IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i2p524-d477931.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Which Are the Main Factors Influencing Corporate Social Responsibility Information Disclosures on Universities’ Websites

Author

Listed:
  • Raquel Garde Sanchez

    (Department of Accounting and Finance, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

  • Manuel Pedro Rodríguez Bolívar

    (Department of Accounting and Finance, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

  • Antonio Manuel López Hernandez

    (Department of Accounting and Finance, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

Abstract

Universities are now becoming more active in the field of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Nevertheless, they do not appear to be granting the same degree of importance to the dissemination of these activities. This article analyses the voluntary corporate social responsibility information disclosed by leading USA universities. We created several indexes of corporate social responsibility information disclosure and examined main universities’ characteristics that affect corporate social responsibility disclosure by these entities. The findings obtained show that the universities are strongly committed to the dissemination of corporate social responsibility information, and that a university’s size, affiliation, public/private status and ranking position are the factors most significantly affecting its online disclosure of general corporate social responsibility information. These findings could be useful for university administrators, especially those in public universities, highlighting the importance of developing and supporting policies and incentives to promote CSR disclosure and thus attract new students and meet social expectations about the ethical behaviour of universities.

Suggested Citation

  • Raquel Garde Sanchez & Manuel Pedro Rodríguez Bolívar & Antonio Manuel López Hernandez, 2021. "Which Are the Main Factors Influencing Corporate Social Responsibility Information Disclosures on Universities’ Websites," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-23, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:2:p:524-:d:477931
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/2/524/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/2/524/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Klaus Wohlrabe & Félix de Moya Anegon & Lutz Bornmann, 2019. "How Efficiently Do Elite US Universities Produce Highly Cited Papers?," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-15, January.
    2. Giacomo Boesso & Kamalesh Kumar, 2007. "Drivers of corporate voluntary disclosure," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 20(2), pages 269-296, April.
    3. Gualberto Buela-Casal & Olga Gutiérrez-Martínez & María Paz Bermúdez-Sánchez & Oscar Vadillo-Muñoz, 2007. "Comparative study of international academic rankings of universities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 71(3), pages 349-365, June.
    4. Gordon, Teresa & Fischer, Mary & Malone, David & Tower, Greg, 2002. "A comparative empirical examination of extent of disclosure by private and public colleges and universities in the United States," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 235-275.
    5. Belal, Ataur Rahman & Cooper, Stuart, 2011. "The absence of corporate social responsibility reporting in Bangladesh," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 22(7), pages 654-667.
    6. Jean-Charles Billaut & Denis Bouyssou & Philippe Vincke, 2010. "Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(1), pages 237-263, July.
    7. Jean-Charles Billaut & Denis Bouyssou & Philippe Vincke, 2010. "Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(1), pages 237-263, July.
    8. Albert N. Link & Donald S. Siegel & Barry Bozeman, 2007. "An empirical analysis of the propensity of academics to engage in informal university technology transfer ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(4), pages 641-655, August.
    9. repec:dau:papers:123456789/2947 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Loet Leydesdorff & Jung C. Shin, 2011. "How to evaluate universities in terms of their relative citation impacts: Fractional counting of citations and the normalization of differences among disciplines," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(6), pages 1146-1155, June.
    11. Roberts, Robin W., 1992. "Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An application of stakeholder theory," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 595-612, August.
    12. Tzu-Kuan Chiu & Yi-Hsin Wang, 2015. "Determinants of Social Disclosure Quality in Taiwan: An Application of Stakeholder Theory," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 129(2), pages 379-398, June.
    13. Hicks, Diana, 2012. "Performance-based university research funding systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 251-261.
    14. Elisabeth Kastenholz & María Ladero & Clementina Casquet & Víctor Amaro, 2004. "La Responsabilidad Social En Las Entidades Financieras: Un Estudio Exploratorio De La Situación En Portugal," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 1(2), pages 89-100, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. NAHAR Hairul Suhaimi & MOHAMAD Maslinawati, 2023. "Academic Research Responses To Covid-19: The Corporate Social Responsibility Perspective," Studies in Business and Economics, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 18(1), pages 171-197, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abramo, Giovanni & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea, 2015. "Evaluating university research: Same performance indicator, different rankings," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 514-525.
    2. J. A. García & Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez & J. Fdez-Valdivia & Daniel Torres-Salinas & Francisco Herrera, 2012. "Ranking of research output of universities on the basis of the multidimensional prestige of influential fields: Spanish universities as a case of study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 1081-1099, December.
    3. Osmo Kivinen & Juha Hedman & Kalle Artukka, 2017. "Scientific publishing and global university rankings. How well are top publishing universities recognized?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 679-695, July.
    4. Giovanni Abramo & Corrado Costa & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, 2015. "A multivariate stochastic model to assess research performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1755-1772, February.
    5. Calabrese, Armando & Capece, Guendalina & Costa, Roberta & Di Pillo, Francesca & Giuffrida, Stefania, 2018. "A ‘power law’ based method to reduce size-related bias in indicators of knowledge performance: An application to university research assessment," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1263-1281.
    6. Henk F. Moed & Gali Halevi, 2015. "Multidimensional assessment of scholarly research impact," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(10), pages 1988-2002, October.
    7. Berlemann, Michael & Haucap, Justus, 2015. "Which factors drive the decision to opt out of individual research rankings? An empirical study of academic resistance to change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1108-1115.
    8. Milica Jovanovic & Veljko Jeremic & Gordana Savic & Milica Bulajic & Milan Martic, 2012. "How does the normalization of data affect the ARWU ranking?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(2), pages 319-327, November.
    9. Vicente Safón, 2013. "What do global university rankings really measure? The search for the X factor and the X entity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(2), pages 223-244, November.
    10. Daniel Torres-Salinas & Jose G. Moreno-Torres & Emilio Delgado-López-Cózar & Francisco Herrera, 2011. "A methodology for Institution-Field ranking based on a bidimensional analysis: the IFQ 2 A index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(3), pages 771-786, September.
    11. Gabriel-Alexandru Vîiu & Mihai Păunescu & Adrian Miroiu, 2016. "Research-driven classification and ranking in higher education: an empirical appraisal of a Romanian policy experience," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 785-805, May.
    12. Osmo Kivinen & Juha Hedman & Päivi Kaipainen, 2013. "Productivity analysis of research in Natural Sciences, Technology and Clinical Medicine: an input–output model applied in comparison of Top 300 ranked universities of 4 North European and 4 East Asian," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(2), pages 683-699, February.
    13. Sung-Shun Weng & Yang Liu & Yen-Ching Chuang, 2019. "Reform of Chinese Universities in the Context of Sustainable Development: Teacher Evaluation and Improvement Based on Hybrid Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-23, October.
    14. Alexandr Gedranovich & Mykhaylo Salnykov, 2012. "Productivity analysis of Belarusian higher education system," BEROC Working Paper Series 16, Belarusian Economic Research and Outreach Center (BEROC).
    15. Ramona Zharfpeykan, 2021. "Representative account or greenwashing? Voluntary sustainability reports in Australia's mining/metals and financial services industries," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 2209-2223, May.
    16. El Gibari, Samira & Gómez, Trinidad & Ruiz, Francisco, 2018. "Evaluating university performance using reference point based composite indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1235-1250.
    17. Khatab Alqararah, 2023. "Assessing the robustness of composite indicators: the case of the Global Innovation Index," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-22, December.
    18. Mehdi Rhaiem & Nabil Amara, 2020. "Determinants of research efficiency in Canadian business schools: evidence from scholar-level data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 53-99, October.
    19. Franceschini, Fiorenzo & Maisano, Domenico, 2011. "Structured evaluation of the scientific output of academic research groups by recent h-based indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 64-74.
    20. María Luisa Pajuelo Moreno & Teresa Duarte-Atoche, 2019. "Relationship between Sustainable Disclosure and Performance—An Extension of Ullmann’s Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-33, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:2:p:524-:d:477931. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.