The emergence of triple bottom line reporting in Spain

  1. Husillos Carqués, Francisco Javier
  2. Larrinaga González, Carlos
  3. Álvarez-Gil, María J.
Revista:
Revista española de financiación y contabilidad

ISSN: 0210-2412

Año de publicación: 2011

Número: 150

Páginas: 195-219

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.1080/02102412.2011.10779701 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR

Otras publicaciones en: Revista española de financiación y contabilidad

Resumen

La reciente aparición en España de memorias de sostenibilidad confeccionadas por organizaciones empresariales es el contexto en el que el presente trabajo aborda el estudio de la infl uencia en la divulgación de información social y medioambiental del contexto interno y externo de las organizaciones empresariales. El estudio está cimentado sobre la conducción de entrevistas semi-estructuradas con 30 gestores involucrados en la preparación de las memorias de sostenibilidad de 20 empresas españolas. Las narrativas emanadas de las entrevistas sugieren que tanto el contexto interno (organizativo e individual), como el externo determina el desarrollo de las memorias. Uno de los principales hallazgos del estudio es la existencia de infl uencias externas e internas que al �ensamblarse� podrían fomentar o inhibir el desarrollo de las memorias de sostenibilidad.

€ Ver financiación

Información de financiación

* Acknowledgments: We are indebted to Crawford Spence, Rob Gray, Jan Bebbington and Jeffrey Unerman for their comments on different drafts of this paper. We also thank the participants at the 30th Annual Congress of the European Accounting Association, 18th International Congress on Social and Environmental Accounting Research and APIRA 2007. This research has been facilitated by financial support provided by the Spanish Government (SEC2006-03959 and ECO2009-09937). ** Corresponding Author: Javier Husillos, Departamento de Gestión de Empresas, Universidad Pública de Navarra, Arro-sadia s.n., (31610) Pamplona, España. Tel. +34948169372. E-mail: javier.husillos@unavarra.es

Financiadores

    • ECO2009-09937

Referencias bibliográficas

  • ADAMS, C. 2002. Internal organisational factors influencing corporate, social and ethical reporting: beyond current theorising. Auditing, Accounting and Accountability Journal 15(2): 223-250.
  • ADAMS, C. 2004. The ethical, social and environmental reporting-performance portrayal gap. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 17(5): 731-757.
  • ADAMS, C., and LARRINAGA-GONZALEZ, C. 2007. Engaging with organizations in pursuit of improved sustainability accounting and performance. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 20(3): 333-355.
  • ADAMS, C., and NARAYANAN, V. 2007. The standardization of sustainability reporting. In: UNERMAN, J.; BEBBINGTON, J., and O'DWYER, B., eds. Sustainability Accounting and Accountability, New York: Routledge: 70-85.
  • ADAMS, C. A., and MCNICHOLAS, P. 2007. Making a difference: sustainability reporting, accountability and organisational change. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 20 (3): 382-402.
  • ALBELDA-PÉREZ, E.; CORREA-RUIZ, C., and CARRASCO-FENECH, F. 2007. Environmental management systems as an embedding mechanism: a research note. Auditing, Accounting and Accountability Journal 20(3): 403.
  • Álvarez-Etxeberría, I. 2009. Las memorias de sostenibilidad: un instrumento para la gestión de la sostenibilidad. Revista Española de Financiación y Contabilidad 38(144): 677-697.
  • ARCHEL, P.; FERNÁNDEZ, M., and LARRINAGA-GONZALEZ, C. 2008. The organizational and operational boundaries of triple bottom line reporting: a survey. Environmental Management Journal 41(1): 106-117.
  • ARKSEY, H., and KNIGHT, P. 1999. Interviewing for Social Scientists. Sage Publications.
  • BATEMAN, T. S., and CRANT, J. M. 1993. The proactive component of organizational behavior: a measure and correlates. Journal of Organizational Behaviour 14(2): 103-118.
  • BEBBINGTON, J.; GRAY, R.; THOMSON, I., and WALTERS, D. 1994. Accountant's attitudes and environmentally- sensitive accounting. Accounting and Business Research 24(94): 109-120.
  • BROWN, N., and DEEGAN, C. M. 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.
  • CALVO-SANCHEZ, J.A.; GARAYAR-ERRO, A., and ÁLVAREZ-ETXEBERRIA, I. 2007. Informes de Sostenibilidad: estado del arte. Cuadernos Aragoneses de Economía 17(1): 63-97.
  • CAMPBELL, D. 2003. Intra- and intersectorial effects in environmental disclosures: evidence for legitimacy theory. Business Strategy and the Environment, 12(6): 357-371.
  • CAMPBELL, D., CRAVEN, B., and SHRIVES, P. 2003. Voluntary social reporting in three FTSE sectors: a comment on perception and legitimacy. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 16(4): 558-581.
  • COLLISON, D.; LORRAINE, N., and POWER, D. 2003. An exploration of corporate attitudes to the signifi - cance of environmental information for stakeholders. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 10(4): 199-211.
  • CORMIER, D., GORDON, I. M., and MAGNAN, M. 2004. Corporate environmental Disclosure: contrasting management's perceptions with Reality. Journal of Business Ethics 49(2): 143-165.
  • CRANT, J. M. 2000. Proactive behavior in organizations. Journal of Management 26(3): 435-462.
  • CZARNIAWSKA, B. (2004). Narratives in Social Science Research. London: Sage Publications.
  • DEEGAN, C., and BLOMQUIST, CH. 2006. Stakeholders influence on corporate reporting: An exploration of the interaction between WWWF-Australia and the Australian minerals industry. Accounting Organizations and Society 31(4/5): 343-372.
  • DEEGAN, C., and GORDON, B. 1996. A study of the environmental disclosure practices of Australian corporations. Accounting and Business Research 26(3): 187-199.
  • DEEGAN, C.; RANKIN, M., and TOBIN, J. 2002. An examination of the corporate social and environmental disclosures of BHP from 1983-1997. A test of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 15(3): 312-343.
  • DEEGAN, C.; RANKIN, M., and VOGHT, P. 2000. Firm's disclosure reactions to major social incidents: Australian evidence. Accounting Forum 14(1): 101-130.
  • DIMAGGIO, P. J. 1988. Interest and agency in institutional theory. In: ZUCKER, L. G., Ed. Institutional patterns and organizations: culture and environment. Cambridge, M.A.: Ballinger.
  • GLOBAL REPORTING INITIATIVE (GRI). 2002. Sustainability reporting guidelines. Boston.
  • GLOBAL REPORTING INITIATIVE (GRI). 2006. Sustainability reporting guidelines. Amsterdam.
  • GRAY, R. 2002a. The Social Accounting Project and Accounting, Organizations and Society: Privileging engagement, imaginings, new accountings and pragmatism over critique?. Accounting, Organizations and Society 27(7): 687-708.
  • GRAY, R. 2002b. Of messiness, systems and sustainability: towards a more social and environmental finance and accounting. British Accounting Review 34(4): 357-386.
  • GRAY, R. 2006. Does sustainability reporting improve corporate behaviour?: Wrong question? Right time? Accounting and Business Research 36(4): 65-88.
  • GRAY, R., KOUHY, R., and LAVERS, S. 1995b. 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.
  • GRAY, R. H. and MILNE, M. J. 2004. Towards reporting on the triple bottom line: mirages, methods and myths. In: HENRIQUES, A., and RICHARDSON, J. Eds. The Triple Bottom Line: Does It All Add Up?, London: Earthscan: 70-80.
  • GRAY, R.; WALTERS, D. M.; BEBBINGTON, J., and THOMPSON, I. 1995a. The greening of enterprise: an exploration of the (non) role of environmental accounting and environmental accountants in organizational change. Critical Perspective on Accounting 6(3): 211-239.
  • HUBERMAN, M., and MILES M. B. 1994. Data management and analysis methods. In: DENZIN, N. K., and LINCOLN, Y. S., Eds. Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oads, California: Sage.
  • KUASIRIKUN, N. 2005. Attitudes to the development and implementation of social and environmental accounting in Thailand. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 16(8): 1035-1057.
  • LARRINAGA-GONZALEZ C., and BEBBINGTON, J. 2001. Accounting change or institutional appropriation?- A case study of the implementation of environmental accounting. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 12(3): 269-292.
  • LAWRENCE, T. B. 1999. Institutional Strategy. Journal of Management 25(2): 161-188.
  • LLENA, F.; MONEVA, J. M., and HERNÁNDEZ, B. 2007. Environmental Disclosure and compulsory accounting standards: The case of Spanish annual reports. Business Strategy and the Environment 16(1): 50-63.
  • MAGNESS, V. 2006. Strategic posture, financial performance and environmental disclosure. An empirical test of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 19(4): 540-563.
  • MILLER, W. L., and CRABTREE, B. F. 1999. Depth interviewing. In CRABTREE, B. F., and MILLER, W. L., Eds. Doing Qualitative Research. California: Sage Publications: 89-108.
  • Moneva, J.M.; Archel, P. and Correa, C. 2006. GRI and the camoufl aging of corporate unsustainability. Accounting Forum 30(2): 121-137.
  • NEU, D.; WARSAME, H., and PEDWELL, D. 1998. Managing public impressions: environmental disclosures in annual reports. Accounting, Organizations and Society 23(3): 265-282.
  • 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): 344-71.
  • O'DWYER, B. 2003. Conceptions of corporate social responsibility: the nature or managerial capture. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 16(4): 523-557.
  • O'DWYER, B. 2004. Qualitative data analysis: illuminating a Process for Transforming a 'Messy' but 'Attractive' 'Nuisance'. In: HUMPHRY, C., and LEE, W., Eds. The Real Life Guide to Accounting Research. A Behind-the-Scenes View of Using Qualitative Research Methods. Amsterdam: Elsevier: 391-407.
  • O'DWYER, B. 2005. The construction of a social account: a case study in an overseas aid agency. Accounting Organizations and Society 30(3): 279-296.
  • O'DWYER, B. 2002. Managerial perceptions of corporate social disclosure. An Irish story. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 15(3): 406-436.
  • PARKER, L. D. 2005. Social and environmental accountability research: a view form the commentary box. Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal 18(6): 842-860.
  • PATTEN, D. M. 1992. Intra-industry environmental disclosures in response to the Alaskan oil spill: a note on legitimacy theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society 17(5): 471-475.
  • PATTEN, D. M. 1995. Variability in social disclosure: A legitimacy-based analysis. Advances in Public Interest Accounting 6: 273-285.
  • PATTON, M.Q. 2002. Qualitative evaluation and research methods, Third Edition, Sage, Beverly Hills, California.
  • ROBERTS, R. W. 1992. Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: an application of stakeholder theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society 17(6): 595-612.
  • SMITH, J.; ADHIKARI, A., and TONDKAR, R. 2005. Exploring differences in social disclosures internationally: A stakeholder perspective. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 24(2): 123-151.
  • THOMSON, I., and BEBBINGTON, J. 2005. Social and environmental reporting in the UK: a pedagogic evaluation. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 16(5): 507-533.
  • TILT, C. A. 1994. The influence of external pressure groups on corporate social disclosure: some empirical evidence. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 7(4): 47-72.
  • TINKER, A. M., and NEIMARK, M. 1987. The role of annual reports in gender and class contradictions at General Motors: 1917-1976. Accounting, Organizations and Society 12(1): 71-88.
  • ULLMANN, A. 1985. Data in search of a theory: A critical examination of the relationships among social performance, social disclosure, and economic performance of U.S. firms. Academy of Management Review 10(3): 540-557.
  • WENGRAF, T. 2001. Qualitative Research Interviewing: Semi-structured, Biographical and Narratives Methods. London: Sage Publications.
  • WILMSHURST, T. D., and FROST, G. R. 2000. Corporate environmental reporting. A test of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 13(1): 10-26.
  • YIN, R. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Second Edition, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publishing.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet