ارزیابیِ کارکردِ گزارشگریِ شهروندی سبزِ شرکت‌های بازار سرمایه

محورهای موضوعی : اقتصاد محیط زیست

اکرم مبارکی ¹ , محمد تمیمی ² , اله کرم صالحی ³

1 - دانشجوی دکتری، گروه حسابداری، واحد اهواز ، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، اهواز، ایران.
2 - استادیار گروه حسابداری، واحد دزفول، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، دزفول، ایران. *(مسوول مکاتبات)
3 - استادیار گروه حسابداری، واحد مسجد سلیمان، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، مسجد سلیمان، ایران.

تاریخ دریافت : 1400/10/13 تاریخ پذیرش : 1401/02/28 تاریخ انتشار : 1402/06/01

کلید واژه: کارکردهای انتقادی, گزارشگری شهروندی شرکتی, , توسعه ارزش‌های سبز در گزارشگری,

چکیده مقاله :

زمینه و هدف: سیرِ تغییرات از مدیریت عمومی سنتی(PM) به دلیلِ بهره‌وریِ پایینِ سیستم مدیریتی به سمتِ مدیریت عمومی نوین (NPM) باعثِ ظهورِ مفاهیمی از حقوق شهروندی به جای واژه‌های همچون ارباب رجوع در نظریه سنتی و یا مشتری در نظریه‌های مدرن شد. لذا گزارشگری مالیِ شرکت‌ها در پی این تغییرات با تقویتِ احساسِ تعهد به شهروندان جامعه، از شکل سنتی و صِرفاً کمی فاصله گرفته و بیشتر بر جنبه‌های مسئولانه در گزارشگری متمرکز شده است. هدف این پژوهش ارزیابیِ کارکردِ گزارشگریِ شهروندی سبزِ شرکت‌های بازار سرمایه می باشد. روش بررسی: این پژوهش از نظر روش شناسی توسعه‌ای و ترکیبی است. در بخش کیفی پژوهش از تحلیل فراترکیب و دلفی استفاده شده است و در بخش کمی از تحلیل ارزیابی فازی جهتِ اولویت بندیِ انتخابِ اثربخش‌ترین کارکردِ گزارشگریِ شهروندی سبزِ شرکت‌های بازار سرمایه استفاده شد. فرآیند جمع‌آوری داده 6 ماه می‌باشد. در این پژوهش جامعه‌ی آماری در بخش کیفی ۱۴ نفر از خبرگان رشته حسابداری و مدیریت مالی در سطح دانشگاهی و در بخش کمی ۲۵ نفر از مدیران عالیِ شرکت‌های بازار سرمایه در ایران بودند. یافته‌ها: نتایج در بخش کیفی از تعیینِ سه بُعدِ کارکردِ گزارشگریِ شهروندی سبزِ شرکت در قالبِ ۱۴ شاخص حکایت دارد. همچنین نتایج در بخش کمی نشان داد، کارکردهای انتقادیِ گزارشگریِ شهروندی سبز، موثرترین شیوه‌ی گزارشگری شهروندی سبز محسوب می شود. بحث و نتیجه گیری: نتایج نشان داد، ارائه‌ی گزارش تفصیلی از نقش و مسئولیت کمیته‌های تخصصی محیط‌زیست به عنوانِ شاخصِ کارکرد انتقادیِ گزارشگریِ شهروندی سبز، مهمترین شاخصِ از میان شاخص‌های شناسایی شده در سطح بازار سرمایه جهتِ تقویتِ گزارشگری شهروندی سبز است.

چکیده انگلیسی:

Background and Objective: The shift from traditional public management (PM) to the new public management (NPM) due to the low productivity of the management system has led to the emergence of concepts of citizenship rights instead of terms such as client in traditional theory or client in modern theories. The emergence of these approaches in accounting, which was borrowed from business management, the purpose of this research is evaluating the green citizenship reporting function of capital market companies. Material and Methodology: This research is in terms of developmental and combined methodology. In the qualitative part of the research, meta-analysis and Delphi analysis were used, and in the quantitative part, fuzzy evaluation analysis was used to prioritize the selection of the most effective green citizenship reporting function of capital market companies. In this study, the statistical population in the qualitative section were 14 experts in accounting and financial management at the university level and in the quantitative section were 25 senior managers of capital market companies in Iran.    Findings: The results in the qualitative part indicate the determination of the three dimensions of the company's green citizenship reporting function in the form of 14 indicators. The results in the quantitative section also showed that the critical functions of green citizenship reporting are the most effective way of green citizenship reporting. Discussion and Conclusion: It was also found that providing a detailed report on the role and responsibility of specialized environmental committees (A14) as an indicator of critical performance of green citizenship reporting is the most important indicator among the indicators identified at the capital market level to strengthen green citizenship reporting.   

منابع و مأخذ:

1. Irani, H., Soltani, M., Jamshidzade, M., Babaei, Y. (2021). Identifying Factors Influencing Corporate Citizenship Acceptance in Tourism Businesses. Journal of Tourism and Development, 10(1): 303-319. (In Persian)


2. Ogola, F, O., Mària, J, F. (2020). Mechanisms for development in corporate citizenship: a multi-level review, International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, 5(7): 105-131. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40991-020-00051-5


3. Van Oosterhout, J, H. (2005). Corporate Citizenship: An Idea Whose Time Has Not Yet Come, The Academy of Management Review, 30(4): 677-681. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159161


4. Visser, W. (2005). Corporate citizenship in South Africa. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, https://doi.org/10.9774/GLEAF.4700.2005.su.00007


5. Kruggel, A., Tiberius, V., Fabro, M. (2020). Corporate Citizenship: Structuring the Research Field, Sustainability, 12(13): 52-89. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12135289


6. Newman, C., Rand, J., Tarp, F., Trifkovic, N. (2020). Corporate Social Responsibility in a Competitive Business Environment, The Journal of Development Studies, 56(8): 1455-1472. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2019.1694144


7. Park, S. (2017). Corporate social responsibility, visibility, reputation and financial performance: empirical analysis on the moderating and mediating variables from Korea. Social Responsibility Journal 13(4): 856-871


8. Lee, T. M., and P. D. Hutchison. (2005). The Decision to Disclose Environmental Information: a Research Review Agenda. Advances in Accounting, 21(1): 83-111


9. Hejazi, R., Rajabdori, H., Khani Zalan, A, R. (2020). Relationship between Ethical Leadership & Corporate Citizen Behaviors: Mediating Role of Self-efficacy, Respect and Interaction between Manager & Employees, Ethics in science and Technology, 15(3): 40-48 (In Persian).


10. Hasseldin, J., and G. Morris. (2012). Corporate Social Responsibility Tax Avoidance: A Comment and Reflection. Accounting Forum http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2012.05.00


11. Liu, X., Lin, K, L. (2020). Green Organizational Culture, Corporate Social Responsibility Implementation, and Food Safety, Frontiers in Psychology, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.585435


12. Nazarian, R., Taftiyan, A., Heyrani F. (2021). Examination of environmental reporting motives: meta-synthesis application, journal of Value & Behavioral Accounting, 6(11): 341-382. (In Persian)


13. Alshbili, I., Elamer, A, A., Moustafa, M, W. (2021). Social and environmental reporting, sustainable development and institutional voids: Evidence from a developing country, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 28(2): 881-895. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2096


14. Bednárová, M, Klimko, R., Rievajová, E. (2019). From Environmental Reporting to Environmental Performance, Sustainability, 11(9): 25-49. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11092549


15. Lenciue, L, A., Popa, I, L., Lenciu, N, M. (2012). Environmental Reporting and Good Practice of Corporate Governance: Petroleum Industry Case Study, Procedia Economics and Finance, 3(3): 961-967. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(12)00258-4


16. Matten, D., Crane, A., Chapple, (2003). Behind the mask: revealing the True Face of corporate citizenship. Journal of business Ethics, 45(2): 109-120.


17. Matten, D., Crane, A. (2005). Corporate citizenship: toward an extended theoretical conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 30(1): 166-179.


18. Carroll, A. B. (1998). The four faces of corporate citizenship. Business and Society Review, 100 (1), 1-7.


19. Mohammadian, M., Setayesh, M. (2018). A Model of Financial and Non-Financial Reporting in Banks: By Indexing the Corporate Citizenship Reporting. Applied Research in Financial Reporting, 7(1): 43-70. (In Persian)


20. Andersen, S, E., Johansen, T, S. (2021). Corporate citizenship: Challenging the corporate centricity in corporate marketing, Journal of Business Research, 131(2): 686-699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.12.061


21. Carini, C., Rocca, L., Veneziani, M., Teodori, C. (2021). Sustainability regulation and global corporate citizenship: A lesson (already) learned? Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 28(1): 116-126. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2036


22. Shinkle, G, A., Spencer, J, W. (2012). The social construction of global corporate citizenship: Sustainability reports of automotive corporations, Journal of World Business, 47(1): 123-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2011.02.003


23. Rego, A; Leal, S; Cunha, M. P; Faria, J; and Pinho, C. (2010). How the perceptions of five dimensions of corporate citizenship and their inter-inconsistencies predict affective commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(1): 107-127.


24. Herold, D. M. (2019). Has carbon disclosure become more transparent in the global logistics industry? An investigation of corporate carbon disclosure strategies between 2010 and 2015. Logistics, 2, 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics2030013


25. Carroll, A. B. (2016). Carroll’s Pyramid of CSR: Taking another look. International journal of corporate social responsibility, 1(1): 1-8.


26. Esposito, P., Antonucci, G. (2021). NGOs, corporate social responsibility and sustainable development trajectories in a new reformative spectrum: ‘New wine in old bottles or old wine in new bottles? Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2223


27. Cassells, S., Lewis, K. (2019). Managing to be environmentally responsible: incentives and disincentives reported by small businesses, Small Enterprise Research, 26(1): 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/13215906.2019.1569553


28. Arora, N, K. (2018). Environmental Sustainability—necessary for survival, Environmental Sustainability, 1(1/2): 108-129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42398-018-0013-3


29. Manrai, A, K. (2018). New Research on Environmentally Responsible Consumption Behavior and Green Business Strategies, Journal of Global Marketing, 31(4): 209-230. https://doi.org/10.1080/08911762.2018.1477039


30. Mendel, M., John, R, I., Liu, F, L. (2006). Interval type-2 fuzzy logical systems made simple, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst 14(6): 808–821.


31. Karnik, J.M. Mendel, (2001). Operations on type-2 fuzzy sets, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 122(2): 327–348.