Search results

The study aims to analyze the level of the disclosure of corporate governance practices by the companies that belong to the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) countries according to normative recommendations and coercive requirements considering the enforcement of laws and norms in the different legal systems and to explain it in the light of the institutional theory approach.

The practices disclosed by a sample of the 20 largest companies listed on the stock exchanges of each of the BRICS countries were analysed, and the 52 practices recommended by UNCTAD (2009) were used as a parameter. The corporate governance practices of the companies were confronted with the laws, rules and norms that require or recommend their adoption and disclosure.

China has 49 practices required by own national law in face of 52 recommended by UNCTAD/International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) followed by South Africa with 44, Russia with 33, Brazil with 28 and India with 24. Brazil has 47 practices recommended by own national governance code in face of 52 recommended by UNCTAD/Intergovernmental Working group of Experts on International Standards of Accounting and Reporting (ISAR), followed by Russia with 45, China with 44, South Africa with 41 and India with 22. It was found that Brazil has the higher median of number of companies disclosing corporate governance practices with 17, followed by India with 13, Russia with 11, South Africa and China with 7.

This research shows that more studies are necessary using the institutional theory to investigate how the normative and coercive pressures influence the disclosure of corporate governance information considering the enforcement of laws and norms in the different legal systems.

The differences observed in this study about normative and coercive forces are presented as an opportunity in the legal sphere of some countries to implement mechanisms to increase their level of enforcement.

This research contributes to various audiences such as governmental institutions, professional associations, market institutions to better understand their role in the improvement of the adoption of corporate governance practices and disclosure of information related to it.

We present a critical literature review debating Brazilian research on social and environmental accounting (SEA). The aim of this study is to understand the role of politics in the construction of hegemonies in SEA research in Brazil. In particular, we examine the role of hegemony in relation to the co-option of SEA literature and sustainability in the Brazilian context by the logic of development for economic growth in emerging economies. The methodological approach adopts a post-structural perspective that reflects Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse theory. The study employs a hermeneutical, rhetorical approach to understand and classify 352 Brazilian research articles on SEA. We employ Brown and Fraser’s (2006) categorizations of SEA literature to help in our analysis: the business case, the stakeholder–accountability approach, and the critical case. We argue that the business case is prominent in Brazilian studies. Second-stage analysis suggests that the major themes under discussion include measurement, consulting, and descriptive approach. We argue that these themes illustrate the degree of influence of the hegemonic politics relevant to emerging economics, as these themes predominantly concern economic growth and a capitalist context. This paper discusses trends and practices in the Brazilian literature on SEA and argues that the focus means that SEA avoids critical debates of the role of capitalist logics in an emerging economy concerning sustainability. We urge the Brazilian academy to understand the implications of its reifying agenda and engage, counter-hegemonically, in a social and political agenda beyond the hegemonic support of a particular set of capitalist interests.

The purpose of this research is to investigate the effect of characteristics of capitalism on environmental performance.

The authors analyzed a sample of 6,257 companies, based in 55 countries and 8 typologies of capitalism. The independent variables are the characteristics of capitalism, measured through five indicators: cooperation between employees and employers, index of economic freedom, local competition between industries, human development index (HDI) and quality of the governance environment. To measure environmental performance, the authors created an index composed of 20 indicators. Data were analyzed using panel data regression and dynamic panel of the generalized method of moments.

The results indicate that the characteristics of capitalism can shape the environmental behavior of companies. The authors find that in countries with better cooperation between employees and employers, more economic freedom, and competition between firms, in addition to better HDI and national governance, companies have higher environmental performance. When they are in more developed countries, companies have a greater environmental performance.

Managers must consider the country's characteristics of capitalism when making their environmental decisions and strategies. The findings invite governments to incorporate into their regulations mechanisms to protect other interest groups, not just shareholders.

Few studies have examined environmental performance, which is less susceptible to greenwashing. The metric for environmental performance measures the company's concrete effort in relation to environmental issues and not just the disclosure of information. Additionally, the authors examine characteristics of capitalism supported by Varieties of Capitalism, an approach still little explored in the environmental management.

Based on the approach of the varieties of capitalism, this paper aims to investigate the influence of national governance characteristics on environmental disclosure.

This research analyzed companies based in coordinated economies, i.e. 1,815 companies from Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain and Sweden were investigated for the period 2009–2018. The authors created an index to measure environmental disclosure, and national governance was measured using the United Nations governance indicators.

The findings show that countries with greater transparency, democracy, citizen participation and government effectiveness tend to have companies with a greater environmental concern. The results allow us to conclude that the responsible behavior of companies is a mirror of the governance environment of the country where they operate. The findings have managerial implications.

Firms must be aware that institutional factors can influence their business. In institutional structures with low government effectiveness, little confidence in social rules and high levels of corruption, corporations tend to be less ethical.

This research used the varieties of capitalism approach to explain companies’ environmental disclosure. This is a recent approach to the institutional theory, and little explored in previous studies. Institutional level variables, such as governance indicators, can be used in other studies that analyze the relationship between institutional environment and corporate disclosure.