Democracy, corruption and civil liberties: does national context influence corporate carbon disclosure?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/1983465969190Keywords:
Democracy, Corruption, Civil Liberties, Carbon Disclosure, Institutional TheoryAbstract
Design/methodology/approach: This research analyzes the carbon disclosure of 1328 companies based in 19 countries. The level of democracy, corruption and civil liberties in the countries was measured using variables from the Varieties of Democracy database. The data were analyzed using three econometric models.
Purpose: This research paper answers the following question: How does the country level of democracy, corruption and civil liberties affect carbon disclosure?
Findings: The results show that the carbon disclosure of companies is affected by the institutional context of the country where the company operates. Therefore, in countries where the level of democracy and control of corruption is higher, companies are more involved in carbon disclosure.
Research limitations/implications: The findings confirm the Institutional Theory, by reinforcing that not only the organizational context, but also the social and political context of the country are relevant for the dissemination of carbon.
Practical implications: Managers of companies based in countries with a greater voice for citizens and a lower level of corruption should invest more resources for the dissemination of carbon. In these countries, companies are under greater pressure from stakeholders for information on carbon emissions.
Social implications: The findings show that policy makers can incorporate protection mechanisms for stakeholders and not just shareholders. Lawmakers can propose increased penalties and criminalized corrupt practices and illicit enrichment of public officials. Less power of voice for citizens and a higher level of corruption can reduce the effectiveness of national policies for sustainable development.
Originality/value: This research, in addition to advancing the studies on carbon disclosure in different national contexts, has for the first time used the credit rating control variable.
Downloads
References
Acquah, I. S. K., Naude, M. J., & Soni, S. (2021). How the dimensions of culture influence supply chain collaboration: an explanatory sequential mixed-methods investigation. Revista de Gestão, 28(3), 241–262. https://doi.org/10.1108/rege-11-2020-0105
Almeida, T. A. N., & García-Sánchez, I. M. (2017). Sociopolitical and economic elements to explain the environmental performance of countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 24(3), 3006–3026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-8061-7
Amorim, W. A. C. de, Cruz, M. V. G. da, Sarsur, A. M., & Fischer, A. L. (2021). HRM in Brazil: an institutional approach. Revista de Gestão, 28(1), 84–99. https://doi.org/10.1108/rege-08-2020-0074
Arvin, M. B., & Lew, B. (2011). Does democracy affect environmental quality in developing countries? Applied Economics, 43(9), 1151–1160. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840802600277
Bahoo, S., Alon, I., & Paltrinieri, A. (2020). Corruption in international business: A review and research agenda. International Business Review, 29(4), 101660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2019.101660
Baldini, M., Maso, L. D., Liberatore, G., Mazzi, F., & Terzani, S. (2018). Role of Country- and Firm-Level Determinants in Environmental, Social, and Governance Disclosure. Journal of Business Ethics, 150(1), 79–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3139-1
Barkemeyer, R., Preuss, L., & Ohana, M. (2018). Developing country firms and the challenge of corruption: Do company commitments mirror the quality of national-level institutions? Journal of Business Research, 90(May), 26–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.04.025
Barrett, S., & Graddy, K. (2000). Freedom, growth, and the environment. Environment and Development Economics, 5(4), 433–456. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355770X00000267
Bättig, M. B., & Bernauer, T. (2009). National institutions and global public goods: Are democracies more cooperative in climate change policy? International Organization, 63(2), 281–308. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818309090092
Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 946–967. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2007.25275684
Choi, B., & Luo, L. (2020). Does the market value greenhouse gas emissions? Evidence from multi-country firm data. British Accounting Review, 53(1), 100909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2020.100909
Coluccia, D., Fontana, S., & Solimene, S. (2018). Does institutional context affect CSR disclosure? A study on Eurostoxx 50. Sustainability (Switzerland), 10(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082823
Davis, L., & North, D. C. (1970). Institutional Change and American Economic Growth : A First Step Towards a Theory of Institutional Innovation. The Journal of Economic History, 30(1), 131–149.
De Villiers, C., & Marques, A. (2016). Corporate social responsibility, country-level predispositions, and the consequences of choosing a level of disclosure. Accounting and Business Research, 46(2), 167–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2015.1039476
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited : Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
Fávero, L. P. L., & Belfiore, P. P. (2017). Manual de análise de dados (1a edition). Elsevier.
Fávero, L. P. L., Belfiore, P. P., Silva, F. L. D., & Chan, B. L. (2009). Análise de dados: modelagem multivariada para tomada de decisões. Elsevier.
Forbes. (2020). Global 2000. https://www.forbes.com/global2000/#27c367c2335d
Gallego-Álvarez, I., García-Sánchez, I. M., & da Silva Vieira, C. (2014). Climate Change and Financial Performance in Times of Crisis. Business Strategy and the Environment, 23(6), 361–374. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1786
Global Carbon Atlas. (2020). CO2 Emissions. http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/en/CO2-emissions
Gong, G., Xu, S., & Gong, X. (2018). On the Value of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure: An Empirical Investigation of Corporate Bond Issues in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 150(1), 227–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3193-8
Gouldner, A. W. (1954). Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy. Free Press.
Grauel, J., & Gotthardt, D. (2016). The relevance of national contexts for carbon disclosure decisions of stock-listed companies: a multilevel analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 133, 1204–1217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.182
Grauel, J., & Gotthardt, D. (2017). Carbon disclosure, freedom and democracy. Social Responsibility Journal, 13(3), 428–456. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-08-2016-0151
Greenwood, R., & Hinings, C. R. (1996). Understanding Radical Organizational Change: Bringing together the Old and the New Institutionalism. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1022–1054. https://doi.org/10.2307/259163
Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2012). What drives corporate social performance the role of nation-level institutions. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(9), 834–864. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2012.26
Iwińska, K., Kampas, A., & Longhurst, K. (2019). Interactions between democracy and environmental quality: Toward a more nuanced understanding. Sustainability (Switzerland), 11(6), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061728
Jensen, J. C., & Berg, N. (2012). Determinants of Traditional Sustainability Reporting Versus Integrated Reporting. An Institutionalist Approach. Business Strategy and the Environment, 21(5), 299–316. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.740
Kouloukoui, D., Gomes, S. M. da S., Marinho, M. M. de O., Torres, E. A., Kiperstok, A., & de Jong, P. (2018). Disclosure of climate risk information by the world’s largest companies. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 23(8), 1251–1279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-018-9783-2
Luo, L. (2019). The influence of institutional contexts on the relationship between voluntary carbon disclosure and carbon emission performance. Accounting and Finance, 59(2), 1235–1264. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12267
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations : Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.
Miniaoui, Z., Chibani, F., & Hussainey, K. (2019). The impact of country-level institutional differences on corporate social responsibility disclosure engagement. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(6), 1307–1320. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1748
Niittynen, P., Heikkinen, R. K., & Luoto, M. (2018). Snow cover is a neglected driver of Arctic biodiversity loss. Nature Climate Change, 8(11), 997–1001. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0311-x
Obiedkov, S., Klimushkin, M., Shabanova, M., & Zaytsev, D. (2013). A Multidimensional Model for Analyzing Democratic Development in Central and Eastern Europe. Transition Studies Review, 20(2), 191–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11300-013-0277-3
Pinheiro, A. B., da Silva Filho, J. C. L., & Moreira, M. Z. (2021). Institutional drivers for corporate social responsibility in the utilities sector. Revista de Gestão, 28(3), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1108/rege-08-2019-0088
Povitkina, M. (2018). The limits of democracy in tackling climate change. Environmental Politics, 27(3), 411–432. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2018.1444723
Rosati, F., & Faria, L. G. D. (2019). Addressing the SDGs in sustainability reports: The relationship with institutional factors. Journal of Cleaner Production, 215, 1312–1326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.107
Scott. (2008). Approaching adulthood: The maturing of institutional theory. Theory and Society, 37(5), 427–442. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-008-9067-z
Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and Organizations: Ideas, Interests, and Identities (4th Editio). Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.3917/mana.202.0204
Selznick, P. (1948). Foundations of the Theory of Organization. American Sociological Review, 13(1), 25–35. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/2086752
Soares, R. A., Pinheiro, A. B., Abreu, M. C. S. de, & Marino, P. D. B. L. P. (2018). Efeito do sistema financeiro na evidenciação socioambiental de empresas em países emergentes e desenvolvidos. Enfoque: Reflexão Contábil, 37(2), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.4025/enfoque.v37i2.34035
Varieties of Democracy Database. (2021). Online Graphing. https://www.v-dem.net/en/analysis/CountryGraph/
Walker, K., Zhang, Z., & Ni, N. (Nina). (2019). The Mirror Effect: Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Social Irresponsibility and Firm Performance in Coordinated Market Economies and Liberal Market Economies. British Journal of Management, 30(1), 151–168. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12271
Williams, S. M. (1999). Voluntary environmental and social accounting disclosure practices in the Asia-Pacific region: An international empirical test of political economy theory. International Journal of Accounting, 34(2), 209–238. https://doi.org/10.2469/dig.v30.n2.655
Xu, S., Qiao, M., Che, B., & Tong, P. (2019). Regional anti-corruption and CSR disclosure in a transition economy: The contingent effects of ownership and political connection. Sustainability (Switzerland), 11(9), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11092499
Zucker, L. G. (1987). Institutional theories of organization. Annual Review of Sociology, 13, 443–464. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.13.1.443
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Revista de Administração da UFSM
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This journal remains the copyright holders of articles published. In order to be published, authors must sign the Copyrights Letter, which is sent to the authors by e-mail, thus granting rights, including on translation, to ReA/UFSM. The journal grants third parties the right to use, reproduce, and share the article according to the Creative Commons license agreement (CC-BY 4.0), as stated in the article’s PDF documents.
