Media coverage and voluntary environmental disclosures: A developing country exploratory experiment

Accounting Forum

Volumn 35, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 139-157

  Elijido Ten, Evangeline ^a  

^a SWINBURNE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Developing country disclosures; Environmental disclosure; Media agenda setting theory; Stakeholder theory

Indexed keywords

EID: 80052303924     PISSN: 01559982     EISSN: 14676303     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.accfor.2011.06.003     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Ader C.R. A longitudinal study of agenda setting for the issue of environmental pollution. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 1995, 72(2):300-311.
2. Aerts W., Cormier D. Media legitimacy and corporate environmental communication. Accounting, Organizations and Society 2009, 34(1):1-27.
3. Ahmad Z., Hassan S., Mohammad J. Determinants of environmental reporting in Malaysia. International Journal of Business Studies 2003, 11(1):69-90.
4. Ahmad N.N., Sulaiman M. Environmental disclosures in Malaysian annual reports: A legitimacy theory perspective. International Journal of Commerce and Management 2004, 14(1):44-58.
5. Al-Tuwaijri S.A., Christensen T.E., Hughes K.E. The relations among environmental disclosure, environmental performance, and economic performance: A simultaneous equations approach. Accounting, Organizations and Society 2004, 29(5-6):447-471.
6. Brewer M. Research design and issues of validity. Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology 2000, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. H. Reis, C. Judd (Eds.).
7. Brown N., Deegan C. The public disclosure of environmental performance information - A dual test of media agenda setting theory and legitimacy theory. Accounting and Business Research 1998, 29(1):21-42.
8. Buhr N. Histories of and rationales for sustainability reporting. Sustainability accounting and accountability 2007, 57-69. Routledge, London. J. Unerman, J. Bebbington, B. O'Dwyer (Eds.).
9. Campbell D.T., Fiske D.W. Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin 1959, 56:81-105.
10. Caroll C.E., McCombs M. Agenda-setting effects of business news on the public's images and opinions about major corporations. Corporate Reputation Review 2003, 6(1):36-46.
11. Choudhury N. The seeking of accounting where it is not: Towards a theory of non-accounting towards organizational settings. Accounting, Organizations and Society 1988, 13(6):549-557.
12. Clarkson P.M., Li Y., Richardson G.D., Vasvari F.P. Revisiting the relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: An empirical analysis. Accounting, Organizations and Society 2008, 33(4/5):303-327.
13. Cormier D., Gordon I.M., Magnan M. Corporate environmental disclosure: Contrasting management's perceptions with reality. Journal of Business Ethics 2004, 49(2):143-165.
14. de Villiers C., van Staden C.J. Can Less Environmental Disclosure have a legitimising effect? Evidence from Africa. Accounting Organizations and Society 2006, 31(8):763-781.
15. Deegan C. Financial accounting theory 2000, McGraw Hill Book Company, Sydney.
16. Deegan C. The legitimising effect of social and environmental disclosures - A theoretical foundation. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 2002, 15(3):282-311.
17. Deegan C., Blomquist C. Stakeholder influence on corporate reporting: An exploration of the interaction between WWF-Australia and the Australian minerals industry. Accounting, Organizations and Society 2006, 31(4-5):343-372.
18. Deegan C., Rankin M., Tobin J. An examination of the corporate social and environmental disclosures of BHP from 1983-1997: A test of legitimacy. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 2002, 15(3):312-343.
19. Deegan C., Rankin M., Voght P. Firms' disclosure reactions to social incidents: Australian evidence. Accounting Forum 2000, 24(1):101-130.
20. Deephouse D.L. Media reputation as a strategic resource: An integration of mass communication and resource-based theories. Journal of Management 2000, 26(6):1091-1112.
21. Economic Planning Unit (EPU) Ninth Malaysia plan 2006, Prime Minister Dpt, Putrajaya.
22. Elijido-Ten E.O. The case for reporting pro-active environmental initiatives: A Malaysian experiment on stakeholder influence strategies. Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting 2008, 2(1):36-60.
23. Elijido-Ten E.O. Can stakeholder theory add to our understanding of Malaysian environmental reporting attitudes?. Malaysian Accounting Review 2009, 8(2):85-110.
24. Elijido-Ten E.O., Kloot L., Clarkson P. Extending the application of stakeholder influence strategies to environmental disclosures: An exploratory study from a developing country. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 2010, 23(8):1032-1059.
25. Environmental Resources Management Malaysia (ERMM) The state of corporate environmental reporting in Malaysia 2002, ACCA, London.
26. Epstein M.J. The annual report report card. Business and Society Review 1992, 92(81):81-83.
27. Epstein M.J., Freedman M. Social disclosure and the individual investor. Accounting Auditing and Accountability 1994, 7(4):94-109.
28. Eyal C.H., Winter J.P., DeGeorge W.F. The concept of time frame in agenda setting. Mass communication yearbook 1981, Vol. 2. Sage Publications Inc, Beverly Hills, CA.
29. Fekrat A.M., Inclan C., Petroni D. Corporate environmental disclosures: Competitive disclosure hypothesis using 1991 annual report data. The International Journal of Accounting 1996, 31(2):175-195.
30. Freedman M., Jaggi B. Association between environmental performance and environmental disclosures: An assessment. Advances in Accounting 1996, 14:161-178.
31. Freeman R. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Advances in Strategic Management 1983, 1:31-60.
32. Freeman R. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach 1984, Pitman, Marshall.
33. Frooman J. Stakeholder influence strategies. Academy of Management Review 1999, 24(2):191-205.
34. Garnaut R. The Garnaut climate change review: Final report 2008, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
35. George A.L. Propaganda analysis: A study of inferences made from Nazi propaganda in World War II 1959, Row, Peterson and Company, Evanston, IL.
36. Gray R., Bebbington J. Accounting for the environment 2001, Sage Publications, London. 2nd edition.
37. Gray R., Kouhy R., Lavers S. Corporate social and environmental reporting. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 1995, 8(2):47-77.
38. Gray R., Owen D., Adams C. Accounting and accountability: Changes and challenges in corporate social and environmental reporting 1996, Prentice Hall, London.
39. Hughes S.B., Anderson A., Golden S. Corporate environmental disclosures: Are they useful in determining environmental performance. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 2001, 3(20):217-240.
40. Jamil C.Z.M., Alwin K.K., Mohamed R. Corporate social responsibility disclosure in the annual reports of Malaysian companies: A longitudinal study. Social and Environmental Accounting 2002, 22(2):5-9.
41. KPMG KPMG international survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2008 2008, KPMG International, USA.
42. Kuruppu S., Milne M.J. Dolphin deaths, organisational legitimacy and potential employees' reactions to assured environmental disclosures. Accounting Forum 2010, 34(1):1-19.
43. Kuzel A.J. Sampling in qualitative inquiry. Research Methods for Primary Care Series 1992, Vol. 3:31-44. Sage Publications, CA. B.F. Cabtree, W.L. Miller (Eds.).
44. Kvale S. InterViews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing 1996, Sage Publications, CA.
45. Lindsay R.M., Ehrenberg A.S.C. The design of replicated studies. American Statistician 1993, August, 217-228.
46. Lippman W. Public opinion 1922, Harcourt Brace, New York.
47. McCombs M., Shaw D. The agenda setting function of the mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly 1972, 36:176-187.
48. Miles M.B., Huberman A.M. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook 1994, Sage Publications, CA. 2nd edition.
49. Milne M., Chan C.C. Narrative corporate social disclosures: How much a difference do they make to investment decision making?. British Accounting Review 1999, 31:439-457.
50. Milne M., Patten D. Securing organizational legitimacy: An experimental decision case examining the impact of environmental disclosures. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 2002, 15(3):372-405.
51. Mitchell R.K., Agle B.R., Wood D.J. Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review 1997, 22(4):853-886.
52. Nasi J., Nasi S., Phillips N., Zyglidopoulos S. The evolution of corporate social responsiveness. Business and Society 1997, 36(3):296-321.
53. O'Donovan G. Environmental disclosures in the annual report: Extending the applicability and predictive power of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 2002, 15(3):344-371.
54. O'Dwyer B. Managerial perceptions of corporate social disclosure: An Irish story. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 2002, 15(3):406-436.
55. O'Dwyer B., Unerman J., Bradley J. Perceptions on the emergence and future development of corporate social disclosure in Ireland. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 2005, 18(1):14-43.
56. Patten D.M. Media exposure, public policy pressure, and environmental disclosure: An examination of the impact of tri data availability. Accounting Forum 2002, 26(2):153-171.
57. Patton M. Qualitative evaluation and research methods 1990, Sage Publications, CA.
58. Pfeffer J., Salancik G. The external control of organisations: A resource dependence perspective 1978, Harper and Row, New York.
59. Roberts M.S. Predicting voting behaviour via the agenda-setting tradition. Journalism Quarterly 1992, 69:878-892.
60. Savage G.T., Nix T.W., Whitehead C.J., Blair J.D. Strategies for assessing and managing organisational stakeholders. Academy of Management Executive 1991, 5(2):61-75.
61. Smith J. Understanding the media: A sociology of mass communication 1995, Hampton Press, Cresskill, NJ.
62. Smith M., Yahya K., Amiruddin A.M. Environmental disclosure and performance reporting in Malaysia. Asian Review of Accounting 2007, 15(2):185-199.
63. Spence C., Husillos J., Correa-Ruiz C. Cargo cult science and the death of politics: A critical review of social and environmental accounting research. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 2010, 21(1):76-89.
64. Stern N. The economics of climate change: The stern review 2006, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
65. Sumiani Y., Haslinda Y., Lehman G. Environmental reporting in a developing country: A case study on status and implementation in Malaysia. Journal of Cleaner Production 2007, 15(10):895-901.
66. Thompson P., Zakaria Z. Corporate social responsibility reporting in Malaysia: Progress and prospects. Journal of Corporate Citizenship 2004, Spring(13):125-136.
67. Tilt C.A. The influence of external pressure groups on corporate social disclosure. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 1994, 7(4):47-72.
68. Wiseman J. An evaluation of environmental disclosures made in corporate annual reports. Accounting, Organizations and Society 1982, 7(1):53-63.
69. Yin R.K. Case study research design and methods. Applied Social Research Methods Series 1994, Vol. 5. Sage Publications, CA.
70. Yusoff H., Lehman G., Nasir N.M. Environmental engagements through the lens of disclosure practices: A Malaysian story. Asian Review of Accounting 2006, 14(1/2):122-148.
71. Zucker, H. (1978). The variable nature of news media influence. In B. Rubin (Ed.), Communication yearbook No. 2 (pp. 225-245). NJ.