The phrase “corporate sustainability” is increasingly prevalent in both the industry press and management journals (Engardio, 2007; Montiel, 2008). Corporate sustainability pledges and reports are also increasingly prevalent, yet empirical studies on how top managers define and enact the construct are lacking. To address this deficiency, we investigate how firms define, support, and report their sustainability efforts. In a large sample ( N = 922) study of accounting executives at U.S.-based firms, we find evidence that organizational size, ownership, and industry (...) are strongly related with support mechanisms and reporting of sustainability. (shrink)

Previous research provides mixed results on the relationship between corporate environmental performance and the level of voluntary environmental disclosure. We revisit this relation by testing competing predictions from defensive and accommodative approaches to voluntary disclosure with regard to climate change. In particular, we add to the prior literature by determining the extent to which environmental performance and company media visibility interact to prompt voluntary climate change disclosure. Using ordinal regression and Ceres, KLD, and Trucost ratings of S& P 500 companies, (...) we find a positive relationship between environmental performance and voluntary climate change disclosure. We extend the literature on environmental strategies and disclosure by establishing that company visibility and issue (climate change) visibility interact with environmental performance to influence the level of voluntary climate change disclosure. (shrink)

This study complements previous empirical research on the business case for corporate social responsibility (CSR) by employing hitherto unused data on corporate social performance (CSP) and proposing statistical analyses to account for bi-directional causality between social and financial performance. By allowing for differences in the importance of single components of CSP between industries, the data in this study overcome certain limitations of the databases used in earlier studies. The econometrics employed offer a rigorous way of addressing the problem of endogeneity (...) due to simultaneous causality. Although the study’s results provide no evidence that there is a generic or universal business case for CSR, they indicate that there is a strong link between single stakeholder-related issues of CSR and financial performance. However, the analysis does not establish causality within these relationships. (shrink)

Some researchers have argued that firms with favorable environmental performance are more likely to provide voluntary environmental disclosure, while others have argued that firms with poor environmental performance are most likely to disclose. The authors propose a curvilinear relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure that is moderated by visibility. Data were obtained from S&P 500 firms queried by Ceres' Climate Disclosure Project. Results show a U-shaped environmental performance—environmental disclosure relation and a main effect for visibility but no moderating effect (...) for visibility on the U-shaped environmental performance-environmental disclosure relation. The authors discussed the implications of these results for future research and practice. (shrink)

Previous studies indicate two possibly asymmetric findings about the relationship between corporate social performance and annual report disclosure practices: disclosure practices of companies with favorable CSP emanate from a sense of ethical duty, and there are strategic reasons to link CSP with disclosure practices. To test the relationship between CSP and annual report disclosure, this study divided S&P 500 companies into two groups, defined for low CSP and high CSP . For the low CSP group of companies, disclosure was positively (...) related to CSP strengths. For the high CSP group of companies, disclosure was positively related to CSP weaknesses. The authors conclude that low CSP disclosure practices are related to CSP strengths to build or repair reputation, whereas high CSP disclosure practices are associated with CSP weaknesses to protect favorable CSP brand. (shrink)