Corporate sustainability reports are supposed to provide a complete and balanced picture of corporate sustainability performance. They are, however, usually voluntary and thus prone to interpretation and even greenwashing tendencies. To overcome this problem, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) provides standardized reporting guidelines challenging companies to report positive and negative aspects of an organization’s sustainability performance. However, the reporting of “negative aspects” in particular can endanger corporate legitimacy if perceived by the stakeholders as not being in line with societal norms and values. Starting from the theoretical lenses of economics-based disclosure theories and socio-political theories of disclosure the focus of this study therefore was to analyze the communicative legitimation strategies companies use to report “negative aspects,” i.e., negative ecological and social impact caused by corporate activity.Using qualitative content analysis of GRI-oriented sustainability reports from companies listed on the US Dow Jones Industrial Average Index and on the German DAX Index, we identified six legitimation strategies. We discuss these strategies regarding to symbolic and substantial management of legitimacy. We show that symbolic legitimation strategies aiming at modifying the perception of legitimizing stakeholders dominate in the reports at hand. Such persuasion, however, does not meet the requirement of impartiality as postulated by the GRI guidelines. Building upon this conclusion we propose a concise characterization of “negative aspects” and develop a GRI-compliant schema of reporting about them. In doing so, we offer a way to improve the overall “balance” of sustainability reporting contributing to a true and fair view in sustainability disclosure.

Legitimizing Negative Aspects in GRI-Oriented Sustainability Reporting: A Qualitative Analysis of Corporate Disclosure Strategies

Corporate sustainability reports are supposed to provide a complete and balanced picture of corporate sustainability performance. They are, however, usually voluntary and thus prone to interpretation and even greenwashing tendencies. To overcome this problem, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) provides standardized reporting guidelines challenging companies to report positive and negative aspects of an organization’s sustainability performance. However, the reporting of “negative aspects” in particular can endanger corporate legitimacy if perceived by the stakeholders as not being in line with societal norms and values. Starting from the theoretical lenses of economics-based disclosure theories and socio-political theories of disclosure, the focus of this study therefore was to analyze the communicative legitimation strategies companies use to report “negative aspects,” i.e., negative ecological and social impact caused by corporate activity. Using qualitative content analysis of GRI-oriented sustainability reports from companies listed on the US Dow Jones Industrial Average Index and on the German DAX Index, we identified six legitimation strategies. We discuss these strategies regarding to symbolic and substantial management of legitimacy. We show that symbolic legitimation strategies aiming at modifying the perception of legitimizing stakeholders dominate in the reports at hand. Such persuasion, however, does not meet the requirement of impartiality as postulated by the GRI guidelines. Building upon this conclusion we propose a concise characterization of “negative aspects” and develop a GRI-compliant schema of reporting about them. In doing so, we offer a way to improve the overall “balance” of sustainability reporting contributing to a true and fair view in sustainability disclosure.

The annual reports of 10 UK-based companies in five sectors were analysed between 1974 and 2000 and the volume of voluntary environmental disclosure was recorded from each. Findings show an overall increase in disclosure volume over the period but with a marked upturn in the late 1980s. This was regressed against the memberships, over the same period, of two UK-based environmental lobbying organisations and a strong correlation was found. The use of a ‘more’ and ‘less’ environmentally sensitive measure was used to test for cross-sectional effects and this yielded a positive association between environmental disclosure and the structural vulnerability of the five sectors to environmental liability and/or criticism. Conclusions allow for the possibility that differentials in the perceived need for social legitimacy may be one cause of both longitudinal and cross-sectional variability in disclosure volumes.

A longitudinal and cross-sectional analysis of environmental disclosure in UK companies—a research note

Purpose – The purpose of this study is twofold: to evidence the disclosure practices of Spanish companies in relation to a voluntary typology of strategic information; and to determine the factors that explain these practices. Among the factors considered, the study seeks to focus on the role of the Board of Directors in depth. According to Agency Theory, strategic information has positive consequences on external funds costs. On the other hand, Proprietary Costs theory limits these practices, given that they can lead to competitive disadvantages.Design/methodology/approach – First, online strategic information disclosure practices are analysed by examining non‐financial quoted Spanish firms. A disclosure index is created, and subsequently, certain factors related to corporate governance – Activity, Size and Board Independence – as well as other factors traditionally analysed, are used to explain the volume of strategic information disclosed on the internet.Findings – The results indicate that Spanish com...

Corporate governance and strategic information on the internet: A study of Spanish listed companies

Purpose – This paper seeks to address a gap in the literature in that it explores community disclosures in annual reports examining annual reports for 5 UK FTSE 100 sectors between, 1974 and 2000.Design/methodology/approach – The sample was bifurcated into types – those with higher public profile and those with lower public profile based on a measure of “proximity to end user”. Two approaches were adopted in the paper: longitudinal volumetric word count mean and frequency of disclosure by company.Findings – The two approaches demonstrated that community disclosure was positively associated with public profile. The findings are consistent with reporting behaviour found in other categories of voluntary disclosure, where disclosure has been found to be associated with the presumed information demands of specific stakeholders. Additionally the research supported a legitimacy theory‐based explanation of cross‐sectional variability in community disclosures. Illustrative disclosures from a number of companies ar...

/pdf/cross-sectional-effects-in-community-disclosure-45pqs870k8.pdf

Heike Bohmbach‐Saager

Papers

Voluntary Disclosure of Mission Statements in Corporate Annual Reports: Signaling What and To Whom?