IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jjrfmx/v15y2022i9p383-d898380.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Decision Usefulness of Integrated Reports of Namibian Listed Companies

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel W. Kamotho

    (Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Namibia University of Science and Technology, Windhoek 9000, Namibia)

  • Tankiso S. Moloi

    (School of Accounting, College of Business and Economics, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg 2092, South Africa)

  • Simone Halleen

    (School of Accounting, College of Business and Economics, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg 2092, South Africa)

Abstract

The study evaluates the decision usefulness of integrated reports by listed Namibian companies using specially designed control checklists. A manual content analysis of the sampled 2018–2019 integrated reports was performed, using the control checklists for the decision usefulness’ qualitative characteristics. The study finds that the integrated reports produced in Namibia are generally decision useful, though the reports’ usefulness varies from company and industry. The study’s findings have policy implications, such as the need to prepare integrated reports for decision-making. The findings also provide detailed insights into the decision usefulness and quality of the Namibian listed companies’ integrated reports and can serve as feedback for companies, especially the report preparers. This study has ramifications for company leadership (e.g., financial managers, boards) and regulators, as it urges businesses to produce decision-useful annual integrated reports if they want their transparency disclosures to be viewed as “informative” by their significant stakeholders, thus improving the decision usefulness of their corporate reports.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel W. Kamotho & Tankiso S. Moloi & Simone Halleen, 2022. "Assessing the Decision Usefulness of Integrated Reports of Namibian Listed Companies," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-15, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:15:y:2022:i:9:p:383-:d:898380
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/15/9/383/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/15/9/383/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mary E. Barth & Wayne R. Landsman & Mark H. Lang, 2008. "International Accounting Standards and Accounting Quality," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(3), pages 467-498, June.
    2. Christopher Marquis & Michael W. Toffel & Yanhua Zhou, 2016. "Scrutiny, Norms, and Selective Disclosure: A Global Study of Greenwashing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 483-504, April.
    3. Cho, Charles H. & Patten, Dennis M., 2007. "The role of environmental disclosures as tools of legitimacy: A research note," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(7-8), pages 639-647.
    4. John Dumay, 2019. "Sustainability accounting and integrated reporting," Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 70-71, January.
    5. Flower, John, 2015. "The International Integrated Reporting Council: A story of failure," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 1-17.
    6. Kabiru Isa Dandago & Nur Isdawani Binti Hassan, 2013. "Decision Usefulness Approach to Financial Reporting: A Case for Malaysian Inland Revenue Board," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 3(6), pages 772-784.
    7. Drake, Michael S. & Roulstone, Darren T. & Thornock, Jacob R., 2016. "The usefulness of historical accounting reports," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 448-464.
    8. Kabiru Isa Dandago, 2013. "Decision Usefulness Approach to Financial Reporting: A Case for Malaysian Inland Revenue Board," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 3(6), pages 772-784, June.
    9. José V. Frias‐Aceituno & Lázaro Rodríguez‐Ariza & Isabel M. Garcia‐Sánchez, 2014. "Explanatory Factors of Integrated Sustainability and Financial Reporting," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 56-72, January.
    10. Subhash Abhayawansa & Evangeline Elijido‐Ten & John Dumay, 2019. "A practice theoretical analysis of the irrelevance of integrated reporting to mainstream sell‐side analysts," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 59(3), pages 1615-1647, September.
    11. Clarkson, Peter M. & Li, Yue & Richardson, Gordon D. & Vasvari, Florin P., 2008. "Revisiting the relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: An empirical analysis," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(4-5), pages 303-327.
    12. Estibaliz Goicoechea & Fernando Gómez-Bezares & José Vicente Ugarte, 2019. "Integrated Reporting Assurance: Perceptions of Auditors and Users in Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-19, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Linda Kannenberg & Philipp Schreck, 2019. "Integrated reporting: boon or bane? A review of empirical research on its determinants and implications," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 89(5), pages 515-567, July.
    2. Hans B. Christensen & Luzi Hail & Christian Leuz, 2021. "Mandatory CSR and sustainability reporting: economic analysis and literature review," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 1176-1248, September.
    3. Mihai Carp & Leontina Păvăloaia & Mihai-Bogdan Afrăsinei & Iuliana Eugenia Georgescu, 2019. "Is Sustainability Reporting a Business Strategy for Firm’s Growth? Empirical Study on the Romanian Capital Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-21, January.
    4. Xiao, Xinning & Shailer, Greg, 2022. "Stakeholders’ perceptions of factors affecting the credibility of sustainability reports," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    5. Alessandro Lai & Gaia Melloni & Riccardo Stacchezzini, 2016. "Corporate Sustainable Development: is ‘Integrated Reporting’ a Legitimation Strategy?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 165-177, March.
    6. Patrick J. Ferguson & Jane Hronsky & Matt Pinnuck, 2023. "Who pays attention to sustainability reports and why? Evidence from Google search activity," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(3), pages 3519-3551, September.
    7. Francesco Paolone & Fabrizio Granà & Laura Martiniello & Riccardo Tiscini, 2021. "Environmental risk indicators disclosure and value relevance: An empirical analysis of Italian listed companies after the implementation of the Legislative Decree 254/2016," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5), pages 1471-1482, September.
    8. Yanqi Sun, 2023. "Can the innovation in sustainability disclosures reflect organisational sustainable development? An integrated reporting perspective from China," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(3), pages 1668-1680, June.
    9. Xiaohua Meng & Saixing Zeng & Xuemei Xie & Hailiang Zou, 2019. "Beyond symbolic and substantive: Strategic disclosure of corporate environmental information in China," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 403-417, February.
    10. Jannik Gerwanski & Othar Kordsachia & Patrick Velte, 2019. "Determinants of materiality disclosure quality in integrated reporting: Empirical evidence from an international setting," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 750-770, July.
    11. Xie, Guanghua & Chen, Lin & Chen, Xichan, 2021. "The role of short selling threat in corporate environmental disclosure strategies: Evidence from China," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    12. Valentina Minutiello & Patrizia Tettamanzi, 2022. "The quality of nonfinancial voluntary disclosure: A systematic literature network analysis on sustainability reporting and integrated reporting," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(1), pages 1-18, January.
    13. Nadia Gulko & Catriona Hyde, 2022. "Corporate perspectives on CSR disclosure: audience, materiality, motivations," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 19(4), pages 389-412, December.
    14. Mathieu Gomes & Sylvain Marsat & Jonathan Peillex & Guillaume Pijourlet, 2023. "Does religiosity influence corporate greenwashing behavior?," Papers 2312.14515, arXiv.org.
    15. Luca Fornaciari & Caterina Pesci, 2018. "Global financial crisis and relevance of GRI disclosure in Italy. Insights from the stakeholder theory and the legitimacy theory," FINANCIAL REPORTING, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2018(1), pages 67-102.
    16. Carmelo Reverte, 2016. "Corporate social responsibility disclosure and market valuation: evidence from Spanish listed firms," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 411-435, March.
    17. Giorgio Mion & Cristian R. Loza Adaui, 2019. "Mandatory Nonfinancial Disclosure and Its Consequences on the Sustainability Reporting Quality of Italian and German Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-28, August.
    18. Busco, Cristiano & Malafronte, Irma & Pereira, John & Starita, Maria Grazia, 2019. "The determinants of companies’ levels of integration: Does one size fit all?," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 277-298.
    19. Martínez-Ferrero, Jennifer & García-Sánchez, Isabel-María, 2017. "Coercive, normative and mimetic isomorphism as determinants of the voluntary assurance of sustainability reports," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 102-118.
    20. Omaima A.G. Hassan & Peter Romilly, 2018. "Relations between corporate economic performance, environmental disclosure and greenhouse gas emissions: New insights," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(7), pages 893-909, November.

    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:jjrfmx:v:15:y:2022:i:9:p:383-:d:898380. 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.