The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Intra‐ and intersectoral effects in environmental disclosures: evidence for legitimacy theory?
Open accessAbstract
Environmental disclosures were recorded from the annual reports of a sample of ten UK FTSE 100 companies in five sectors between 1974 and 2000. ‘Environmental sensitivity’ was employed as a proxy for corporate vulnerability to environmental concern, and intra‐ and intersectoral differences were tested for in the belief that difference in industry response will signify differing perceptions on the need to provide voluntary disclosure and hence restore or maintain legitimacy. Intrasectoral agreements at given points in time were also taken to be evidence for legitimacy theory in that more than one company in a sector perceived a need to change disclosure behaviour at the same time. Legitimacy theory as an explicator for variability in environmental disclosure is supported. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Exploring the reliability of social and environmental disclosures content analysis
Milne, M. J., & Adler, R. W. (1999) · Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal · doi:10.1108/09513579910270138 · Cited by 1,425
Cited by
Seele, P., & Gatti, L. (2017) · Business Strategy and the Environment · doi:10.1002/bse.1912 · Cited by 693
Greenwashing and environmental communication: Effects on stakeholders' perceptions
Torelli, R., Balluchi, F., & Lazzini, A. (2020) · Business Strategy and the Environment · doi:10.1002/bse.2373 · Cited by 577
Hąbek, P., & Wolniak, R. (2016) · Quality & Quantity · doi:10.1007/s11135-014-0155-z · Cited by 353
Arena, C., Bozzolan, S., & Michelon, G. (2015) · Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management · doi:10.1002/csr.1350 · Cited by 273
In Search of the Dominant Rationale in Sustainability Management: Legitimacy- or Profit-Seeking?
Schaltegger, S., & Hörisch, J. (2017) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-015-2854-3 · Cited by 269
Metadata
- Authors
- Campbell, D.
- Venue
- Business Strategy and the Environment
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-10-24
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 357-371
- ISSN
- 0964-4733 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-0836
- OpenAlex
- W2053443712
- Cited by
- 200
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 3.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
