Cited by 6Corporate Social Responsibility ReportingAuditing, Earnings Management, GovernanceFinancial Reporting and XBRL

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

CSR disclosure quantity to CSR disclosure quality – in pursuit of a disclosure quality index

Hameed, Faisal, Wilmshurst, Trevor, Horner, Claire·2024·Pacific Accounting Review

Abstract

Purpose: Studies in corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure were initially focused more on disclosure “Quantity” than “Quality” and while they have started to explore “Disclosure Quality”, their assessment mechanisms are found to be immature. Thus, while a number of papers have sought to assess the quality of CSR disclosure, this paper aims to suggest an approach tied closely to both expectations in assessing “quality” derived from the Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting (revised 2018) and the global reporting initiative. The outcome is to offer a best practice approach to assessing CSR disclosure quality. Design/methodology/approach: In this paper, prior literature is reviewed, qualitative characteristics from the Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting (revised 2018) and globally recognised guidelines such as the GRI are reviewed. The framework for a “CSR disclosure quality index” as an assessment tool to assess CSR disclosure quality is developed from qualitative characteristics and criteria identified. Findings: The proposed CSR disclosure quality index is developed in stages from the qualitative characteristics identified in the Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting (revised 2018) and criteria identified from the guidelines discussed. A table was then developed linking the qualitative characteristics to criteria providing a Likert scale approach to assessing the disclosures made by companies to make an assessment of the quality of the companies’ reports. It is argued this provides a robust assessment, being a direct and comprehensive measure of disclosure quality. Research limitations/implications: As with most qualitative work, there are alternative approaches to establishing an index, but the authors believe this is an approach offering links (and, therefore, credibility) to globally recognised guidelines in the assessment of CSR disclosure quality. Future work could enhance the alignment of this index with the sustainable development goals (SDGs), building on the preliminary connections established in this study. Practical implications: At a practical level this index offers an approach to reviewing the quality of CSR disclosures which could prove useful to policymakers and in the future development and expansion of this framework offering greater objectivity to assessments and justification for proposed improvement in reporting practice. Also, this index serves as a benchmarking tool for companies to meet the disclosure expectations of stakeholders. Social implications: This approach has the potential to substantially fulfil stakeholder expectations by addressing the growing demand for transparency in this area, while avoiding practices that could be perceived as superficial or misleading (greenwashing). Focusing on social issues enables stronger connections between companies and their stakeholders. Furthermore, the index helps companies link their CSR efforts with SDGs and show their commitment to long-term social value building in discussion of governance factors to show accountability expectations are being met. Originality/value: This paper contributes to CSR disclosure quality literature and provides a reliable method of assessing the quality of CSR disclosures. Opportunities for further and broader developments can be envisaged while offering a credible and reliable approach.

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/par-11-2023-0161

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 129

  1. 2024, Does mandating ESG reporting reduce ESG decoupling? Evidence from the European Union's directive 2014/95, Business Strategy and the Environment, 33, 1305, 10.1002/bse.3543 · DOI
  2. 2004, The ethical, social and environmental reporting‐performance portrayal gap, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 17, 731, 10.1108/09513570410567791 · DOI
  3. 2004, Accountability, completeness, credibility and the audit expectations gap, Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 2004, 97, 10.9774/GLEAF.4700.2004.su.00010 · DOI
  4. 2009, Media legitimacy and corporate environmental communication, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34, 1, 10.1016/j.aos.2008.02.005 · DOI
  5. 2018, Is CSR reporting always favorable?, Management Decision, 56, 1506, 10.1108/MD-05-2017-0540 · DOI
  6. 1996, Corporate environmental disclosures: competitive disclosure hypothesis using 1991 annual report data, The International Journal of Accounting, 31, 175, 10.1016/S0020-7063(96)90003-5 · DOI
  7. 2023, The impact of sustainability governance attributes on comprehensive CSR reporting: a developing country setting, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31
  8. 2004, The relations among environmental disclosure, environmental performance, and economic performance: a simultaneous equations approach, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29, 447, 10.1016/S0361-3682(03)00032-1 · DOI · Paper page
  9. 2022, Corporate governance and the quality of CSR disclosure: lessons from an emerging economy, Society and Business Review, 17, 280, 10.1108/SBR-09-2021-0153 · DOI
  10. 2012, An assessment of the quality of environmental information disclosure of corporation in China, Systems Engineering Procedia, 5, 420, 10.1016/j.sepro.2012.04.064 · DOI
  11. 2019, A study of the determinants of environmental disclosure quality: evidence from French listed companies, Journal of Management and Governance, 23, 939, 10.1007/s10997-019-09474-0 · DOI
  12. 2013, Firm value and the quality of sustainability reporting in Australia, Australian Accounting Review, 23, 67, 10.1111/j.1835-2561.2012.00187.x · DOI
  13. 2012, Exploring the strategic integration of sustainability initiatives: opportunities for accounting research, Accounting Horizons, 26, 265, 10.2308/acch-50088 · DOI
  14. 2014, Managing corporate sustainability and CSR: a conceptual framework combining values, strategies and instruments contributing to sustainable development, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 21, 258, 10.1002/csr.1336 · DOI
  15. 2015, Assessing the communication quality of CSR reports. A case study on four Spanish food companies, Sustainability, 7, 11010, 10.3390/su70811010 · DOI
  16. 2004, A methodology for analysing and evaluating narratives in annual reports: a comprehensive descriptive profile and metrics for disclosure quality attributes, Accounting Forum, 28
  17. 2021, Measuring CSR disclosure when assessing stock market effects, Accounting and the Public Interest, 21, 1, 10.2308/API-2020-017 · DOI
  18. 2002, Stakeholder accountability or stakeholder management: a review of UK firms' social and ethical accounting, auditing and reporting (SEAAR) practices, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 9, 8, 10.1002/csr.5 · DOI
  19. 2008, Quality versus quantity: the case of forward-looking disclosure, Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, 23, 333, 10.1177/0148558X0802300304 · DOI
  20. 2018, Integrating sustainability in business model disclosure: evidence from the UK mining industry, Journal of Cleaner Production, 171, 1161, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.282 · DOI
  21. 2004, The role of information precision in determining the cost of equity capital [journal article, ]. Review of Accounting Studies, 9, 233, 10.1023/B:RAST.0000028188.71604.0a · DOI
  22. 2006, Voluntary environmental disclosures by large UK companies, Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 33, 1168, 10.1111/j.1468-5957.2006.00598.x · DOI
  23. 2008, Factors influencing the quality of corporate environmental disclosure, Business Strategy and the Environment, 17, 120, 10.1002/bse.506 · DOI
  24. 2013, Corporations and human rights: towards an effective legal regulation, or the perpetuation of the status quo?, Anuario Mexicano de Derecho Internacional, 13, 313
  25. 2021, Mandatory vs voluntary exercise on non-financial reporting: does a normative/coercive isomorphism facilitate an increase in quality?, Meditari Accountancy Research, 29, 449, 10.1108/MEDAR-08-2019-0540 · DOI
  26. 2015, The normativity and legitimacy of CSR disclosure: Evidence from France, Journal of Business Ethics, 130, 789, 10.1007/s10551-014-2114-y · DOI
  27. 2009, Is corporate responsibility converging? A comparison of corporate responsibility reporting in the USA, UK, Australia, and Germany, Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 299, 10.1007/s10551-008-9794-0 · DOI
  28. 2012, Enhancement and obfuscation through the use of graphs in sustainability reports: an international comparison, Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 3, 74, 10.1108/20408021211223561 · DOI
  29. 2010, The language of US corporate environmental disclosure, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 35, 431, 10.1016/j.aos.2009.10.002 · DOI
  30. 2022, Why is corporate virtue in the eye of the beholder? The case of ESG ratings, The Accounting Review, 97, 147, 10.2308/TAR-2019-0506 · DOI
  31. 2009, Voluntary narrative disclosures by local governments: a comparative analysis of the textual complexity of mayoral and chairpersons’ letters in annual reports, Australian Journal of Public Administration, 68, 194, 10.1111/j.1467-8500.2009.00630.x · DOI
  32. 2008, Revisiting the relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: an empirical analysis, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33, 303
  33. 2013, The relevance of environmental disclosures: are such disclosures incrementally informative?, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 32, 410, 10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2013.06.008 · DOI · Paper page
  34. 2008, Revisiting the relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: an empirical analysis, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33, 303, 10.1016/j.aos.2007.05.003 · DOI · Paper page
  35. 2005, Environmental disclosure quality in large German companies: Economic incentives, public pressures or institutional conditions?, European Accounting Review, 14, 3, 10.1080/0963818042000339617 · DOI · Paper page
  36. 2004, Corporate report obfuscation: artefact or phenomenon?, The British Accounting Review, 36, 291, 10.1016/j.bar.2004.03.005 · DOI
  37. 2016, Researching corporate social responsibility communication: themes, opportunities and challenges, Journal of Management Studies, 53, 1223, 10.1111/joms.12196 · DOI · Paper page
  38. 2006, Reporting organisational performance in managing human resources: intellectual capital or stakeholder perspectives?, Journal of Human Resource Costing and Accounting, 10, 164, 10.1108/14013380610718629 · DOI
  39. 2018, Seeking legitimacy through CSR reporting: evidence from China, Journal of Management Accounting Research, 30, 1, 10.2308/jmar-51627 · DOI
  40. 2003, Transparency and assurance minding the credibility gap, Journal of Business Ethics, 44, 195, 10.1023/A:1023351816790 · DOI
  41. 2022, Do ESG reporting guidelines and verifications enhance firms' information disclosure?, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29, 1214, 10.1002/csr.2265 · DOI
  42. 2021, Global CSR, drivers and consequences: a systematic review, Journal of Global Responsibility, 12, 416, 10.1108/JGR-12-2020-0103 · DOI
  43. 2014, The institutionalisation of corporate social responsibility reporting, The British Accounting Review, 46, 198, 10.1016/j.bar.2014.03.001 · DOI
  44. 2006, Can less environmental disclosure have a legitimising effect? Evidence from Africa, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31, 763, 10.1016/j.aos.2006.03.001 · DOI
  45. 1996, Do Australian companies report environmental news objectively? An analysis of environmental disclosures by firms prosecuted successfully by the environmental protection authority, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 9, 50, 10.1108/09513579610116358 · DOI
  46. 2020, Measurement of corporate social responsibility: a review of corporate sustainability indexes, rankings and ratings, Sustainability, 12, 2153, 10.3390/su12052153 · DOI
  47. 2017, The quality of sustainability reports and impression management: a stakeholder perspective, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 30, 643, 10.1108/AAAJ-04-2015-2044 · DOI · Paper page
  48. 2023, Sustainability reporting quality and the financial sector: evidence from China, Meditari Accountancy Research, 31, 1190, 10.1108/MEDAR-05-2020-0899 · DOI
  49. 2012, The disclosure of industrial greenhouse gas emissions: a critical assessment of corporate sustainability reports, Journal of Cleaner Production, 29/30, 222, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.01.024 · DOI
  50. 1990, The association between environmental performance and environmental disclosure in annual reports and 10Ks, Advances in Public Interest Accounting, 3, 183
  51. 2019, Impact of disclosure and assurance quality of corporate sustainability reports on access to finance, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26, 832, 10.1002/csr.1724 · DOI
  52. 2020, CSR reporting communication: Defective reporting models or misapplication?, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27, 952, 10.1002/csr.1858 · DOI
  53. 2019, CSR committees on boards: the impact of the external country level factors, Journal of Management and Governance, 23, 759, 10.1007/s10997-018-9442-8 · DOI
  54. 2007, Communicating about corporate social responsibility: a comparative study of CSR reporting in Australia and Slovenia, Public Relations Review, 33, 1, 10.1016/j.pubrev.2006.11.001 · DOI
  55. 2020, Risk disclosure in listed Greek companies: the effects of the financial crisis, Accounting Research Journal, 33, 615, 10.1108/ARJ-03-2020-0050 · DOI
  56. 2003, A typology of stakeholder participation for company environmental decision‐making, Business Strategy and the Environment, 12, 292, 10.1002/bse.371 · DOI
  57. 1990, Corporate social disclosure practice: a comparative international analysis, Advances in Public Interest Accounting, 3, 159
  58. 2017, CSR reporting practices in visegrad group countries and the quality of disclosure, Sustainability, 9, 2322, 10.3390/su9122322 · DOI
  59. 2016, Assessing the quality of corporate social responsibility reports: the case of reporting practices in selected European Union member states, Quality and Quantity, 50, 399, 10.1007/s11135-014-0155-z · DOI
  60. 1996, Some determinants of social and environmental disclosures in New Zealand companies, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 9, 77, 10.1108/09513579610109987 · DOI
  61. 2014, Legitimizing negative aspects in GRI-oriented sustainability reporting: a qualitative analysis of corporate disclosure strategies, Journal of Business Ethics, 123, 401, 10.1007/s10551-013-1801-4 · DOI
  62. 2018, The impact of voluntary environmental disclosure on firm value: Does organizational visibility play a mediation role?, Business Strategy and the Environment, 27, 1569, 10.1002/bse.2217 · DOI
  63. 2010, Disclosure measurement in the empirical accounting literature-a review article
  64. 2019, Does designing environmental sustainability disclosure quality measures make a difference?, Business Strategy and the Environment, 28, 525, 10.1002/bse.2262 · DOI
  65. 2009, Assurance of sustainability reports: impact on report users’ confidence and perceptions of information credibility, Australian Accounting Review, 19, 178, 10.1111/j.1835-2561.2009.00056.x · DOI
  66. 2011, Evaluating environmental disclosures: the relationship between quality and extent measures, The British Accounting Review, 43, 200, 10.1016/j.bar.2011.06.005 · DOI
  67. 2015, Corporate social responsibility research in accounting, Journal of Accounting Literature, 34, 1, 10.1016/j.acclit.2015.03.001 · DOI · Paper page
  68. 2016, The relationship between sustainability performance and sustainability disclosure–reconciling voluntary disclosure theory and legitimacy theory, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 35, 455, 10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2016.06.001 · DOI
  69. 2011, The emergence of triple bottom line reporting in Spain, Spanish Journal of Finance and Accounting / Revista Española de Financiación y Contabilidad, 40, 195, 10.1080/02102412.2011.10779701 · DOI
  70. IFRS (2023), “IFRS S1 IFRS® sustainability disclosure standard”, in General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information, London, Vol. 46.
  71. 1980, Environmental performance and corporate disclosure, Journal of Accounting Research, 18, 614, 10.2307/2490597 · DOI
  72. 2015, The impact of corporate social responsibility on investment recommendations: Analysts' perceptions and shifting institutional logics, Strategic Management Journal, 36, 1053, 10.1002/smj.2268 · DOI · Paper page
  73. 2016, The consequences of mandatory corporate sustainability reporting: evidence from four countries, Harvard Business School Research, 11
  74. 2019, Adaptations of CSR in the context of globalization the case of the GCC
  75. 2014, Beyond financial reporting-international integrated reporting framework, Indian Journal of Corporate Governance, 7, 73, 10.1177/0974686220140105 · DOI
  76. 2016, Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder governance around the world, Global Finance Journal, 29, 42, 10.1016/j.gfj.2015.04.003 · DOI
  77. 2024, A comparison of analysts’ and investors’ information efficiency of corporate social responsibility activities, Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 15, 547, 10.1108/SAMPJ-02-2023-0079 · DOI
  78. 2019, Key issues and challenges in stakeholder engagement in sustainability reporting: a study of Australian local councils, Pacific Accounting Review, 31, 2, 10.1108/PAR-11-2017-0092 · DOI
  79. 2017, Corporate social responsibility and governance: Information disclosure in multinational corporations, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 24, 555, 10.1002/csr.1428 · DOI
  80. 2019, Sartrean bad-faith? Site-specific social, ethical and environmental disclosures by multinational mining companies, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 32, 55, 10.1108/AAAJ-03-2016-2473 · DOI
  81. 2015, Quo vadis GRI? A (critical) assessment of GRI 3.1 a+ non-financial reports and implications for credibility and standardization, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 20, 196, 10.1108/CCIJ-11-2013-0101 · DOI
  82. 2023, Corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance and stakeholder engagement: Evidence from the quantity and quality of CSR disclosures, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 30, 504, 10.1002/csr.2370 · DOI
  83. 2016, International financial reporting standards, board governance, and accounting quality: a preliminary Indonesian evidence, Asian Review of Accounting, 24, 474, 10.1108/ARA-06-2014-0064 · DOI
  84. 2019, Choreographers of corporate social responsibility, International Journal of Business and Management Invention (IJBMI), 8, 34
  85. 2006, Comparability of sustainability reports. A comparative content analysis of Austrian sustainability reports, 581, 10.1007/978-1-4020-4974-3_26 · DOI
  86. 2023, Disclosure index development for sustainable procurement: an Australian perspective, Journal of Cleaner Production, 420, 138357, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138357 · DOI
  87. 2013, Determinants of GRI G3 application levels: the case of the fortune global 500, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 20, 182, 10.1002/csr.1285 · DOI
  88. 2015, Quality of corporate social responsibility information, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 213, 334, 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.547 · DOI
  89. 2023, Information or pressure? The effect of director experience on CEO CSR compensation adoption and design, Journal of Business Finance and Accounting.
  90. 2021, How corporate social responsibility mediates the relationship between corporate governance and sustainability performance in UK: a multiple mediator analysis, Society and Business Review, 16, 201, 10.1108/SBR-12-2020-0143 · DOI
  91. 2023, Does board capital enhance corporate social responsibility disclosure quality? The role of CEO power, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 30, 209, 10.1002/csr.2349 · DOI
  92. 2014, The relationship between corporate environmental performance and environmental disclosure: an empirical study in China, Journal of Environmental Management, 145, 357, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.07.009 · DOI
  93. 2017, A theoretical framework of external accounting communication, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 30, 433, 10.1108/AAAJ-04-2015-2039 · DOI
  94. 2022, Voluntary assurance of sustainability reports: evidence from Indonesia, Accounting Analysis Journal, 11, 44, 10.15294/aaj.v11i1.58810 · DOI
  95. 2015, CSR reporting practices and the quality of disclosure: an empirical analysis, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 33, 59, 10.1016/j.cpa.2014.10.003 · DOI
  96. 2013, W(h)ither ecology? The triple bottom line, the global reporting initiative, and corporate sustainability reporting [article], Journal of Business Ethics, 118, 13, 10.1007/s10551-012-1543-8 · DOI · Paper page
  97. 2018, Corporate governance mechanisms as drivers that enhance the credibility and usefulness of CSR disclosure, Journal of Management and Governance, 22, 565, 10.1007/s10997-018-9411-2 · DOI
  98. 2017, Assessing social and environmental performance through narrative complexity in CSR reports, Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, 13, 166, 10.1016/j.jcae.2017.05.002 · DOI
  99. 2011, The role of institutional and reputational factors in the voluntary adoption of corporate social responsibility reporting standards, Journal Article]. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39, 136, 10.1007/s11747-010-0214-5 · DOI
  100. 2024, From institutional integration to institutional demise: the disintegration of the international integrated reporting council (IIRC), Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 99, 102699, 10.1016/j.cpa.2023.102699 · DOI
  101. 1991, Exposure, legitimacy, and social disclosure, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 10, 297, 10.1016/0278-4254(91)90003-3 · DOI
  102. 2002, The relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: a research note, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 27, 763, 10.1016/S0361-3682(02)00028-4 · DOI
  103. 2020, Assurance on CSR reports: impact on the credibility perceptions of non-financial information by bank directors, Meditari Accountancy Research, 28, 833, 10.1108/MEDAR-10-2019-0597 · DOI
  104. 2017, Does innovation drive environmental disclosure? A new insight into sustainable development, Business Strategy and the Environment, 26, 893, 10.1002/bse.1950 · DOI
  105. 2016, Board diversity and CSR reporting: an Australian study, Meditari Accountancy Research, 24, 182, 10.1108/MEDAR-08-2015-0052 · DOI
  106. 2022, Quality of voluntary modern slavery disclosures: top Australian listed companies, Pacific Accounting Review, 34, 451, 10.1108/PAR-07-2021-0117 · DOI
  107. 1995, Corporate social and environmental reporting, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 8, 47, 10.1108/09513579510146996 · DOI · Paper page
  108. 2019, Sustainability reporting and stakeholder engagement in Spain: Different instruments, different quality, Business Strategy and the Environment, 28, 221, 10.1002/bse.2251 · DOI
  109. 2019, Hide-and-seek in corporate disclosure: evidence from negative corporate incidents, Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 19, 158, 10.1108/CG-05-2018-0164 · DOI
  110. 2020, A qualitative analysis of GRI principles for defining sustainability report quality: an Australian case from the preparers’ perspective, Accounting Forum, 44
  111. 2010, Critical success factors for corporate social responsibility: a public sector perspective, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 17, 205, 10.1002/csr.200 · DOI
  112. 2019, A review of corporate social responsibility in developed and developing nations, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26, 712, 10.1002/csr.1739 · DOI
  113. 2000, Could corporate environmental reporting shadow financial reporting?, Accounting Forum, 24
  114. 2022, Defining CSR disclosure quality: a review and synthesis of the accounting literature, Journal of Accounting Literature, 45, 1
  115. 2020, Corporate social responsibility and accountability: a new theoretical foundation for regulating CSR, International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, 5, 2, 10.1186/s40991-019-0045-8 · DOI
  116. 2020, Corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure and the choice between bank debt and public debt, Accounting Horizons, 34, 151, 10.2308/acch-52631 · DOI
  117. 2021, The contribution of corporate social responsibility on SMEs performance in emerging country, Journal of Cleaner Production, 322, 129103, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129103 · DOI
  118. 2002, firm resources, quality signals and the determinants of corporate environmental reputation: some UK evidence, The British Accounting Review, 34, 257, 10.1006/bare.2002.0211 · DOI
  119. 2019, CSR reporting of sports organizations, 209, 10.1007/978-3-319-97649-5_6 · DOI
  120. 2005, Exploring differences in social disclosures internationally: a stakeholder perspective, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 24, 123, 10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2004.12.007 · DOI
  121. 2007, A comprehensive comparison of corporate environmental reporting and responsiveness, The British Accounting Review, 39, 197, 10.1016/j.bar.2007.05.004 · DOI
  122. 2018, Does gender diversity in the audit committee influence key audit matters' readability in the audit report? UK evidence, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25, 748, 10.1002/csr.1491 · DOI
  123. 2023, Examining the quality of the consolidated mandatory non-financial statements of a cooperative banking group: a longitudinal analysis, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 30, 1573, 10.1002/csr.2436 · DOI
  124. 2020, Introducing fundamental accountability principles in sustainability reporting assessment: a cross-sectoral analysis from the Greek business sector, Environmental Quality Management, 29, 33, 10.1002/tqem.21689 · DOI
  125. 2018, CSR performance and the readability of CSR reports: too good to be true?, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25, 66, 10.1002/csr.1440 · DOI
  126. 1982, An evaluation of environmental disclosures made in corporate annual reports, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 7, 53, 10.1016/0361-3682(82)90025-3 · DOI
  127. 2016, Quality assessment of CSR reports–factor analysis, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 220, 541, 10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.530 · DOI
  128. 2023, CSR disclosure, quality measurement of, 1
  129. 2021, CSR communication research: a theoretical-cum-methodological perspective from semiotics, Business and Society, 60, 876, 10.1177/0007650319843623 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Hameed, F., Wilmshurst, T., & Horner, C.
Affiliations
  • University of Tasmania (AU)
  • Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU)
Corresponding author
Hameed, Faisal
Venue
Pacific Accounting Review
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2024-09-03
Volume
36
Issue
3/4
Pages
433-467
ISSN
0114-0582 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4402140130
Cited by
6
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 1
FWCI
1.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pacific Accounting Review (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Financial Reporting and XBRL
Keywords
corporate social responsibility disclosure, disclosure quality, Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting, Global Reporting Initiative, qualitative characteristics of financial reporting, greenwashing, stakeholder expectations, Sustainable Development Goals, transparency, benchmarking, accountability, governance factors, stakeholder engagement, corporate governance

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: CSR disclosure quantity to CSR disclosure quality – in pursuit of a disclosure quality index. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/par-11-2023-0161
The paper
Hameed, F., Wilmshurst, T., & Horner, C. (2024). CSR disclosure quantity to CSR disclosure quality – in pursuit of a disclosure quality index. Pacific Accounting Review. https://doi.org/10.1108/par-11-2023-0161