The DOI matches its Crossref record; 54 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Environmental disclosures in the annual report: Extending the applicability and predictive power of legitimacy theory
Abstract
Much of the extant research into why companies disclose environmental information in the annual report indicates that legitimacy theory is one of the more probable explanations for the increase in environmental disclosures since the early 1980s. Legitimacy theory is based on the idea that in order to continue operating successfully, corporations must act within the bounds of what society identifies as socially acceptable behaviour. The purpose of the practical research undertaken and reported in this paper is to extend the applicability and predictive power of legitimacy theory by investigating to what extent annual report disclosures are interrelated to: attempts to gain, maintain and repair legitimacy; and the choice of specific legitimation tactics. The quasi‐experimental method adopted utilised semi‐structured interviews with senior personnel from three large Australian public companies. The findings indicated support for legitimacy theory as an explanatory factor for environmental disclosures. Moreover, findings about the likelihood of specific micro‐legitimation tactics being used in response to legitimacy threatening environmental issues/events, and dependent on whether the purpose of the response is designed to gain, maintain or repair legitimacy, are reported.
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
Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches
Suchman, M. C. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258788 · Cited by 19,903
Building Theories from Case Study Research
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258557 · Cited by 17,455
(2008) · Biostatistics and Microbiology: A Survival Manual · doi:10.1007/978-0-387-77282-0_6 · Cited by 17,371
The Analytic Hierarchy Process
SAATY, T. L., & KEARNS, K. P. (1985) · Analytical Planning · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-032599-6.50008-8 · Cited by 15,357
External Control of Organizations: Resource Dependence Perspective
(2011) · Organizational Behavior 6 · doi:10.4324/9781315701967-54 · Cited by 14,181
Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods
Lotto, L. S., Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1986) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.2307/1163741 · Cited by 10,315
Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes
Oliver, C. (1991) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1991.4279002 · Cited by 8,950
A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance
Clarkson, M. B. E. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258888 · Cited by 7,838
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259247 · Cited by 5,039
Optimization by the Analytic Hierarchy Process
Saaty, T. L. (1979) · doi:10.21236/ada214804 · Cited by 4,466
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- Anderson, R.H. and Epstein, M. (1995), “The usefulness of annual reports”, Australian Accountant, April, pp. 25‐8.
- Bansal, P. (1995), “Why do firms go green? The case of organisational legitimacy”, D. Phil thesis, Oxford University, Oxford.
- Coopers & Lybrand Consultants (1997), “Environmental reporting”, On Environmental Reporting, Vol. 2 No. 1, September.
- Dyball, M.C. (1998), “Corporate annual reports as promotional tools: the case of Australian National Industries Limited”, Asian Review of Accounting, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 25‐53. · doi:10.1108/eb060696
- Frost, G.R. and Wilmshurst, T.D. (1998), “Evidence of environmental accounting in Australian companies”, Asian Review of Accounting, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 163‐80. · doi:10.1108/eb060702
- Gibson, K. and O’Donovan, G. (2000), “Environmental disclosures in Australia: a longitudinal study”, paper presented at the 6th Interdisciplinary Environmental Association Conference, Montreal, 21‐24 July.
- O’Donovan, G. (1997), “The decision to include environmental information in the corporate annual report: some Australian case study evidence”, American Accounting Association, Southwest Region Meeting Conference Proceedings, New Orleans, LA, March, pp. 119‐126.
- O’Donovan, G. (1998), “Corporate strategy and environmental reporting: a multinational’s perspective”, in Hickey, K. and Kantarelis, D. (Eds), Our Natural Environment: Interdisciplinary Interactions, Assumption College, Worcester, MA, pp. 89‐104.
- O’Donovan, G. (2000), Legitimacy Theory as an Explanation for Environmental Disclosures, PhD thesis, Victoria University of Technology, Melbourne.
- Pava, M.L. and Krausz, J. (1997), “Criteria for evaluating the legitimacy of corporate social responsibility”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 16, pp. 337‐47. · doi:10.1023/a:1017920217290
- Sethi, S.P. (1978), “Advocacy advertising – the American experience”, California Management Review, Vol. 11, pp. 55‐67. · doi:10.2307/41165295
- Sutton, B. (Ed.) (1993), The Legitimate Corporation, Blackwell, Cambridge, MA.
- Wartick, S.L. and Mahon, J.F. (1994), “Toward a substantive definition of the corporate issue construct: a review and synthesis of the literature”, Business and Society, Vol. 33, pp. 293‐311. · doi:10.1177/000765039403300304
- Weil, S., Clark, M. and Wegner, T. (1996), “Measuring students perceptions of the design features of a computer‐aided learning program in introductory accounting”, paper presented at AAANZ Annual Conference, Christchurch, July.
Cited by
Deegan, C. (2002) · Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal · doi:10.1108/09513570210435852 · Cited by 3,829
Organized hypocrisy, organizational façades, and sustainability reporting
Cho, C. H., Laine, M., Roberts, R. W., & Rodrigue, M. (2015) · Accounting, Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/j.aos.2014.12.003 · Cited by 1,066
Cormier, D., Magnan, M., & Van Velthoven, B. (2005) · European Accounting Review · doi:10.1080/0963818042000339617 · Cited by 1,011
Social and environmental accountability research: A view from the commentary box
Parker, L. D. (2005) · Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal · doi:10.1108/09513570510627739 · Cited by 698
Drivers of Environmental Disclosure and Stakeholder Expectation: Evidence from Taiwan
Huang, C.-L., & Kung, F.-H. (2010) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0476-3 · Cited by 522
Metadata
- Authors
- O’Donovan, G.
- Venue
- Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2002-08-01
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 344-371
- ISSN
- 0951-3574 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1905298264
- Cited by
- 1,450
- References
- 54
- FWCI
- 55.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.emerald.com/insight/site-policies (tdm)
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Environmental disclosures in the annual report: Extending the applicability and predictive power of legitimacy theory. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/09513570210435870
- The paper
- O’Donovan, G. (2002). Environmental disclosures in the annual report: Extending the applicability and predictive power of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570210435870
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.
