THE LANGUAGE OF CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTAL DISCLOSURE: A RESEARCH NOTE

We investigate different language techniques used in corporate environmental disclosures and test whether the impression management (see Neu et al., 1998) hypothesis holds when disclosures are measured as such. We argue that the way information is presented (i.e., the language and verbal tone of narratives) in environmental disclosure is equally or perhaps more important than its amount or thematic content, and that such narrative choice is not neutral to firm environmental performance. We use a computer-based measurement approach to evaluate the extent of language bias contained in corporate environmental disclosures for a cross-sectional sample of U.S. firms' 10-K reports. This study contributes to the social and environmental literature by (1) systematically analyzing the language used in environmental disclosures, (2) examining whether corporations attempt to manage impressions by writing such disclosures, and (3) further exploring the characteristics of impression management.Environmental disclosure; language tone; impression management

Enhancement and obfuscation through the use of graphs in sustainability reports: An international comparison

‘This article is (c) Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear here https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/ Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'Purpose – In this study we investigate the use of graphs in corporate sustainability reports and attempt to determine, first, whether the use of graphs appears to be associated with attempts at impression management, and second, whether differences across three levels of reporting regulatory structure (Leuz, Nanda and Wysocki, 2003) are associated with differences in the level of impression management. Design/methodology/approach - Based on a sample of 120 sustainability reports issued by firms from six different countries, we empirically test for differences in presentation of favorable as opposed to unfavorable items (enhancement) and for differences in the direction of materially distorted graphs (obfuscation). Findings - For the overall sample we find substantial evidence of both enhancement and obfuscation in the graph displays. We also find more limited evidence that impression management differs across companies facing different regulatory structures. Research limitations/implications – We investigate graph use for only one year’s reports and for a sample of large companies from only six different countries. Further, our enhancement findings are not evidence that the companies are necessarily providing misleading information. However, our results show that the way information is being provided in corporate sustainability reports appears to be manipulated by the firms to enhance a positive image and to obfuscate negative trends. The reports may thus be less about increasing corporate accountability across the social and environmental domains than about managing impressions. Hence, it may be beneficial for advocate organizations such as the Global Reporting Initiative to provide additional guidance on “how” information gets portrayed in sustainability reports. Originality/value – Our study expands prior research into corporate manipulation of graphs to the domain of sustainability reporting and adds further evidence that the reporting needs to be carefully assessed

CSR disclosure: The more things change…?

This article is (c) Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear here https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/ Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.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.ESSEC Business School’s Research Center (CERESSEC)University of Padov

Calls for accountability and sustainability : how organizations respond

acceptedVersionPeer reviewe