An empirical investigation of factors influencing the environmental reporting quality: evidence from France

Abstract

Purpose This study empirically tests a comprehensive set of relevant factors to explain environmental reporting quality. This study aims to understand whether environmental assurance has a direct effect on “environmental reporting quality”. In addition, this study also aims to examine the relationship between corporate governance and the quality of environmental reporting as measured by voluntary and timely reporting. Design/methodology/approach A number of econometric techniques are used including panel data specifications using a sample of French listed companies in SBF120 for the period 2012–2017. Findings The results demonstrate that the presence of an environmental audit committee and the size of the environmental external assurance firm has a significant effect on the level of voluntary reporting of environmental information. The results also reveal that the presence of the environmental audit committee, as well as the corporate social responsibility (CSR) committee, the size of the environmental external assurance and corporate governance index, affect the timely environmental reporting. Research limitations/implications This study helps all market participants to more comprehensively evaluate the quality of environmental reporting in the French context and highlights whether various factors could affect the quality of the environmental information disclosed using a multi-theoretical framework. Originality/value This paper fills the gap in the literature by highlighting an unexplored field of literature about the quality of environmental reporting by linking on the division of the quality of environmental information reporting into sub-dimensions (voluntary reporting and timely reporting) in the French context. To the knowledge, no empirical study has been done on the timely reporting of environmental information in the French context or other contexts. The originality of the work consists of the fact that it is one of the first works that deal with the relationship between environmental external assurance, corporate governance and the quality of environmental reporting.

Corporate board attributes and environmental accounting disclosure of oil and gas firms in Nigeria

“…The findings also support hypotheses two, three, and four of the study, which claim that board financial expertise, AC independence, and AC financial accounting expertise have a direct significant influence on CEAD. It is also in line with the findings of [5,15] who found positive significant link between board attributes and AC attributes on CEAD.…”

“…If a similar study will be carried out in the Nigerian context, a different and more reliable result could have been documented. An empirical investigation was also conducted by [15] on factors influencing the environmental reporting quality of listed companies in France. A sample of 120 quoted firms was employed.…”

Corporate governance perspective on environmental reporting: Literature review and future research agenda

“…The formation of a dedicated CSR or environmental committee within the board is perceived as a signal of a firm's engagement and dedication to bringing the topic of social responsibility or sustainability to the top decision‐making levels (Peters & Romi, 2014; Shwairef et al, 2021), so that the “environmental committees facilitate ER by assisting them to comply with the rules and regulations keeping them in their social contract with the society” (Agyei & Yankey, 2019, p. 280). However, the existing evidence provides mixed results, ranging from no effect (Baalouch et al, 2019; Rupley et al, 2012) to an indirect positive link (with the mediating role of manager's strategic posture) or even a strong direct link (Cosma et al, 2022; Moalla et al, 2020; Ofoegbu et al, 2018; Shwairef et al, 2021). The presence of an environmental audit committee and CSR committee is positively associated with the timely delivery of environmental reports (Moalla et al, 2020), together with the likelihood of greenhouse gases (GHG) disclosure (Peters & Romi, 2014).…”

Drivers of corporate voluntary disclosure: a systematic review

“…It should be noted that due to the absence of persuasive theoretical underlying structure and the subjective experience that affects the established proxies, prior research failed to provide an accurate measure of sustainable reporting quality which made it more difficult in evaluating its determinants. Also, some factors have to lack theoretical support from the commonly applied theories such as stakeholder and legitimacy lenses (Chi et al , 2020; Darus and Taylor, 2009; Islam et al , 2016; Moalla et al , 2020). Having reviewed the literature, the researchers believe that more work is needed to explore theories that have been applied in a limited investigation such as social contract, political costs, institutional, media agenda setting, proprietary cost and signaling theories (Darus and Taylor, 2009; Duran and Rodrigo, 2018; Orazalin and Mahmood, 2019).…”