility reporting 2011. www.kpmg.de/docs/survey-corporate-responsibility-reporting-2011.pdf
33. Karamanou, I. and N. Vafeas. 2005. The association between corporate boards, audit committees, and management earnings forecasts: an empirical analysis. Journal of Accounting Research 43(3): 453-486.
34. Kent, P., J. Routledge and J. Stewart. 2010. Innate and discretionary accruals quality and corporate governance. Accounting & Finance 50 (1): 171-195.
35. Kiron, D., N. Kruschwitz., K. Haanaes., M. Reeves., S. FuiszKehrbach and G. Kell. 2015. Joining Forces: Collaboration and Leadership for Sustainability. MIT Sloan Management Review, the Boston Consulting Group, and the United Nations Global Compact. http://marketing.mitsmr.com/PDF/56380-MITSMR-BGC-UNGCSustainability2015.pdf?cid=1 (accessed January 12).
36. Krishnan, G.V. and G. Visvanathan. 2007. Reporting internal control deficiencies in the post- Sarbanes‐Oxley era: the role of auditors and corporate governance. International Journal of Auditing 11 (2): 73-90.
37. Kuzey, C., Uyar, A. (2017). Determinants of sustainability reporting and its impact on firm value: evidence from the emerging market of Turkey. Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 27–39.
38. Laplume, A.O., K. Sonpar and R.A. Litz. 2008. Stakeholder theory: reviewing a theory that moves us. Journal of Management 34 (6): 1152-1189.
39. Leftwich, R.W., R.L. Watts and J.L. Zimmerman. 1981. Voluntary corporate disclosure: the case of interim reporting. Journal of Accounting Research 18 (1): 50-77.
40. Li, J., M. Mangena and R. Pike. 2012. The effect of audit committee characteristics on intellectual capital disclosure. The British Accounting Review 44 (2): 98-110.
41. Madi, H.K., Z. Ishak and N.A.A> Manaf. 2014. The impact of audit committee characteristics on corporate voluntary disclosure.Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 164: 486-492.
42. Mangena, M. and V. Tauringana. 2007. Corporate compliance with non-mandatory statements of best practice: the case of the ASB statement on interim reports. European Accounting Review 16 (2): 399-427.
43. Mangena, M., and R. Pike. 2005. The Effect of Audit Committee Shareholding, Financial Expertise and Size on Interim Financial Disclosures. Accounting & Business Research, 35 (4): 327–349.
44. Mistry, V., U. Sharma and M. Low. 2014. Management accountants’ perception of their role in accounting for sustainable development: an exploratory study. Pacific Accounting Review 26 (1): 112-133.
45. Naciti, V. (2019). Corporate governance and board of directors: the effect of a board composition on firm sustainability performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 237, 1-18.
46. Neifar, S. and A. Jarboui. 2018. Corporate governance and operational risk voluntary disclosure: evidence from Islamic banks”, Research in International Business and Finance 46 (1): 43-54.
47. Persons, O.S. 2009. Audit committee characteristics and earlier voluntary ethics disclosure among fraud and no-fraud firms. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance 6 (4): 284-297.
48. Petra, S. T. 2005. Do outside independent directors strengthen corporate boards? Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society 5 (1): 55-64.
49. Pucheta-Martınez, M.C., and C. De Fuentes. 2007. The Impact of Audit Committee Characteristics on the Enhancement of the Quality of Financial Reporting: An Empirical Study in the Spanish Context. Corporate Governance: An International Review 15 (6): 1394–1412.
50. Rao, K. and C. Tilt. 2016. Board diversity and CSR reporting: an Australian study. Meditari Accountancy Research 24 (2): 182-210.
51. Ray, S., B. Ray Chaudhuri. 2018. Business group affiliation and corporate sustainability strategies of firms: an investigation of firms in India. Journal of Business Ethics 153 (4): 955-976.
52. Rezaee, Z. 2016. Business Sustainability Research: A Theoretical and Integrated Perspective. Journal of Accounting Literature 36: 48-64.
53. Rezaee, Z. 2017. Corporate Sustainability: Theoretical and Integrated Strategic Imperative and Pragmatic Approach. The Journal of Business Inquiry 16: 60-87.
54. Samaha, K., H. Khlif and K. Hussainey. 2015. The impact of board and audit committee characteristics on voluntary disclosure: a meta-analysis. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation 24 (1): 13-28.
55. Sharma, U. and M. Kelly. 2014. Students’ perceptions of education for sustainable development in the accounting and business curriculum at a business school in New Zealand. Meditari Accountancy Research 22 (2): 130-148.
56. Sultana, N., M. Van der and J.L. Zahn. 2015. Earnings conservatism and audit committee financial expertise. Accounting & Finance 55 (1): 279-310.
57. Tilling, M. V. 2004. Some Thoughts on Legitimacy Theory in Social and Environmental Accounting. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 24 (2): 3-7.
58. Vafeas, N. 2005. Audit committees, boards, and the quality of reported earnings. Contemporary Accounting Research 22 (4): 1093-1122.
59. Waddock, S.A. and S.B. Graves. 1997. The corporate social performance–financial performance link .Strategic Management Journal 18 (4): 303-319.
60. Weber, M. 2008. The Business Case for Corporate Social Responsibility: A Company- Level Measurement Approach for CSR. European Management Journal 26 (4): 247-61.
61. Wijen, F. 2014. Means Versus Ends in Opaque Institutional Fields: Trading off Compliance and Achievement in Sustainability Standards Adoption. Academy of Management Review 39 (3): 302-323.
62. Wilburn, K. and R.Wilburn. 2013. Using global reporting initiative indicators for CSR programs. Journal of Global Responsibility 4 (1): 62-75.
63. Woidtke, T. and Y.H. Yeh. 2013. The role of the audit committee and the informativeness of accounting earnings in East Asia. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal 23 (1): 1-24.
64. Yuen, C.Y, M. Liu., X. Zhang and C. Lu. 2009. A Case Study of Voluntary Disclosure by Chinese Enterprises. Asian Journal of Finance & Accounting. 1(2): 118-145.
65. Zhang, J. Q. , H. Zhu and H. B. Ding. 2013. Board composition and corporate social responsibility: An empirical investigation in the post Sarbanes-Oxley era. Journal of Business Ethics 114 (3): 381–392.
66. Zou,Z., Y. Wu., Q. Zhu and SH. Yang. 2018.. Do Female Executives Prioritize Corporate Social Responsibility? Emerging Markets Finance and Trade 2965-2981.
Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA

XML   Persian Abstract   Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Abdi M, Homayoun S, Kazemi Oloum M. Investigating the Effect of Audit Committee Characteristics on Sustainability Reporting Level. aapc 2020; 5 (9) :335-369
URL: http://aapc.khu.ac.ir/article-1-807-en.html
Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 5, Issue 9 (8-2020) Back to browse issues page
دوفصلنامه علمی حسابداری ارزشی و رفتاری journal of Value & Behavioral Accounting
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.14 seconds with 37 queries by YEKTAWEB 4666