Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 865

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Corporate social reporting and reputation risk management

Open access
Bebbington, Jan, Larrinaga, Carlos, Moneva, Jose M.·2008·Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal
DOI 10.1108/09513570810863932
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore the proposition that corporate social responsibility reporting could be viewed as both an outcome of, and part of reputation risk management processes. Design/methodology/approach: The paper draws heavily on management research. In addition, an image restoration framework is introduced. Findings: The concept of reputation risk management could assist in the understanding of corporate social responsibility reporting practice. Originality/value: This paper explores the link between reputation risk management and existing theorising in social accounting.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/09513570810863932

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 4 references

Research works printed but not linked: 55

  1. Adams, C. (2002), “Internal organisational factors influencing corporate social and ethical reporting: beyond current theorising”, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 223‐50. · DOI · Paper page
  2. Adams, C., Coutts, A. and Harte, G. (1995), “Corporate equal opportunities (non‐) disclosure”, British Accounting Review, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 87‐108. · doi:10.1006/bare.1994.0005
  3. Baucus, M.S. (1995), “Commentary: halo‐adjusted residuals – prolonging the life of a terminally ill measure of corporate social performance”, Business and Society, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 227‐35. · doi:10.1177/000765039503400209
  4. Beatty, R.P. and Ritter, J.R. (1986), “Investment banking, reputation and the underpricing of initial public offerings”, Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 15, pp. 213‐32. · DOI · Paper page
  5. Bebbington, J. (1997), “Engagement, education and sustainability: a review essay on environmental accounting”, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 365‐81. · DOI · Paper page
  6. Benoit, W.L. (1995), Accounts, Excuses and Apologies: A Theory of Image Restoration Strategies, State University of New York Press, New York, NY.
  7. Bromley, D. (2002), “Comparing corporate reputations: league tables, quotients, benchmarks, or case studies?”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 35‐50. · doi:10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540163
  8. Brown, N. and Deegan, C. (1998), “The public disclosure of environmental performance information – a dual test of media agenda setting theory and LT”, Accounting and Business Research, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 21‐41. · DOI · Paper page
  9. Buhr, N. (1998), “Environmental performance, legislation and annual report disclosure: the case of acid rain and Falconbridge”, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 163‐90. · DOI · Paper page
  10. Chalmers, K. and Godfrey, J.M. (2004), “Reputation costs: the impetus for voluntary derivative financial instrument reporting”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 95‐125. · DOI · Paper page
  11. Deegan, C. (2002), “The legitimating effect of social and environmental disclosures – a theoretical foundation”, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 281‐311. · DOI · Paper page
  12. Deegan, C. and Rankin, M. (1996), “Do Australian companies report environmental news objectively?– An analysis of environmental disclosures by firms prosecuted successfully by the environmental protection authority”, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 50‐67. · DOI · Paper page
  13. Deegan, C., Rankin, M. and Tobin, J. (2002), “An examination of the corporate social and environmental disclosures of BHP from 1983‐1997: a test of legitimacy theory”, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 312‐43. · DOI · Paper page
  14. Deephouse, D.L. and Carter, S.M. (2005), “An examination of differences between organizational legitimacy and organizational reputation”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. 329‐60. · DOI · Paper page
  15. Dowling, G. (2004), “Corporate reputations: should you compete on yours?”, California Management Review, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 19‐36. · DOI · Paper page
  16. Fombrun, C. (1996), Reputation: Realizing Value from the Corporate Image, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
  17. Fombrun, C. and Van Riel, C. (1997), “The reputational landscape”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 1 Nos 1‐2, pp. 5‐13. · DOI · Paper page
  18. Fombrun, C.J. and Shanley, S. (1990), “What's in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 233‐58. · doi:10.5465/256324 · Paper page
  19. Fombrun, C.J., Gardberg, N.A. and Barnett, M.L. (2000), “Opportunity platforms and safety nets: corporate citizenship and reputational risk”, Business and Society Review, Vol. 105 No. 1, pp. 85‐106. · DOI · Paper page
  20. Friedman, A.L. and Miles, S. (2001), “Socially responsible investment and corporate social and environmental reporting in the UK: an exploratory study”, British Accounting Review, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 523‐48. · DOI · Paper page
  21. Fryxell, G.E. and Wang, J. (1994), “The fortune corporate ‘reputation’ index: reputation for what?”, Journal of Management, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 1‐14. · DOI · Paper page
  22. Gray, R. (1992), “Accounting and environmentalism: an exploration of the challenge of gently accounting for accountability, transparency and sustainability”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 399‐425. · DOI · Paper page
  23. Gray, R. (2002), “The social accounting project and Accounting, Organizations and Society: privileging engagement, imagination, new accountings and pragmatism over critique?”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 27 No. 7, pp. 687‐708. · DOI · Paper page
  24. Gray, R., Owen, D.L. and Adams, C.A. (1996), Accounting and Accountability: Changes and Challenges in Corporate Social and Environmental Reporting, Prentice Hall, London.
  25. Hasseldine, J., Salama, A.I. and Toms, J.S. (2005), “Quantity versus quality: the impact of environmental disclosures on the reputations of UK plcs”, British Accounting Review, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 231‐48. · DOI · Paper page
  26. Herbst, T. (1998), “Environmental disclosure: corporate use of the world wide web”, Corporate Environmental Strategy, Winter, pp. 81‐90. · doi:10.1016/s1066-7938(00)80071-8
  27. Hutton, J.G., Goodman, M.B., Alexander, J.B. and Genest, C.M. (2001), “Reputation management: the new face of corporate public relations?”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 247‐61. · DOI · Paper page
  28. Larrinaga, C. and Bebbington, J. (2001), “Accounting change or institutional appropiation? A case study on the implementation of environmental accounting”, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 269‐92. · DOI · Paper page
  29. Larrinaga, C., Carrasco, F., Correa, C., Llena, F. and Moneva, J.M. (2002), “Accountability and accounting regulation: the case of the Spanish environmental disclosure standard”, The European Accounting Review, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 723‐40. · DOI · Paper page
  30. Lawrence, T.A. (1998), “Examining resources in an occupational community: reputation in Canadian forensic accounting”, Human Relations, Vol. 51 No. 9, pp. 1103‐31. · DOI
  31. Lindblom, C.K. (1994), “The implications of organizational legitimacy for corporate social performance and disclosure”, paper presented at the Critical Perspectives on Accounting Conference, New York, NY.
  32. Little, P.L. and Little, B.L. (2000), “Do perceptions of corporate social responsibility contribute to explaining differences in corporate price‐earnings ratios? A research note”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 137‐42. · doi:10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540108
  33. Margolis, J.D. and Walsh, J.P. (2003), “Misery loves companies: rethinking social initiatives by business”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 48, pp. 268‐305. · DOI · Paper page
  34. Miles, M.P. and Covin, J.G. (2000), “Environmental marketing: a source of reputational, competitive, and financial advantage”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 299‐311. · DOI · Paper page
  35. Milgrom, P. and Roberts, J. (1986), “Relying on the information of interested parties”, Rand Journal of Economics, Vol. 17, pp. 18‐32. · DOI · Paper page
  36. Milne, M.J. and Patten, D.M. (2002), “Securing organizational legitimacy: an experimental decision case examining the impact of environmental disclosures”, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 372‐405. · DOI · Paper page
  37. Mitchell, R., Agle, B. and Wood, D. (1997), “Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 853‐86. · doi:10.5465/amr.1997.9711022105 · Paper page
  38. Neu, D., Warsame, H. and Pedwell, K. (1998), “Managing public impressions: environmental disclosures in annual reports”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 265‐82. · DOI · Paper page
  39. O'Donovan, G. (2002), “Environmental disclosures in the annual report: extending the applicability and predictive power of legitimacy theory”, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 344‐71. · DOI · Paper page
  40. O'Dwyer, B. (2002), “Managerial perceptions of corporate social disclosure: an Irish story”, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 406‐36. · DOI · Paper page
  41. O'Dwyer, B. (2003), “Conceptions of corporate social responsibility: the nature of managerial capture”, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 523‐57. · DOI · Paper page
  42. Owen, D., Gray, R. and Bebbington, J. (1997), “Green accounting: cosmetic irrelevance or radical agenda for change?”, Asia‐Pacific Journal of Accounting, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 175‐98. · DOI · Paper page
  43. Parker, L.D. (2005), “Social and environmental accountability research: a view from the commentary box”, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 18, pp. 842‐60. · DOI · Paper page
  44. Patten, D. (1992), “Intra‐industry environmental disclosures in response to the Alaskan oil spill: a note on legitimacy theory”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 471‐5. · DOI · Paper page
  45. Patten, D. (1995), “Variability in social disclosure: a legitimacy‐based analysis”, Advances in Public Interest Accounting, Vol. 6, pp. 273‐85.
  46. Roberts, J. (2001), “Corporate governance and the ethics of narcissus”, Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 109‐27. · DOI · Paper page
  47. Roberts, P.W. and Dowling, G.R. (2002), “Corporate reputation and sustained superior financial performance”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 23 No. 12, pp. 1077‐93. · DOI · Paper page
  48. Schweizer, T.S. and Wijnberg, N.M. (1999), “Transferring reputation to the corporation in different cultures: individuals, collective systems and the strategic management of corporate reputation”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 249‐66. · DOI
  49. Scott, S.V. and Walsham, G. (2005), “Reconceptualizing and managing reputation risk in the knowledge economy: towards reputable action”, Organizational Science, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 308‐22. · DOI · Paper page
  50. Shearer, T. (2002), “Ethics and accountability: from the for‐itself to the for‐the‐other”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 541‐73. · DOI · Paper page
  51. Thomson, I. and Bebbington, J. (2005), “Social and environmental reporting in the UK: a pedagogic evaluation”, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 507‐33. · DOI · Paper page
  52. Toms, J.S. (2002), “Firm resources, quality signals and the determinants of corporate environmental reputation: some UK evidence”, British Accounting Review, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 257‐82. · DOI · Paper page
  53. Unerman, J. and Bennett, M. (2004), “Increased stakeholder dialogue and the internet: towards greater corporate accountability or reinforcing capitalist hegemony?”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 29 No. 7, pp. 685‐707. · DOI · Paper page
  54. Wood, D.J. (1995), “Introduction: the Fortune database as a CSP measure”, Business & Society, Vol. 34, pp. 197‐8. · DOI
  55. Zyglidopoulos, E.C. (2002), “The social and environmental responsibilities of multinationals: evidence from the Brent Spar case”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 36 Nos 1‐2, pp. 141‐51. · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 865

Metadata

Authors
Bebbington, J., Larrinaga, C., & Moneva, J. M.
Venue
Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2008-03-28
Volume
21
Issue
3
Pages
337-361
ISSN
0951-3574 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1108/09513570810863932
OpenAlex
W2007778791
Cited by
865
References
4
FWCI
74.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green
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: Corporate social reporting and reputation risk management. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/09513570810863932
The paper
Bebbington, J., Larrinaga, C., & Moneva, J. M. (2008). Corporate social reporting and reputation risk management. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570810863932

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.