نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دکتری حسابداری، دانشکده علوم اقتصادی و اداری، دانشگاه مازندران، بابلسر، ایران

2 دانشیار، گروه حسابداری، دانشکده علوم اقتصادی و اداری، دانشگاه مازندران، بابلسر، ایران

چکیده

امروزه اهمیت آب و مدیریت منابع آن ازجمله موضوعات بحث‌انگیز در سطح جهانی به دلیل تغییرات آب و هوایی است. این موضوع خصوصاً در کشور ایران که از خشک‌سالی مستمر رنج می‌برد با اهمیت‌تر می‌باشد. از همین رو هدف پژوهش حاضر، تبیین عوامل مؤثر بر گزارشگری آب در شرکت‌های پذیرفته‌شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران است. برای این منظور با استفاده از داده‌های 102 شرکت طی سال‌های 1391 الی 1400 (1020 سال-شرکت) که به روش حذفی انتخاب شدند، عوامل مؤثر بر افشای گزارشگری آب تعیین و با روش رگرسیون گام‌به‌گام و رگرسیون چندگانه مورد تجزیه‌وتحلیل قرار گرفت. نتایج این پژوهش نشان داد که بیشترین میزان افشا مربوط به آب متعلق به شرکت‌های صنعت شیمیایی و نفتی بوده، همچنین در بررسی عوامل مؤثر بر گزارشگری آب مشخص شد که عوامل سن شرکت، اندازه هیئت‌مدیره، تخصص مالی کمیته حسابرسی، تمرکز مالکیت، مالکیت نهادی، بازده دارایی، میانگین بارش سالانه، شهرت، قوانین و حساسیت صنعت به آب بر گزارشگری آب شرکت‌ها تأثیرگذار بوده‌اند، این یافته‌ها می‌تواند برای برنامه‌ریزی و کنترل در خصوص مدیریت آب و همچنین شناخت سرمایه‌گذاران از محرک‌های افشای شرکتی در تشکیل پرتفوی بهینه‌شان مفید باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Drivers of Corporate Water Reporting

نویسندگان [English]

  • Fatemeh Asnad 1
  • Hossein Fakhari 2

1 Ph.D. of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran

2 Associate Professor of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, University of Mazandaran , Babolsar, Iran

چکیده [English]

Nowadays, the importance of water and the management of its resources are among the most controversial issues at the global level due to climate change. This issue is especially important in Iran, which suffers from continuous drought. Therefore, the current research aims to explain the determinants affecting water reporting in the listed companies on the Tehran Stock Exchange. For this purpose, by using the data of 102 companies during the years 2012 to 2021 which were selected by elimination method, the determinants affecting the disclosure of water reporting were identified and analyzed using stepwise regression and multiple regression methods. The results of this research showed that the highest amount of disclosure related to water belonged to chemical and oil industry companies, Additionally, in the investigation of the determinants affecting water reporting, it was found that the determinants affecting water reporting, it was found that the determinants of firm age, board size, financial expertise of the audit committee, concentration of ownership, institutional ownership, return on assets, average annual rainfall, reputation, regulation, and sensitivity of the industry to water had an impact on corporate water reporting. These findings can be useful for planning and controlling water management, as well as for investors to know the drivers of corporate disclosure in forming their optimal portfolio.
 

Introduction

Nowadays, the importance of water and the management of its resources are among the most controversial issues at the global level due to climate change. This issue is especially important in Iran, which suffers from continuous drought. Therefore, the current research aims to explain the determinants affecting water reporting in the listed companies on the Tehran Stock Exchange.
Research Question(s): What are the determinants influencing the disclosure of water reporting in Tehran Stock Exchange member companies? What is the impact of these determinants on the disclosure of water reporting?

Literature Review

Although the limitation of water resources and its serious role in sustainable life and economic activities are not hidden from anyone, with increasing concerns about water and its pollution, and the effects of climate change, how to effectively manage water and report it at the corporate level has become more important. This attention has been such that today the disclosure of water management information and its risks has become part of the strategy and sustainability efforts of companies. Water reporting at the company level is a tool for transferring information about water risks, the effects of risk, and the company's water resources strategy.
Multiple theoretical frameworks can be used to justify the necessity of water reporting at the company level and its determinants. These theories are in the same direction and complement each other, such that they are competing theories because all of them are trying to explain corporate water reporting. These theories include legitimacy theory, stakeholders theory, social responsibility theory, and resource-based theory.

Methodology

The population studied in this research comprises the companies that are members of the Tehran Stock Exchange over a period of 10 years from 2012 to 2021, and ultimately, 102 companies (1020 company-years) were selected using the systematic elimination method. The method used in this research to explain the determinants affecting the disclosure of water reporting included five steps: In the first step, the study of literature related to water reporting and the determinants affecting it was conducted. In the second step, a comprehensive review of the literature was carried out by referring to Springer, Wiley, Science Direct, Google Scholar, and ResearchGate databases. The preliminary search identified a number of articles that focused on broad areas of disclosure. The process of studying the abstracts and introductions of the articles led to the exclusion of some out-of-scope studies. After filtering the results, only eight of these articles related to water disclosure were selected. In the third step, a questionnaire was prepared and distributed among experts to confirm and complete the components. This step was used as a complementary method, according to the experts, to confirm and complete the determinants extracted from the literature, taking into account the local conditions of Iran. The fourth step involved finalizing the determinants after reviewing the questionnaires; finally, ten responses were received from the questionnaires sent to the experts, and the questionnaires were tested with the independent t-test method. The results showed that all the determinants included in the questionnaire, except for gender diversity, were approved by the board of directors and the audit committee. In the fifth step, the stepwise regression method was used to examine the effective variables and select the effective stimuli on water reporting, and then the multiple regression method was used to measure the impact of each of the approved stimuli.

Results

In the stepwise regression method, the dependent variable (water reporting disclosure) and independent variables (firm size, firm age, financial leverage, audit committee size, audit committee financial expertise, independent members of the audit committee, board size, ownership concentration, institutional ownership, government ownership, return on assets, corporate social responsibility, average annual rainfall, GDP growth, reputation, and sensitivity of the industry to water) were selected and, over 10 stages, various regressions were formed and finally, ten independent variables were confirmed. The adjusted coefficient of determination of this regression is equal to 0.322, which has the highest coefficient of determination compared to other models, and the value of the significance level of the model is equal to 0.000, which shows the significance of the model. Finally, in response to the research question of what are the drivers of water reporting in companies, the following variables can be mentioned: firm age, audit committee financial expertise, board size, ownership concentration, institutional ownership, return on assets, average annual precipitation, reputation, regulation, and industry sensitivity to water. Subsequently, to check the impact of each of the factors, the variables selected in the previous step were entered into the regression and analyzed with the multiple regression method. Finally, the regression equation was obtained as follows:
WaterDisclosure= -3.327 – 0.620 LnAge + 0.764 BoardSize + 1.450 Concentration + 0.895 ROA + 0.119 Co-financial + 3.191 Reputation – 0.001 Rainy – 0.977 Regulation+ 1.450 Institutional + 0.162 Sensetive

Discussion

By reviewing the literature, it was found that several determinants were effective in water reporting in companies; some of these determinants were related to the structural characteristics of the company, some to the characteristics and ownership structure, and finally to the financial performance of the company. Also, determinants such as the existence of foreign regulation and supervision, the company's attention from major shareholders, and reputation, as well as the level of social responsibility of companies, can lead to more disclosure of water-related information. In this research, in addition to these determinants, some other determinants such as the country's economic growth, annual rainfall, and audit committee characteristics were investigated by interviewing experts.

Conclusion

According to the findings of the research, companies with higher profitability and reputation also have higher disclosure. In addition, the findings suggested that considering there is still no codified and general regulation for water management applicable to all companies in Iran, it is recommended, according to the theory of stakeholders, that legislators and the environmental organization establish specific and enforceable regulations for companies to adhere to and disclose information related to water in their reports. Furthermore, since there is currently a requirement for listed companies to prepare sustainable reporting, providing information on water and how to manage water and its risks can be combined with other information on social activities and governance. This integration of reports will enable better monitoring for policy-makers and foster collaboration among stakeholders for responsible water management and achieving sustainable goals at both the corporate and global levels.
 
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  •  Water Reporting
  • Reporting Drivers
  • Disclosure
  • Water Management
  1. فخاری، حسین؛ رضائی پیته نوئی، یاسر و نوروزی، محمد. (1395). تأثیر افشای مسئولیت اجتماعی شرکت بر کارایی سرمایه‌گذاری. نشریه راهبرد مدیریت مالی، 4 (15)، 85-106.Doi: 10.22051/JFM.2017.11856.1152.
  2. فخاری، حسین، محمدی، جواد و حسن نتاج کردی، محسن. (1394). بررسی اثر ویژگی‌های کمیته حسابرسی بر مدیریت سود از طریق اقلام واقعی. مطالعات تجربی حسابداری مالی، 12 (46)، 123-146. Doi: https://doi.org/10.22054/qjma.2015.1679
  3. فخاری، حسین، کاشانی پور، محمد و رجب بیکی، محمدعلی. (1393). بررسی نقش نظارتی ساختار مالکیت و خط‌مشی بدهی بر کنترل مشکلات نمایندگی ناشی از جریان‌های نقدی آزاد شرکت‌های پذیرفته‌شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران. پیشرفت‌های حسابداری، 6 (1)، 63-90. Doi: 10.22099/JAA.2014.2257.
  4. فقیه، محسن و فخاری، حسین. (1401). تدوین شاخص ترکیبی برای حمایت از سهامداران. بررسیهای حسابداری و حسابرسی، 29 (4)، 673-713.Doi: 10.22059/ACCTGREV.‌2022.340434.1008661.
  5. طهماسبی خورنه، سعید و سهیلی، کیومرث. (1394). بررسی تأثیر شهرت شرکتی بر ریسک شرکت‌های پذیرفته‌شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران. توسعه مدیریت پولی و بانکی، 3 (8)، 131-150.
  6. نمازی، محمد و مصلی نژاد، آرزو. (1400 الف). شاخص‌های حسابداری آب: رهیافت فراترکیب و فن ارزیابی متوازن. تحقیقات حسابداری و حسابرسی، 13 (49)، 5-30. Doi: 10.22034/IAAR.2021.131565
  7. نمازی، محمد و مصلی نژاد، آرزو. (1400 ب). طراحی الگوی حسابداری مدیریت یکپارچه آب با استفاده از مدل ارزیابی متوازن. مطالعات تجربی حسابداری مالی، 18(72)، 27-56. doi: 10.22054/qjma.2021.61932.2284
  8. Alsaifi, K., Elnahass, M., & Salama, A. (2020). Carbon disclosure and financial performance: UK environmental policy. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(2), 711-726. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/bse.2426.
  9. Asnad, F., & Fakhari, H. (2023). Identifying and explaining the indicators and components of water reporting in corporate level using the Best-Worst Method. Journal of Applied Research in Water and Wastewater, 10(1), 63-73. Doi; 10.22126/arww.2023.9306.1296.
  10. Barber, M., & Jackson, S. (2012). Indigenous engagement in Australian mine water management: The alignment of corporate strategies with national water reform objectives. Resources Policy, 37(1), 48-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2011.12.006.
  11. Ben‐Amar, W., & Chelli, M. (2018). What drives voluntary corporate water disclosures? The effect of country‐level institutions. Business Strategy and the Environment, 27(8), 1609-1622. DOI: 10.1002/bse.2227.
  12. Ben Lahouel, B., Peretti, J.-M., & Autissier, D. (2014). Stakeholder power and corporate social performance. Corporate Governance, 14, 363-381. DOI: 10.1108/CG-07-2012-0056.
  13. Brammer, S., & Pavelin, S. (2008). Factors influencing the quality of corporate environmental disclosure. Business Strategy and Environment, 17(2), 120–136. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.506.
  14. Bravo, F. (2016). Forward-looking disclosure and corporate reputation as mechanismsto reduce stock return volatility. Revista De Contabilidad- Spanish Accounting Review, 19(1), 122-131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcsar.2015.03.001.
  15. Bunclark, L.A., & Scott, G.J. (2022). Benchmarking corporate water reporting in emerging economies: the case of Peru. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 13(1), 2020-0031. DOI 10.1108/SAMPJ-02-
  16. Burritt, R.L., Christ, K.L., & Omori, A. (2016). Drivers of corporate water-related disclosure: Evidence from Japan. Journal of Cleaner Production, 129, 65-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.119.
  17. CDP (2018). Treading Water: CDP Global Water Report 2018. Carbon disclosure project, London. Retrieved from: https://www.cdp.net/en/research/global-reports/global-water-report-2018.
  18. CDP (2022). CDP Water Security Questionnaire Preview and Reporting Guidance 2022 - Version Control. London: CDP Worldwide. Retrieved from: https://www.cdp.net/en/guidance/how-cdp-is-aligned-to-the-tcfd
  19. Dhaliwal, D.S., Radhakrishnan, S., Tsang, A., & Yang, Y.G. (2012). Nonfinancial disclosure and analyst forecast accuracy. The Accounting Review, 87(3), 723-759. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1596458.
  20. Fernando, S., & Lawrence, S. (2014). A theoretical framework for CSR practices: Integrating legitimacy theory, stakeholder theory and institutional theory. The Journal of Theoretical Accounting, 10(1), 149-178. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290485216.
  21. Gamerschlag, R., Möller, K., & Verbeeten, F. (2011). Determinants of voluntary CSR disclosure: Empirical evidence from Germany. Review of Managerial Science, 5, 233–262. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-010-0052-3.
  22. Global Reporting Initiative [GRI]. (2021). GRI Standards, GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018. The Netherlands. www.globalreporting.org.
  23. Huang, C.L., & Kung, F.H. (2010). Drivers of environmental disclosure and stakeholder expectation: evidence from Taiwan. Journal of Business Ethics, 96, 435-451. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-010-0476-3.
  24. Jenkins, H., & Yakovleva, N. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in the mining industry: exploring trends in social and environmental disclosure. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14, 271-284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2004.10.004.
  25. Kuo, L., Yeh, C.C., & Yu, H.C. (2012). Disclosure of corporate social responsibility and environmental management: Evidence from China. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 19, 273-287. DOI: 10.1002/csr.274.
  26. Kuo, L., & Yu, H.C. (2017). Corporate political activity and environmental sustainability disclosure: The case of Chinese companies. Baltic Journal of Management, 12, 348-367. DOI: 10.1108/BJM-07-2016-0149.
  27. Kuo, L., Yu, H.C., & Chang, B.G. (2015). The signals of green governance on mitigation of climate change-evidence from Chinese firms. International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management, 7, 154-171. DOI: 10.1108/IJCCSM-07-2013-0083.
  28.  
  29. Lemma, T.T., Shabestari, M.A., Freedman, M., & Mlilo, M. (2020). Corporate carbon risk exposure, voluntary disclosure, and financial reporting quality. Business Strate3gy and the Environment, 29(5), 2130-2143. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2499.
  30. Lu, Y., & Abeysekera, I. (2014). Stakeholder’s power, corporate characteristics, and social and environmental disclosure: Evidence from China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 64, 426-436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.10.005.
  31. Magara, Y. (2010). Water quality and standards. Volume 1, EOLSS Publications.
  32. Morrison, J., Schulte, P., & Schenck, R. (2010). Corporate Water Accounting: An Analysis of Methods and Tools for Measuring Water Use and Its Impacts, Pacific Institute: Oakland, CA, USA.
  33. Muttakin, M.B., & Khan, A. (2014). Determinants of corporate social disclosure: empirical evidence from Bangladesh. Advances in Accounting, 30, 168-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adiac.2014.03.005.
  34. OECD (2011). Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, Paris, available at: 10.1787/9789264115415-en.
  35. Ogbeide, S.O., Eguavoen, I., & Ugbogbo, N. (2023). Corporate Water Accounting, IASs/IFRSs Gap and the Role of Accounting Profession. Sapientia Global Journal of Arts, Humanities and Development Studies (SGOJAHDS), 6(2), 123-133, ISSN: 2695-2327.
  36. Qiu, Y., Shaukat, A., & Tharyan, R. (2016). Environmental and social disclosures: Link with corporate financial performance. The British Accounting Review, 48(1), 102-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2014.10.007.
  37. Raj, A. (2016). The relation between corporate water risk, water accounting and financial performance of metal mining firms [Master’s thesis, University of Waterloo], University of Waterloo. http://hdl.handle.net/10012/10149.
  38. Sarni, W. (2013). Getting ahead of the “ripple e_ect”. A framework for a water stewardship strategy. Deloitte Review, 12, 84-97. http://dupress.com/articles/getting-ahead-of-the-ripple-effect/?coll= 8182.
  39. Velte, P. (2020). Determinants and consequences of corporate social responsibility assurance: a systematic review of archival research. Society and Business Review, 16(1), 1-25. DOI: 10.1108/SBR-05-2020-0077.
  40. Wang, X., Cao, F., & Ye, K. (2018). Mandatory corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting and financial reporting quality: Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment. Journal of Business Ethics, 152(1), 253-274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3296-2.
  41. Weber, O., & Saunders-Hogberg, G. (2020). Corporate social responsibility, water management, and financial performance in the food and beverage industry. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(4), 1937-1946. DOI: 10.1002/csr.1937.
  42. Wicaksono, A.P., & Setiawan, D. (2023). Impacts of stakeholder pressure on water disclosure within Asian mining companies. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 26(3), 6493-6515. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-02972-0.
  43. Yu, H.Ch., Kuo, L., & Ma, B. (2020). The Drivers of Corporate Water Disclosure in Enhancing Information Transparency. Sustainability, 12(385), 1-14. Doi:10.3390/su12010385.
  44. Yung, K., & Nguyen, T. (2020). Managerial ability, product market competition, and firm behavior. International Review of Economics & Finance, 70, 116-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2020.06.027.
  45. Zhang, L., Tang, Q., & Huang, R.H. (2021). Mind the Gap: Is Water Disclosure a Missing Component of Corporate Social Responsibility?. The British Accounting Review, 53(1), 100940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2020.100940.
  46. Zeng, H., Zhang, T., Zhou, Z., Zhao, Y., & Chen, X. (2020). Water disclosure and firm risk: empirical evidence from highly water-sensitive industries in China. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(1), 17-38. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2347.
  47. Zhou, Q., Wang, Y., Zeng, M., Jin, Y., & Zeng, H. (2021). Does China’s river chief policy improve corporate water disclosure? A quasi-natural experimental. Journal of Cleaner Production, 311, 127707. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127707.
  48. Zhou, Z., Zhang, T., Chen, J., Zeng, H., & Chen, X. (2019). Help or resistance? Product market competition and water information disclosure: evidence from China. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 11(5), 933-962. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-10-2018-0287.