No abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide preliminary evidence on current practices in non-financial key performance indicator (KPI) reporting in annual reports by listed Australian companies to inform Australian legislators and accounting standard setters contemplating regulations and guidance for non-financial performance disclosure, including input into the revision of IFRS Practice Statement 1: Management Commentary (2010). Design/methodology/approach Non-financial KPIs were hand-collected from the annual report narratives of 40 listed Australian companies from five sectors in 2016. Trends in the type, quantity, comparability and range of non-financial KPIs were analysed, and the association between company characteristics and non-financial disclosure was explored. Findings In total, 78 per cent of the sampled companies disclose non-financial KPIs in their annual reports, reporting 11 non-financial KPIs per company on average. The most common category is Employee, followed by Environment, accounting for 68 per cent of non-financial KPIs. Provision of comparators is low, with only 28 per cent of non-financial KPIs disclosed with prior year results and 24 per cent disclosed with a target. Companies disclose across a median of two out of seven categories. Company size is shown to be associated with non-financial measures. Originality/value The study contributes initial detailed empirical Australian evidence of non-financial KPI reporting practices. A framework is established for assessing non-financial KPI disclosure, adding to voluntary disclosure studies. A data collection method is developed for collecting KPIs from annual report narratives, contributing to the methodology used in voluntary reporting content analysis.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to enhance conceptual understanding of reporting boundaries in corporate annual reports by developing a conceptual framework of the rules and principles, referred to here as dimensions, underlying boundaries. A total of nine contemporary regulations/guidelines are compared in terms of the boundary dimensions identified to illustrate similarities and differences in boundary concepts.Design/methodology/approachTo develop a conceptual framework of reporting boundary dimensions, academic and industry literature were analysed to identify boundary dimensions. Thereafter, nine contemporary regulations/guidelines were compared in terms of these dimensions. A qualitative approach was taken including document analysis and content analysis.FindingsA total of 10 key boundary dimensions were identified through analysis of academic and industry literature. Each dimension represents a continuum along which regulations/guidelines can position themselves. Taken together, the 10 dimensions provide a comprehensive description of the chosen boundary concept.Originality/valueThe paper contributes to accounting theory by providing a holistic conceptual framework of dimensions relating to reporting boundaries, thus answering calls for more conceptual development of the boundary construct. The conceptual framework and comparison of contemporary regulations/guidelines adds to scarce literature considering financial and non-financial boundaries simultaneously, which is relevant for annual reports. From a practical perspective, the paper brings renewed visibility to boundaries with implications for preparers, users, standard setters and auditors of annual reports.

No abstract

PurposeThe authors examine the determinants of ESG disclosure and differentiate between voluntary and mandatory disclosure regimes in Hong Kong.Design/methodology/approachThe authors analyse both Bloomberg ESG scores and a disclosure index score, manually constructed according to the 2019 Hong Kong Exchange ESG Guide using regression tests.FindingsThe results indicate that the level of concentrated ownership is negatively associated with the quantity of ESG disclosure only in the voluntary disclosure period, suggesting that agency problems are alleviated when ESG reporting is mandatory. The findings also show that larger firms significantly disclose higher levels of ESG information in both voluntary and mandatory disclosure periods. Furthermore, the extent of ESG disclosure significantly increases when firms' sustainability reports are audited by Big 4 accounting firms only in the voluntary disclosure period. Finally, the control variables are significantly related to the level of ESG disclosure showing that ESG disclosure increased over time and is significantly different among industries.OriginalityThe authors make contributions to the literature on non-financial disclosure in relation to ESG reporting by examining the relationship between firm characteristics and ESG disclosure in the Hong Kong context under both voluntary and mandatory disclosure regimes. This study also provides important implications for other stock markets and relevant stakeholders including preparers, users and the sustainability profession.