Corporate social responsibility disclosure and firm performance: Evidence from Vietnam
-
Author(s)Ngoc Mai TranLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0452-9193
,
Manh Ha TranLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7914-7563
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.19(3).2022.05
-
Article InfoVolume 19 2022, Issue #3, pp. 49-59
- Cited by
- 811 Views
-
241 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is quite a new concept to business and society in Vietnam. Information on CSR reflects a firm’s commitment to ethical behavior in its activities and reputation. However, it is questioned whether the information disclosure has any relationship with firm performance. Employing panel regression of about 200 listed firms on the Vietnam Stock Exchange and space-based measurement of CSR disclosure, the study confirms a positive impact of CSR disclosure on firm performance. Firms use CSR disclosures to indirectly improve their performance. Firms that disclose CSR with greater degree of information experience higher marginal profitability. This finding supports stakeholder theory, legitimacy theory, and signaling theory in using CSR disclosure as a tool to improve firms’ reputation and transparency, maintain long-term operation, and hence improve financial performance. During the COVID-19 pandemic, firms that engage more in CSR will suffer less from the pandemic than firms that do not. Thus, the study implies a promising CSR picture for corporations in Vietnam. Investors, policy makers and any related authorities can utilize these findings to get more insight into the business through CSR disclosures.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)M14, M40
-
References60
-
Tables9
-
Figures0
-
- Table 1. Explanation of variables
- Table 2. Descriptive statistics for all firms
- Table 3. Descriptive statistics for mid-cap firms
- Table 4. Descriptive statistics for large-cap firms
- Table 5. Descriptive statistics for small-cap firms
- Table 6. Correlation matrix
- Table 7. Regression results of equation (2)
- Table 8. Regression results of regression (3)
- Table 9. Regression results of regression (4)
-
- Abor, J. (2005). The effect of capital structure on profitability: an empirical analysis of listed firms in Ghana. The Journal of Risk Finance.
- Adams, C. A., Coutts, A., & Harte, G. (1995). Corporate equal opportunities (non-) disclosure. The British Accounting Review, 27(2), 87-108.
- Agiomirgianakis, G., Voulgaris, F., & Papadogonas, T. (2006). Financial factors affecting profitability and employment growth: the case of Greek manufacturing. International Journal of Financial Services Management, 1(2-3), 232-242.
- Albuquerque, R., Koskinen, Y., Yang, S., & Zhang, C. (2020). Resiliency of environmental and social stocks: An analysis of the exogenous COVID-19 market crash. The Review of Corporate Finance Studies, 9(3), 593-621.
- Anwar, R., & Malik, J. A. (2020). When does corporate social responsibility disclosure affect investment efficiency? A new answer to an old question. SAGE Open, 10(2), 2158244020931121.
- Arbabiyan, A. A., & Safari, M. (2009). The effects of capital structure and profitability in the listed firms in Tehran Stock Exchange. Journal of Management Perspective, 33(12), 159-175.
- Baker, H. K., & Martin, G. S. (2011). Capital structure and corporate financing decisions: theory, evidence, and practice (Vol. 15). John Wiley & Sons.
- Buallay, A., Kukreja, G., Aldhaen, E., Al Mubarak, M., & Hamdan, A. M. (2020). Corporate social responsibility disclosure and firms’ performance in Mediterranean countries: a stakeholders’ perspective. EuroMed Journal of Business.
- Campbell, D. J. (2000, March). Legitimacy theory or managerial reality construction? Corporate social disclosure in Marks and Spencer Plc corporate reports, 1969–1997. In Accounting Forum, 24(1), 80-100. Taylor & Francis.
- Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39-48.
- Chan, M. C., Watson, J., & Woodliff, D. (2014). Corporate governance quality and CSR disclosures. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(1), 59-73.
- Chauvey, J. N., Giordano-Spring, S., Cho, C. H., & Patten, D. M. (2015). The normativity and legitimacy of CSR disclosure: Evidence from France. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(4), 789-803.
- Deegan, C., & Blomquist, C. (2006). Stakeholder influence on corporate reporting: An exploration of the interaction between WWF–Australia and the Australian minerals industry. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(4-5), 343-372.
- Deitiana, T. (2011). Effect of financial ratios, sales growth, and dividends on stock prices. Journal of Business and Accounting, 13(1), 57-66.
- Delbard, O. (2008). CSR legislation in France and the European regulatory paradox: An analysis of EU CSR policy and sustainability reporting practice. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society.
- Di Bella, V., & Al-Fayoumi, N. (2016). Perception of stakeholders on corporate social responsibility of Islamic Banks in Jordan. EuroMed Journal of Business.
- Edmans, A. (2011). Does the stock market fully value intangibles? Employee satisfaction and equity prices. Journal of Financial economics, 101(3), 621-640.
- Fombrun, C. J., Gardberg, N. A., & Barnett, M. L. (2000). Opportunity platforms and safety nets: Corporate citizenship and reputational risk. Business and Society Review, 105(1).
- Freedman, M., & Jaggi, B. (1982). Pollution disclosures, pollution performance and economic performance. Omega, 10(2), 167-176.
- Freeman, R. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder perspective. Boston, MA: Piman.
- Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase profits. New York Times Magazine, September 13, 32-33.
- Friedman, A. L., & Miles, S. (2001). Socially responsible investment and corporate social and environmental reporting in the UK: an exploratory study. The British Accounting Review, 33(4), 523-548.
- Giacomini, D., Martini, M., Sancino, A., Zola, P., & Cavenago, D. (2021). Corporate social responsibility actions and organizational legitimacy at the peak of COVID–19: A sentiment analysis. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society.
- Godfrey, P. C. (2005). The relationship between corporate philanthropy and shareholder wealth: A risk management perspective. Academy of management review, 30(4), 777-798.
- Godfrey, P. C., Merrill, C. B., & Hansen, J. M. (2009). The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic Management Journal, 30(4), 425-445.
- Halabi, A. K., & Samy, M. (2009). Corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting: a study of selected banking companies in Bangladesh. Social Responsibility Journal.
- Healy, P. M., & Palepu, K. G. (2001). Information asymmetry, corporate disclosure, and the capital markets: A review of the empirical disclosure literature. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31(1-3), 405-440.
- Herzig, C., & Schaltegger, S. (2006). Corporate sustainability reporting. An Overview. Sustainability Accounting and Reporting, 301-324.
- Hsiao, C. (2007). Panel data analysis – advantages and challenges. Test, 16(1), 1-22.
- Ingram, R. W., & Frazier, K. B. (1980). Environmental performance and corporate disclosure. Journal of Accounting Research, 614-622.
- Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360.
- Laskar, N., & Maji, S. G. (2016). Disclosure of corporate social responsibility and firm performance: evidence from India. Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation, 12(2), 145-154.
- Lin, C. H., Yang, H. L., & Liou, D. Y. (2009). The impact of corporate social responsibility on financial performance: Evidence from business in Taiwan. Technology in Society, 31(1), 56-63.
- Margaritis, D., & Psillaki, M. (2010). Capital structure, equity ownership and firm performance. Journal of Banking & Finance, 34(3), 621-632.
- Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 268-305.
- Margolis, J. D., Elfenbein, H. A., & Walsh, J. P. (2009). Does it pay to be good... and does it matter? A meta-analysis of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1-68.
- Neu, D., Warsame, H., & Pedwell, K. (1998). Managing public impressions: environmental disclosures in annual reports. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 23(3), 265-282.
- Nollet, J., Filis, G., & Mitrokostas, E. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: A non-linear and disaggregated approach. Economic Modelling, 52, 400-407.
- O’Dwyer, B., & Gray, R. (1998). Corporate social reporting in the Republic of Ireland: a longitudinal study. Irish Accounting Review, 5(2), 1-34.
- Patten, D. M. (2000). Changing Superfund disclosure and its relation to the provision of other environmental information. In Advances in environmental accounting & management. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
- Platonova, E., Asutay, M., Dixon, R., & Mohammad, S. (2018). The impact of corporate social responsibility disclosure on financial performance: Evidence from the GCC Islamic banking sector. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(2), 451-471.
- Reverte, C. (2009). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure ratings by Spanish listed firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 88(2), 351-366.
- Ross, S. A. (1977). The determination of financial structure: the incentive–signalling approach. The Bell Journal of Economics, 23-40.
- Ruf, B. M., Muralidhar, K., Brown, R. M., Janney, J. J., & Paul, K. (2001). An empirical investigation of the relationship between change in corporate social performance and financial performance: A stakeholder theory perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 32(2), 143-156.
- Saka, C., & Oshika, T. (2014). Disclosure effects, carbon emissions and corporate value. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 5(1), 22-45.
- Selcuk, E. A., & Kiymaz, H. (2017). Corporate social responsibility and firm performance: Evidence from an emerging market. Accounting and Finance Research, 6(4), 42.
- Sharfman, M. P., & Fernando, C. S. (2008). Environmental risk management and the cost of capital. Strategic Management Journal, 29(6), 569-592.
- Singal, M. (2014). The link between firm financial performance and investment in sustainability initiatives. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 55(1), 19-30.
- Spence, M. (1973). Job market signaling. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87(3), 355-374.
- Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571-610.
- Tasnia, M., AlHabshi, S. M. S. J., & Rosman, R. (2020). The impact of corporate social responsibility on stock price volatility of the US banks: A moderating role of tax. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting.
- Theodoulidis, B., Diaz, D., Crotto, F., & Rancati, E. (2017). Exploring corporate social responsibility and financial performance through stakeholder theory in the tourism industries. Tourism Management, 62, 173-188.
- Titman, S., & Wessels, R. (1988). The determinants of capital structure choice. The Journal of Finance, 43(1), 1-19.
- Tran, A. N., & Jeppesen, S. (2016). SMEs in their own right: The views of managers and workers in Vietnamese textiles, garment, and footwear companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 137(3), 589-608.
- Turban, D. B., & Greening, D. W. (1997). Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 658-672.
- Watson, A., Shrives, P., & Marston, C. (2002). Voluntary disclosure of accounting ratios in the UK. The British Accounting Review, 34(4), 289-313.
- Welford, R. (2007). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility: Issues for Asia. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 14(1), 42-51.
- Xu, H., Xu, X., & Yu, J. (2021). The impact of mandatory CSR disclosure on the cost of debt financing: Evidence from China. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 57(8), 2191-2205.
- Yazdanfar, D. (2013). Profitability determinants among micro firms: evidence from Swedish data. International Journal of Managerial Finance.
- Yoo, D., & Lee, J. (2018). The effects of corporate social responsibility (CSR) fit and CSR consistency on company evaluation: The role of CSR support. Sustainability, 10(8), p. 2956.
-
The relationship between corporate social responsibility and earnings management: accounting for endogeneity
Hyunjung Choi , Byungchul Choi ,
Jungyoon Byun
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.15(4).2018.06
Investment Management and Financial Innovations Volume 15, 2018 Issue #4 pp. 69-84 Views: 4335 Downloads: 493 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯThis study examines the relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and earnings management after controlling for endogeneity of CSR. Using a sample of non-financial firms listed on Korean Securities Market between 2002 and 2010, this study finds that ignoring endogeneity biases the estimated relation between CSR and earnings management. Specifically, the results show that the negative and significant relation between CSR commitment and discretionary accruals reported in the previous studies becomes insignificant. However, the negative and significant relation between CSR commitment and real activities manipulation remains significant even when the endogeneity of CSR commitment is taken into account. Therefore, this study provides evidence that proactive CSR engagement significantly affects firm’s practice of real activities manipulation, while it does not affect its practice of discretionary accruals. These results indicate that CSR commitment leads managers to be more responsible in management of operational activities than in accruals management.
-
Does board composition have an impact on CSR reporting?
Patrick Velte 
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.15(2).2017.02
Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 15, 2017 Issue #2 pp. 19-35 Views: 4186 Downloads: 1613 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯCorporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting plays a key role in management control, particularly in light of the increased demand for non-financial reporting after the financial crisis of 2008–2009. This literature review evaluates 47 empirical studies that concentrate on the influence of several board composition variables on the quantity and quality of CSR reporting. The author briefly introduces the research framework that underpins current empirical studies in this field. This is followed by a discussion of the main variables of board composition: (1) committees (audit and CSR committees), (2) board independence, (3) board expertise, (4) CEO duality, (5) board diversity (gender and foreign diversity), (6) board activity, and (7) board size. The author, then, summarizes the key findings, discusses the limitations of the existing research and offers useful recommendations for researchers, firm practice and regulators.
-
The impact of social distancing policy on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Indonesia
Muhtar Lutfi ,
Pricylia Chintya Dewi Buntuang ,
Yoberth Kornelius ,
Erdiyansyah ,
Bakri Hasanuddin
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.18(3).2020.40
Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 18, 2020 Issue #3 pp. 492-503 Views: 3408 Downloads: 1267 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯThis study aims to investigate the impact of social distancing policies on SMEs in Indonesia. It used a quantitative method with a survey design. Respondents were all SMEs in Indonesia that are affected by social distancing policies during the COVID-19 pandemic. It involved a total of 587 SME samples selected randomly. The data were collected through observations, questionnaires, and literature studies. The collected data were analyzed using descriptive statistics with SPSS software to determine the mean value. The result showed that social distancing policies affect SMEs during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is indicated by the decreasing income and demand for SMEs products, and even some have no income (mean values of 2.40) due to the social distancing policies. Besides, the policy’s impact is also shown in the increasing cost of raw materials and production costs due to supply chain problems (mean values of 4.79). The policy’s impact raises anxiety for SMEs to survive so that business actors change their plans by utilizing information technology (mean values of 4.81). This change is a strategy to survive due to the impact of the applied policies. Although social distancing policies affect SMEs’ survival during the pandemic, research findings show that SMEs in Indonesia did not terminate employment (mean values of 4.37) due to the presence of economic stimulus policies that helped SMEs survive and grow during the COVID-19 pandemic.
