Corporate social and environmental reporting

a review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure

Rob Gray, Reza Kouhy, Simon Lavers

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1249 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract


Takes as its departure point the criticism of Guthrie and Parker by Arnold and the Tinker et al. critique of Gray et al. Following an extensive review of the corporate social reporting literature, its major theoretical preoccupations and empirical conclusions, attempts to re‐examine the theoretical tensions that exist between “classical” political economy interpretations of social disclosure and those from more “bourgeois” perspectives. Argues that political economy, legitimacy theory and stakeholder theory need not be competitor theories but may, if analysed appropriately, be seen as alternative and mutually enriching theories from alternative levels of resolution. Offers evidence from 13 years of social disclosure by UK companies and attempts to interpret this from different levels of resolution. There is little doubt that social disclosure practice has changed dramatically in the period. The theoretical perspectives prove to offer different, but mutually enhancing, interpretations of these phenomena.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)47-77
Number of pages31
JournalAccounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal
Volume8
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1995
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Longitudinal study
Environmental reporting
Disclosure
Corporate social reporting
Criticism
Classical political economy
Stakeholder theory
Competitors
Political economy
Legitimacy theory

Cite this

@article{bfb66e05db7a4bd7b5a54b373c775bd7,
title = "Corporate social and environmental reporting: a review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure",
abstract = "Takes as its departure point the criticism of Guthrie and Parker by Arnold and the Tinker et al. critique of Gray et al. Following an extensive review of the corporate social reporting literature, its major theoretical preoccupations and empirical conclusions, attempts to re‐examine the theoretical tensions that exist between “classical” political economy interpretations of social disclosure and those from more “bourgeois” perspectives. Argues that political economy, legitimacy theory and stakeholder theory need not be competitor theories but may, if analysed appropriately, be seen as alternative and mutually enriching theories from alternative levels of resolution. Offers evidence from 13 years of social disclosure by UK companies and attempts to interpret this from different levels of resolution. There is little doubt that social disclosure practice has changed dramatically in the period. The theoretical perspectives prove to offer different, but mutually enhancing, interpretations of these phenomena.",
author = "Rob Gray and Reza Kouhy and Simon Lavers",
year = "1995",
doi = "10.1108/09513579510146996",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
pages = "47--77",
journal = "Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal",
issn = "0951-3574",
publisher = "Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.",
number = "2",

}

Corporate social and environmental reporting : a review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure. / Gray, Rob; Kouhy, Reza; Lavers, Simon.

In: Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1995, p. 47-77.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Corporate social and environmental reporting

T2 - a review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure

AU - Gray, Rob

AU - Kouhy, Reza

AU - Lavers, Simon

PY - 1995

Y1 - 1995

N2 - Takes as its departure point the criticism of Guthrie and Parker by Arnold and the Tinker et al. critique of Gray et al. Following an extensive review of the corporate social reporting literature, its major theoretical preoccupations and empirical conclusions, attempts to re‐examine the theoretical tensions that exist between “classical” political economy interpretations of social disclosure and those from more “bourgeois” perspectives. Argues that political economy, legitimacy theory and stakeholder theory need not be competitor theories but may, if analysed appropriately, be seen as alternative and mutually enriching theories from alternative levels of resolution. Offers evidence from 13 years of social disclosure by UK companies and attempts to interpret this from different levels of resolution. There is little doubt that social disclosure practice has changed dramatically in the period. The theoretical perspectives prove to offer different, but mutually enhancing, interpretations of these phenomena.

AB - Takes as its departure point the criticism of Guthrie and Parker by Arnold and the Tinker et al. critique of Gray et al. Following an extensive review of the corporate social reporting literature, its major theoretical preoccupations and empirical conclusions, attempts to re‐examine the theoretical tensions that exist between “classical” political economy interpretations of social disclosure and those from more “bourgeois” perspectives. Argues that political economy, legitimacy theory and stakeholder theory need not be competitor theories but may, if analysed appropriately, be seen as alternative and mutually enriching theories from alternative levels of resolution. Offers evidence from 13 years of social disclosure by UK companies and attempts to interpret this from different levels of resolution. There is little doubt that social disclosure practice has changed dramatically in the period. The theoretical perspectives prove to offer different, but mutually enhancing, interpretations of these phenomena.

U2 - 10.1108/09513579510146996

DO - 10.1108/09513579510146996

M3 - Article

VL - 8

SP - 47

EP - 77

JO - Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal

JF - Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal

SN - 0951-3574

IS - 2

ER -