Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

CSR Reporting and Legitimacy Theory: Some Thoughts on Future Research Agenda

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Dynamics of Corporate Social Responsibility

Part of the book series: CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance ((CSEG))

Abstract

Although there is growing research that examines CSR reporting within the context of developing nations, few attempts have been made to theorize this phenomenon. The aim of this study is to explore the possibility of using the legitimacy theory as a plausible explanation for CSR reporting practices by organizations within the context of developing nations. In terms of the future direction of the applicability of the legitimacy theory, there appears to be a number of subject areas or legitimacy threatening incidents to be researched within the context of developing nations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    The social contract is a theoretical construct considered to represent the multitude of explicit and implicit expectations that society has about how an organisation should conduct its operations (Donaldson 1982).

References

  • Abayo, A., Adams, C., & Roberts, C. (1993). Measuring the quality of corporate disclosure in less developed countries: The case of Tanzania. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 2, 145–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambe, C. M. (2007). Perspective of environmental management accounting in South Africa, part 3. Southern African Journal of Accountability and Auditing (SAJAAR), 7, 59–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azlan, A., & Susela, D. (2007). Corporate social reporting in Malaysia: A political theory perspective. Malaysian Accounting Review, 6(1), 19–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bebbington, J., & Thomson, I. (2007). Social and environmental accounting, auditing and reporting: A potential source of organisational risk governance? Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 25, 38–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belal, A. (2001). A study of corporate social disclosures in Bangladesh. Managerial Auditing Journal, 16(5), 274–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belal, A., & Owen, D. (2007). The views of corporate managers on the current state of, and future prospects for, social reporting in Bangladesh: An engagement-based study. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 20(3), 472–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boulding, K. (1978). The legitimacy of the business institution. In E. Epstein & D. Votaw (Eds.), Rationality, legitimacy, responsibility: Search for new directions in business and society. Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowles, M. (1991). The organization shadow. Organization Studies, 12, 387–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, N., & Deegan, C. (1998). The public disclosure of environmental performance information: A dual test of media agenda setting theory and legitimacy theory. Accounting and Business Research, 29(1), 21–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Villiers, C. J. (2003). Why do South African companies not report more environmental information when managers are so positive about this kind of reporting? Meditari Accounting Research, 11, 11–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Villiers, C., & van Staden, C. (2006). Can less environmental disclosure have a legitimising effect? Evidence from Africa. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31, 763–781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C. (2002). The legitimizing effect of social and environmental disclosures: A theoretical foundation. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 15(3), 282–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C. (2003). Environmental management accounting: An introduction and case studies for Australia. Melbourne: Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C. (2007). Australian financial accounting (5th ed.). Sydney: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C. (2008). Environmental costing in capital investment decisions: Electricity distributors and the choice of power poles. Australian Accounting Review, 18(1), 2–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C. (2014). Financial accounting theory (4th ed.). Sydney: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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, 343–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C., & Islam, M. A. (2014). An exploration of NGO and media efforts to influence workplace practices and associated accountability within global supply chains. The British Accounting Review, 46(4), 397–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C., & Rankin, M. (1997). The materiality of environmental information to users of annual reports. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 10(4), 562–583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C., & Rankin, M. (1999). The environmental reporting expectations gap: Australian evidence. British Accounting Review, 31, 313–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C., Rankin, M., & Tobin, J. (2002). An examination of the corporate social and environmental disclosures BHP from 1983–1997: A test of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 15(3), 312–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C., Rankin, M., & Voght, P. (2000). Firms disclosure reactions to major social incidents: Australian evidence. Accounting Forum, 24(1), 101–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deephouse, D. L., & Carter, S. M. (2005). An examination of differences between organizational legitimacy and organizational reputation. Journal of Management Studies, 42, 329–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T. (1982). Corporations and morality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowling, J., & Pfeffer, J. (1975). Organizational legitimacy: Social values and organizational behaviour. Pacific Sociological Review, 18(1), 122–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gamble, A. (1995). The new political economy. Political Studies, 43(4), 516–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R. (2000). Current development and trends in social and environmental auditing, reporting and attestation: A review and comment. International Journal of Auditing, 4(3), 247–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R., Kouhy, R., & Lavers, S. (1995). Corporate social and environmental reporting: A review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 8(2), 47–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R., Owen, D., & Adams, C. (1996). Accounting and accountability: Social and environmental accounting in a changing world. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J., & Parker, L. (1989). Corporate social reporting: A rebuttal of legitimacy theory. Accounting and Business Research, 9(76), 343–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hegde, P., Bloom, R., & Fuglister, J. (1997). Social financial reporting in India: A case. The International Journal of Accounting, 32(2), 155–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogner, R. (1982). Corporate social reporting: Eight decades of development in US steel. Research in Corporate Performance and Policy, 4, 243–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoq, M., Mustaruddin, S., Mahmud, Z., & Tanvir, M. (2010). The effect of CSR disclosure on institutional ownership. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences, 4, 22–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hybels, R. (1995). On legitimacy, legitimation, and organizations: A critical review and integrative theoretical model. Academy of Management Journal (Special issue: Best papers procedures), 241–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Islam, M. (2002). An introductory overview of environmental accounting in Bangladesh. Khulna University Journal of Business Studies, Bangladesh, 3(1), 85–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Islam, M. (2005). An examination of corporate environmental disclosure practices in Bangladeshi public limited companies. Southeast University Journal of Business Studies, Bangladesh, 1(1), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Islam, M. A. (2010). Social and environmental accounting research: Major contributions and future directions for developing countries. Journal of the Asia-Pacific Centre for Environmental Accountability, 16(2), 27–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Islam, M., & Deegan, C. (2008). Motivations for an organisation within a developing country to report social responsibility information: Evidence from Bangladesh. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 21(6), 850–874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Islam, M., & Deegan, C. (2010). Media pressures and corporate disclosure of social responsibility performance: A case study of two global clothing and sports retail companies. Accounting and Business Research, 40(2), 131–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Islam, M. A., & Dellaportas, S. (2011). Perceptions of corporate social and environmental accounting and reporting practices from accountants in Bangladesh. Social Responsibility Journal, 7(4), 649–664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaggi, B., & Zhao, R. (1996). Environmental performance and reporting: Perceptions of managers and accounting professionals in Hong Kong. The International Journal of Accounting, 31(3), 333–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • KPMG. (2008). KPMG international survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2008. Retrieved May 18, 2012, from https://www.kpmg.com/Global/en/Search/Pages/Results.aspx?k=KPMG+2008+surveyandu=http%3a%2f%2fwww.kpmg.com%2fglobal%2fenandredirect=false

  • Kuasirikun, N. (2005). Attitudes to the development and implementation of social and environmental accounting in Thailand. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 16(8), 1035–1057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindblom, C. (1994). The implications of organizational legitimacy for corporate social performance and disclosure. New York, NY: Critical Perspectives on Accounting Conference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Y. (2001). Assumptions and principles of environmental accounting. Shanghai Accounting, 1, 18–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lodhia, S. K. (2003). Accountants’ response to the environmental agenda in a developing nation: An initial and exploratory study on Fiji. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 14(7), 715–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lodhia, S. (2004). Environmental accounting for South Pacific Island nations: A possible mechanism for encouraging sustainable development by the corporate sector. Fijian Studies: Special Issue on Sustainable Development, 2(1), 111–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marquis, C., & Qian, C. (2014). Corporate social responsibility reporting in China: Symbol or substance? Organization Science, 25(1), 127–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathews, M. (1993). Socially responsible accounting. London: Chapman & Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathews, M. (1997). Twenty-five years of social and environmental accounting research: Is there a Silver Jubilee to celebrate? Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 10(4), 481–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meng, F. (1997). Definition and nature of environmental accounting. Accounting Research, 12, 45–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, C., & Tooze, R. (1991). Getting beyond the “common sense” of the IPE orthodoxy. In C. Murphy & R. Tooze (Eds.), The new international political economy. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Nasi, T., Nasi, S., Phillips, N., & Zyglidopoulos, S. (1997). The evolution of corporate social responsiveness: An exploratory study of Finnish and Canadian forestry companies. Business and Society, 38(3), 296–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donovan, G. (1999). Managing legitimacy through increased corporate environmental reporting: An exploratory study. Interdisciplinary Environmental Review, 1(1), 63–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donovan, G. (2002). Environmental disclosures in the annual report: Extending the applicability and predictive power of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 15(3), 344–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Dwyer, B. (2002). Managerial perceptions of corporate social disclosure: An Irish story. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 15(3), 406–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owen, D. (2004). Adventures in social and environmental accounting and auditing research: A personal reflection. In C. Humphrey & W. Lee (Eds.), The real life guide to accounting research (pp. 23–36). Oxford: Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Owen, D. (2008). Chronicles of wasted time? A personal reflection on the current state of, and future prospects for, social and environmental accounting research. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 21(2), 240–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. (2003). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, L. (2005). Social and environmental accountability research: A view from the commentary box. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 18(6), 842–860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patten, D. (1991). Exposure, legitimacy, and social disclosure. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 10, 297–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patten, D. (1992). Intra-industry environmental disclosure in response to the Alaska oil spill: A note on legitimacy theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17, 471–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramanathan, K. (1976). Toward a theory of corporate social accounting. Accounting Review, 51(3), 516–528.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger, S., & Burritt, R. (2000). Contemporary environmental accounting: Issues, concepts and practice. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, S. (1974). Corporate social policy in a dynamic society: The options available to business. In S. Sethi (Ed.), The unstable ground: Corporate social policy in a dynamic society (pp. 1–5). Los Angeles, CA: Melvill Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, S. (1977). Dimensions of corporate social performance: An analytical framework. In A. Carroll (Ed.), Managing corporate social responsibility. Boston, MA: Little Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shocker, A., & Sethi, S. (1974). An approach to incorporating social preferences in developing corporate action strategies. In S. Sethi (Ed.), The unstable ground: Corporate social policy in a dynamic society (pp. 67–80). Los Angeles, CA: Melvill Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M. (1995). Localism and globalism in institutional analysis: The emergence of contractual norms in venture finance. In W. Scott & S. Chriatensen (Eds.), The institutional construction of organizations: International and longitudinal studies (pp. 39–66). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teoh, H., & Thong, G. (1984). Another look at corporate social responsibility and reporting: An empirical study in a developing country. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 9(2), 189–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilt, C. (1994). The influence of external pressure groups on corporate social disclosure. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 7(4), 47–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsang, E. (1998). A longitudinal study of corporate social reporting in Singapore: The case of the banking, food and beverages and hotel industries. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 11(5), 624–635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, L., Yi, C., & Li, W. (1998). An analysis of a survey of corporate environmental accounting practice in China. Accounting Research, 8, 17–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodward, D., Edwards, P., & Birkin, F. (1996). Organizational legitimacy and stakeholder information provision. British Journal of Management, 7, 329–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiao, H., & Li, Y. (2002). On improving corporate environmental information reporting. The Journal of Xiamen University, 6, 1114–1122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yakhou, M., & Dorweiler, V. (2004). Environmental accounting: An essential component of business strategy. Business Strategy and the Environment, 13, 65–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Muhammad Azizul Islam

Authors
  1. Muhammad Azizul Islam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Muhammad Azizul Islam .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept of Management Theory, Warsaw School of Economics, Warsaw, Poland

    Maria Aluchna

  2. London Metropolitan University, London Guildhall Faculty Business & Law, London, United Kingdom

    Samuel O. Idowu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Azizul Islam, M. (2017). CSR Reporting and Legitimacy Theory: Some Thoughts on Future Research Agenda. In: Aluchna, M., Idowu, S. (eds) The Dynamics of Corporate Social Responsibility. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39089-5_17

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation