IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i12p6948-d832985.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public Pressure, Environmental Policy Uncertainty, and Enterprises’ Environmental Information Disclosure

Author

Listed:
  • Die Wu

    (School of Management, Shanghai University of Engineering Science, Shanghai 201620, China)

  • Hafeezullah Memon

    (College of Textile Science and Engineering, International Institute of Silk, Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, Hangzhou 310018, China)

Abstract

Under the Chinese strategy of “carbon peaking and carbon neutrality”, Enterprises’ Environmental Information Disclosure (EEID), as one of the important ways for enterprises to achieve low-carbon development, has gained increased attention from the government, media, investors, and other stakeholders. the EEID is not only an important tool for companies to communicate environmental performance to the outside world, but also an effective way for the government to monitor corporate pollution behavior. Its importance is self-evident. However, relevant research shows that 70% of Chinese listed companies had not implemented the EEID in 2020. Also, there are common problems in the disclosure content and the polarization of the disclosure level among the companies that do disclose. These problems weaken the objectivity and practicability of the EEID and have a negative impact on the government’s environmental supervision, the environmental protection demands of the public, and investors’ decision making. This paper takes listed companies in China’s A-share heavily polluting industries as the research sample to solve the optimization problem of the EEID. By adopting a fixed effects model (FEM), this paper empirically studies the impact of three public pressures on the EEID: government environmental regulation, media attention, and institutional investment preference. Based on China’s unique socialist market economic system, this paper innovatively uses environmental policy uncertainty as a moderator variable. This paper examines the limitations of theoretical research on public pressure and environmental information disclosure by studying the impact of local environmental leadership change on the relationship between public pressure and the EEID. The conclusions of this paper reveal the driving mechanism of how stakeholders such as government, media, and institutional investors influence the EEID. At the same time, it expands the application of public pressure theory in environmental information disclosure research by introducing the perspective of environmental policy uncertainty.

Suggested Citation

  • Die Wu & Hafeezullah Memon, 2022. "Public Pressure, Environmental Policy Uncertainty, and Enterprises’ Environmental Information Disclosure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-18, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:12:p:6948-:d:832985
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/12/6948/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/12/6948/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rongjiang Cai & Tao Lv & Xu Deng, 2021. "Evaluation of Environmental Information Disclosure of Listed Companies in China’s Heavy Pollution Industries: A Text Mining-Based Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-23, May.
    2. Henry Petersen & Harrie Vredenburg, 2009. "Morals or Economics? Institutional Investor Preferences for Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 90(1), pages 1-14, November.
    3. David Daokui Li & Ming Feng & Shaobo Long & Gangming Yuan & Peng Zhou & Yusha Li, 2021. "Proactive Macroeconomic Management," Springer Books, in: David Daokui Li (ed.), Economic Lessons from China’s Forty Years of Reform and Opening-up, pages 183-251, Springer.
    4. Muhammad Islam & Craig Deegan, 2010. "Media pressures and corporate disclosure of social responsibility performance information: A study of two global clothing and sports retail companies," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(2), pages 131-148.
    5. Yunshi Mao & Jing Wang, 2019. "Is green manufacturing expensive? Empirical evidence from China," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(23), pages 7235-7247, December.
    6. Darrell, W. & Schwartz, Bill N., 1997. "Environmental disclosures and public policy pressure," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 125-154.
    7. 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.
    8. Turhan Kaymak & Eralp Bektas, 2017. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Governance: Information Disclosure in Multinational Corporations," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(6), pages 555-569, November.
    9. Karen Schnatterly & Kenneth W. Shaw & William W. Jennings, 2008. "Information advantages of large institutional owners," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 219-227, February.
    10. Chong Chen & Dequan Jiang & Weiping Li & Zilong Song, 2022. "Does analyst coverage curb executives’ excess perks? Evidence from Chinese listed firms," Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(2), pages 329-343, March.
    11. Lili Dai & Phong Ngo, 2021. "Political Uncertainty and Accounting Conservatism," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 277-307, March.
    12. 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.
    13. Pinglin He & Huayu Shen & Ying Zhang & Jing Ren, 2019. "External Pressure, Corporate Governance, and Voluntary Carbon Disclosure: Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-20, May.
    14. Shun-Pin Chuang & Sun-Jen Huang, 2018. "The Effect of Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility on Environmental Performance and Business Competitiveness: The Mediation of Green Information Technology Capital," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(4), pages 991-1009, July.
    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. Yongliang Yang & Liwen Shen & Yuwen Li & Yi Li, 2022. "The Impact of Environmental Information Disclosure on Environmental Governance Satisfaction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-21, June.
    2. Gheorghița Dincă & Ana-Angela Milan & Maria Letiția Andronic & Anna-Maria Pasztori & Dragoș Dincă, 2022. "Does Circular Economy Contribute to Smart Cities’ Sustainable Development?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-27, June.
    3. Huiping Zhu & Haifeng Gu & Habiba Halepoto, 2022. "Can Fulfillment of Social Responsibility Enable Enterprises to Innovate? The Role of Corporate Financialization and Agency Costs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-22, October.
    4. Zhang, Jing & Zhang, Lu & Zhang, Mancen, 2024. "Media pressure, internal control, and corporate environmental information disclosure," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    5. Amna Farrukh & Sanjay Mathrani & Aymen Sajjad, 2023. "An exploratory study of green‐lean‐six sigma motivators for environmental sustainability: Managerial insights from a developed and developing economy," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(8), pages 5187-5210, December.
    6. Yongliang Yang & Yuting Zhu & Xiaopeng Wang & Yi Li, 2022. "The Perception of Environmental Information Disclosure on Rural Residents’ Pro-Environmental Behavior," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-22, June.
    7. Lee, Chien-Chiang & Wang, Chih-Wei & Thinh, Bui Tien & Purnama, Muhammad Yusuf Indra & Sharma, Susan Sunila, 2024. "Corporate leverage and leverage speed of adjustment: Does environmental policy stringency matter?," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    8. Xiaoming Peng & Yihao Li & Chengxin Guo & Liang Peng & Sijin Tan, 2023. "“Risk” or “Opportunity”? The High Sensitivity of Corporate Green Innovation to Environmental Policy Uncertainty: Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-18, June.
    9. Wenjing Zu & Guoda Gu & Sihan Lei, 2022. "Does Digital Transformation in Manufacturing Affect Trade Imbalances? Evidence from US–China Trade," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-14, July.
    10. Zhaohan Wang & Ying Fu & Junqian Wu, 2024. "The Impact of Environmental Regulation on Collaborative Innovation Efficiency: Is the Porter Hypothesis Valid in Chengdu–Chongqing Urban Agglomeration?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-28, March.
    11. Chensi Guo & Wenyan Pan, 2022. "Research on Voluntary Carbon Information Disclosure Mechanism of Enterprises from the Perspective of Stakeholders—A Case Study on the Automobile Manufacturing Industry," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-15, December.

    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. S. Zeng & X. Xu & H. Yin & C. Tam, 2012. "Factors that Drive Chinese Listed Companies in Voluntary Disclosure of Environmental Information," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(3), pages 309-321, September.
    2. Chen, Hongtao & Fang, Xiumei & Xiang, Erwei & Ji, Xiaojia & An, Maolin, 2023. "Do online media and investor attention affect corporate environmental information disclosure？Evidence from Chinese listed companies," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1022-1040.
    3. Rongbing Huang & Yubo Huang, 2020. "Does Internal Control Contribute to a Firm’s Green Information Disclosure? Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-23, April.
    4. Linyan Fan & Sheng Yao, 2022. "Analyst Site Visits and Corporate Environmental Information Disclosure: Evidence from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-21, December.
    5. Florence Depoers & Tiphaine Jérôme, 2017. "Environmental expenditure disclosure strategies in a regulated context [Stratégies de publication des dépenses environnementales dans un cadre réglementaire]," Post-Print hal-01576195, HAL.
    6. Radhakrishnan, Suresh & Tsang, Albert & Liu, Rubing, 2018. "A Corporate Social Responsibility Framework for Accounting Research," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 274-294.
    7. Fawad Rauf & Cosmina Lelia Voinea & Hammad Bin Azam Hashmi & Cosmin Fratostiteanu, 2020. "Moderating Effect of Political Embeddedness on the Relationship between Resources Base and Quality of CSR Disclosure in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-19, April.
    8. Perera, Luckmika & Jubb, Christine & Gopalan, Sandeep, 2019. "A comparison of voluntary and mandated climate change-related disclosure," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 243-266.
    9. Patten, Dennis M. & Zhao, Na, 2014. "Standalone CSR reporting by U.S. retail companies," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 132-144.
    10. Yantuan Yu & Jianhuan Huang & Nengsheng Luo, 2018. "Can More Environmental Information Disclosure Lead to Higher Eco-Efficiency? Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-20, February.
    11. Kevin Koh & Heather Li & Yen H. Tong, 2023. "Corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance and stakeholder engagement: Evidence from the quantity and quality of CSR disclosures," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(2), pages 504-517, March.
    12. Qiu, Yan & Shaukat, Amama & Tharyan, Rajesh, 2016. "Environmental and social disclosures: Link with corporate financial performance," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 102-116.
    13. Zhengguang Li & Ping Li & Xibo Zhao & Ziying Tu, 2022. "Business Strategy and Environmental Information Disclosure Quality: Empirical Evidence from Chinese Heavy Pollution Listed Firms," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-18, July.
    14. Die Wu & Shuzhen Zhu & Aftab Ahmed Memon & Hafeezullah Memon, 2020. "Financial Attributes, Environmental Performance, and Environmental Disclosure in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-14, November.
    15. Denis Cormier & Michel Magnan, 2015. "The Economic Relevance of Environmental Disclosure and its Impact on Corporate Legitimacy: An Empirical Investigation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(6), pages 431-450, September.
    16. Jared F. Egginton & Garrett A. McBrayer, 2019. "Does it pay to be forthcoming? Evidence from CSR disclosure and equity market liquidity," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 396-407, March.
    17. Huixiang Zeng & Tao Zhang & Zhifang Zhou & Yang Zhao & Xiaohong Chen, 2020. "Water disclosure and firm risk: Empirical evidence from highly water‐sensitive industries in China," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 17-38, January.
    18. Islam, Muhammad Azizul & van Staden, Chris J., 2018. "Social movement NGOs and the comprehensiveness of conflict mineral disclosures: evidence from global companies," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 1-19.
    19. Mohamed Chelli & Sylvain Durocher & Anne Fortin, 2018. "Normativity in Environmental Reporting: A Comparison of Three Regimes," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 149(2), pages 285-311, May.
    20. Dwi Ratmono & Darsono Darsono & Nur Cahyonowati & Triana Chaerun Niza, 2022. "Greenhouse Gas Emission Accounting Disclosure, Corporate Characteristics and Governance: An Empirical Investigation on Indonesian Firms," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 12(6), pages 86-95, 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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:12:p:6948-:d:832985. 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.