The relevance of national contexts for corporate carbon disclosure: a cross-cultural analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-8077.2024.e86562Keywords:
Institutional Theory, Environmental Disclosure, Climate Change, Cultural Dimensions, Corporate Social ResponsibilityAbstract
Goal: This paper aims to investigate the influence of the country’s national culture on carbon disclosure.
Methodology/approach: Our research analyzed five cultural dimensions of the GLOBE Project (uncertainty avoidance, future orientation, power distance, societal collectivism, and gender egalitarianism) of the ten largest economies in the world and their statistical influences on the carbon disclosure of 1,072 companies.
Originality/relevance: Despite numerous studies seeking to analyze which factors influence environmental disclosure, there is still a gap in the literature with the need for research on the effect of informal national institutions on carbon disclosure.
Main findings: The results indicate that in countries with greater uncertainty avoidance and less power inequality, companies exhibit more responsible behavior regarding the disclosure of their carbon emissions. In addition, we found that in environments with greater gender equality, companies are more environmentally transparent.
Theoretical contributions: This research confirms the Institutional Theory by showing that the institutional environment affects the performance of companies and presents new evidence that national culture influences carbon disclosure practices.
Management contributions: Managers operating in such environments must be aware of these cultural barriers and develop strategies to overcome them, such as implementing internal governance reforms that encourage transparency and engaging with stakeholders to foster a culture of openness.
References
Adnan, S., Hay, D., & Van Staden, C. J. (2018). The influence of culture and corporate governance on corporate social responsibility disclosure: A cross country analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 198, 820–832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.057
Amran, A., & Haniffa, R. (2011). Evidence in development of sustainability reporting: a case of a developing country. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20(3), 141–156. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.672
Auffhammer, M. (2018). Quantifying economic damages from climate change. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 32(4), 33–52. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.32.4.33
Barkemeyer, R., Preuss, L., & Lee, L. (2015). Corporate reporting on corruption: An international comparison. Accounting Forum, 39(4), 349–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2015.10.001
Batjargal, B., Webb, J. W., Tsui, A., Arregle, J. L., Hitt, M. A., & Miller, T. (2019). The moderating influence of national culture on female and male entrepreneurs’ social network size and new venture growth. Cross Cultural and Strategic Management, 26(4), 490–521. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCSM-04-2018-0057
Bondy, K., Moon, J., & Matten, D. (2012). An Institution of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in Multi-National Corporations (MNCs): Form and Implications. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(2), 281–299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1208-7
Cheng, B., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014). Corporate Social Responsibility and Access to Finance. Strategic Management Journal, 35, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj
Depoers, F., Jeanjean, T., & Jérôme, T. (2016). Voluntary Disclosure of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Contrasting the Carbon Disclosure Project and Corporate Reports. Journal of Business Ethics, 134(3), 445–461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2432-0
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited : Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
Fávero, L. P. L., & Belfiore, P. P. (2017). Manual de análise de dados (1a edition). Elsevier.
Ferri, L. M. (2017). The influence of the institutional context on sustainability reporting. A cross-national analysis. Social Responsibility Journal, 13(1), 24–47.
Gallén, María L., & Peraita, C. (2018). The effects of national culture on corporate social responsibility disclosure: a cross-country comparison. Applied Economics, 50(27), 2967–2979. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2017.1412082
Gallén, Maria Luisa, & Grado, C. P. de. (2016). Información de responsabilidad social corporativa y teoria institucional. Intangible Capital, 12(4), 942–977. https://doi.org/10.3926/ic.732
Garcia-Sanchez, I. M., Cuadrado-Ballesteros, B., & Frias-Aceituno, J. V. (2016). Impact of the Institutional Macro Context on the Voluntary Disclosure of CSR Information. Long Range Planning, 49(1), 15–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2015.02.004
García-Sánchez, I. M., Rodríguez-Ariza, L., & Frías-Aceituno, J. V. (2013). The cultural system and integrated reporting. International Business Review, 22(5), 828–838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2013.01.007
Handgraaf, A. (2012). Institutional Pressures & Strategic Responses: The Case of Shell and the Ogoni Struggle. In Master of Science in Business Administration. Vrije Universiteit of Amsterdam.
Hofstede, G. (1983). The Cultural Relativity of Organizational Practices and Theories. Journal of International Business Studies, 14(2), 75–89.
Issa, A., & Alleyne, A. (2018). Corporate disclosure on anti-corruption practice: A study of social responsible companies in the Gulf Cooperation Council. Journal of Financial Crime, 25(4), 1077–1093. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-05-2017-0045
Javidan, M., & Dastmalchian, A. (2009). Managerial implications of the GLOBE project: A study of 62 societies. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 47(1), 41–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/1038411108099289
Jensen, J. C., & Berg, N. (2012). Determinants of Traditional Sustainability Reporting Versus Integrated Reporting. An Institutionalist Approach. Business Strategy and the Environment, 21(5), 299–316. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.740
Kostova, T., & Marano, V. (2023). Organizational institutionalism and corporate social responsibility: Theoretical advances and empirical insights. Academy of Management Review, 48(1), 120-139. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2022.0035
Kouloukoui, D., Marinho, M. M. de O., Gomes, S. M. da S., de Jong, P., Kiperstok, A., & Torres, E. A. (2019). The impact of the board of directors on business climate change management: case of Brazilian companies. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-019-09864-7
Kühn, A. L., Stiglbauer, M., & Fifka, M. S. (2018). Contents and Determinants of Corporate Social Responsibility Website Reporting in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Seven-Country Study. Business and Society, 57(3), 437–480. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650315614234
Lahuerta-Otero, E., & González-Bravo, M. I. (2018). Can National Culture Affect the Implementation of Common Sustainable Policies? A European Response. Cross-Cultural Research, 52(5), 468–495. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397117739849
Luo, L. (2019). The influence of institutional contexts on the relationship between voluntary carbon disclosure and carbon emission performance. Accounting and Finance, 59(2), 1235–1264. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12267
Maleki, A., & de Jong, M. (2014). A Proposal for Clustering the Dimensions of National Culture. Cross-Cultural Research, 48(2), 107–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397113510268
Marano, V., Tashman, P., & Kostova, T. (2017). Escaping the iron cage: Liabilities of origin and CSR reporting of emerging market multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 48(3), 386–408. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2016.17
Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). “Implicit” and “explicit” CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 404–424. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2008.31193458
Miniaoui, Z., Chibani, F., & Hussainey, K. (2019). The impact of country-level institutional differences on corporate social responsibility disclosure engagement. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(6), 1307–1320. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1748
Minkov, M., Bond, M. H., Dutt, P., Schachner, M., Morales, O., Sanchez, C., Jandosova, J., Khassenbekov, Y., & Mudd, B. (2018). A Reconsideration of Hofstede’s Fifth Dimension: New Flexibility Versus Monumentalism Data From 54 Countries. Cross-Cultural Research, 52(3), 309–333. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397117727488
Miska, C., Szőcs, I., & Schiffinger, M. (2018). Culture’s effects on corporate sustainability practices: A multi-domain and multi-level view. Journal of World Business, 53(2), 263–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2017.12.001
Oliveira, M., Rodrigues Júnior, M., Lima, S., & de Freitas, G. (2018). The Influence of the Characteristics of the National Business System in the Disclosure of Gender-Related Corporate Social Responsibility Practices. Administrative Sciences, 8(2), 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci8020014
Orcos, R., & Palomas, S. (2019). The impact of national culture on the adoption of environmental management standards: The worldwide diffusion of ISO 14001. Cross Cultural and Strategic Management, 26(4), 546–566. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCSM-10-2018-0168
Pinheiro, A. B., Batistella, A. J., Mazzioni, S., & Dal Magro, C. B. (2024). Influência da Cultura Nacional sobre as Práticas de RSC: Analisando as Empresas Industriais dos Países do BRICS. Advances in Scientific and Applied Accounting, 246-259. https://doi.org/10.14392/asaa.2021140310
Pinheiro, A., da Silva Arruda, R., Lima Sampaio, T. S., & Witt Haddad Carraro, W. B. (2022). The role of cultural values in carbon disclosure: a global perspective. Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v16.2866%20
Pinheiro, A. B., de Albuquerque Ribeiro, C. D. M., Mazzioni, S., & Batistella, A. J. (2021). Effect of economic freedom on carbon disclosure: an international investigation. Advances in Scientific and Applied Accounting, 256-268. https://doi.org/10.14392/asaa.2021140310
Pinheiro, A. B., Oliveira, M. C., & Lozano, M. B. (2023). The effects of national culture on environmental disclosure: A cross-country analysis. Revista Contabilidade & Finanças, 34(91), e1636. https://doi.org/10.1590/1808-057x20221636.en
Pucheta-Martínez, M. C., & Gallego-Álvarez, I. (2019). Corporate Environmental Disclosure Practices in Different National Contexts: The Influence of Cultural Dimensions. Organization and Environment, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026619860263
Reisch, L. (2020). Does national culture influence management’s accounting behaviour and strategy? – an empirical analysis of European IFRS adopters. Cross Cultural and Strategic Management, 28(1), 129–157. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCSM-04-2019-0088
Risi, D., Wickert, C., & Scherer, A. G. (2022). The role of values in corporate social responsibility: How values enable or constrain CSR in institutional contexts. Business & Society, 61(5), 1224-1251. https://doi.org/10.1177/00076503211014532
Rosati, F., & Faria, L. G. D. (2019). Addressing the SDGs in sustainability reports: The relationship with institutional factors. Journal of Cleaner Production, 215, 1312–1326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.107
Sannino, G., Lucchese, M., Zampone, G., & Lombardi, R. (2020). Cultural dimensions, Global Reporting Initiatives commitment, and corporate social responsibility issues: New evidence from Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development banks. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(4), 1653–1663. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1914
Scott. (2008). Approaching adulthood: The maturing of institutional theory. Theory and Society, 37(5), 427–442. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-008-9067-z
Scott, W. R. (2014). Instututions and Organizations: Ideas, Interests, and Identities. In SAGE (Fourth edi, Vol. 04).
Shostya, A., Tkach, M., & Davis, J. S. (2023). Cultural dimensions and economic performance: The role of governance adaptability. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 195, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2022.10.010
Tran, M., & Beddewela, E. (2020). Does context matter for sustainability disclosure? Institutional factors in Southeast Asia. Business Ethics, 29(2), 282–302. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12265
Villena, V. H., & Dhanorkar, S. (2020). How institutional pressures and managerial incentives elicit carbon transparency in global supply chains. Journal of Operations Management. doi:10.1002/joom.1088
Vollero, A., Siano, A., Palazzo, M., & Amabile, S. (2020). Hoftsede’s cultural dimensions and corporate social responsibility in online communication: Are they independent constructs? Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(1), 53–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1773
Walker, K., Zhang, Z., & Ni, N. (Nina). (2019). The Mirror Effect: Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Social Irresponsibility and Firm Performance in Coordinated Market Economies and Liberal Market Economies. British Journal of Management, 30(1), 151–168. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12271
Wukich, C., Ramkumar, P., & Patel, D. (2023). Mimetic, normative, and coercive pressures in CSR disclosure practices: Global perspectives. Corporate Governance, 23(2), 295-312. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-03-2022-0125
Zainuddin, M., Mahi, M., Akter, S., & Yasin, I. M. (2020). The role of national culture in the relationship between microfinance outreach and sustainability: a correlated random effects approach. Cross Cultural and Strategic Management, 27(3), 447–472. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCSM-12-2019-0219
Zarei, F., Safari, H., & Rastegar, R. (2022). The impact of national culture on budget transparency and performance management in developing countries. Public Administration Review, 82(1), 72-90. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13380
Zhang, X., Li, W., & Lee, J. (2023). The role of national culture in the development of open government data: An empirical study of 55 countries. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 33(2), 289-310. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muac020
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Alan Bandeira Pinheiro, Vanessa Marques de Araújo Zafalon, Camila Maria de Oliveira, Wendy Beatriz Witt Haddad Carraro
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The author must ensure:
- that there is complete consensus among all co-authors to approve the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
- that their work is original, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, these have been duly acknowledged.
Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. RCA reserves the right to use software or any other methods of plagiarism detection.
All submissions received for evaluation in the RCA journal are screened for plagiarism and self-plagiarism. Plagiarism identified in manuscripts during the evaluation process will result in the submission being archived. In the event of plagiarism being identified in a manuscript published in the journal, the Editor-in-Chief will conduct a preliminary investigation and, if necessary, retract it.
Authors grant RCA exclusive rights of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons (CC BY) 4.0 International License.
Authors are authorized to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g., publishing in an institutional repository, on a personal website, publishing a translation, or as a chapter in a book), with an acknowledgement of its authorship and initial publication in this journal.
This license grants any user the right to:
Share – copy, download, print, or redistribute the material in any medium or format.
Adapt – remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
According to the following terms:
Attribution – You must give appropriate credit (cite and reference), provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions – You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
