Integrated reporting is becoming increasingly popular. The focus of this study was to assess the overall integrated reporting quality of global companies and find determinants of high-level integrated reporting. Qualitative text analysis was performed on the 2017 integrated reports of 110 global organizations to determine in what way companies report on specific topics related to the six capitals: social and relationship, human, intellectual, manufacturing, natural, and financial. Using a novel assessment technique, scores were then assigned according to the details provided in the integrated reports on the various topics. This was done for each form of capital, and the total integrated score was subsequently calculated as the average between all the capital scores. Finally, a regression analysis was performed to determine the characteristics of high-quality integrated reporters. The results of univariate analysis and two-stage least squares instrumental variable (2SLS) regression indicate that companies of a larger size with a higher female board ratio and listing in the International Integrated Reporting Committee (IIRC) examples database are more likely to publish a higher quality integrated report. The results imply that these variables are the main disclosure drivers. However, a significant negative correlation was found between integrated report quality and the variables related to female executive ratio, external board member ratio, profitability, leverage, and previous report experience, as well as report length. No significant association was found between the location and industry group and report quality. The empirical evidence of this study shows that even though integrated reporting has become more common overall, the comparability and quality of the reports still remain low.

This study examines the impact of corporate characteristics on climate change governance among 100 of the world’s largest companies, with 1400 observations in the fiscal year 2020. We consider variables such as company location, size, profitability, female board representation, years of reporting using Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) guidelines, the inclusion of UN Global Compact and Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) information, Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) membership, MSCI ESG ratings, and the presence of a climate transition plan, a sustainability executive, and a sustainability board committee. Applying a multi-theoretical framework, we employ correlation analysis and univariate and multiple linear regressions to assess the relationships. Our findings reveal positive correlations between climate governance and the presence of a climate transition plan, MSCI ratings, DJSI membership, and the existence of a sustainability executive. Additionally, companies located in developed countries exhibit significantly higher levels of climate change governance. These results hold across various scenarios, offering valuable insights for researchers, academics, business leaders, practitioners, and regulators. With the growing importance of climate change reporting, understanding the key contributing factors for effective climate governance is crucial for organizations seeking to address this critical issue.

This study empirically analyzes reporting on long-term value creation for Canadian public mining and energy companies. It represents an important first step in determining the quality of reporting and its determinants for large public companies. In this exploratory empirical study, a reporting quality scoring index was developed to measure disclosure quality of long-term value creation reporting. Content analysis was used to examine financial and sustainability reports for a sample of twenty Canadian public mining and energy companies. Corporate disclosure quality scores were then calculated by assessing the quality of reporting in four main categories. The findings suggest that overall disclosure quality on long-term value creation is still low. Companies disclosing higher quality information on long-term value creation are of bigger size, operate in the basic materials sector, have an independent board, are listed in the Dow Jones Sustainability Index, experience higher stock volatility and use more words related to long-term value creation in their annual financial and non-financial reports. In order to increase and restore stakeholder trust and credibility as well as a tool to maintain stability, it is strongly recommended to introduce adequate mandatory standardization resulting in a set of internationally recognized reporting standards as well as a requirement for external assurance of reports.

The objective of this study was to identify the factors determining a company’s corporate governance related to climate change. We analyzed the effect of various sustainability corporate governance variables on the disclosure level of climate change governance. These variables included facts such as having a dedicated sustainability executive and board committee, the mediating effect of female representation on the board of directors, number of reporting years according to TCFD, membership in a sustainability index, MSCI ESG rating, the existence of a corporate climate transition plan, a mention of the UN Global Compact and GRI, company location, as well as company size and profitability. By adopting a multi-theoretical framework that included stakeholder theory as well the legitimacy and agency theory, the underlying research study used a sample of 100 of the largest global companies by market capitalization and their reporting for the year 2020. Based on 1,400 observations for fiscal year 2020 and using correlation analysis, univariate and linear multiple regressions, we find a positive association between having a climate transition plan in place, being a leader in sustainability according to MSCI ratings, and being a DJSI constituent and the propensity to disclose information on governance for climate change. In addition, we find a company with a dedicated sustainability executive show an increased tendency to be transparent on climate governance issues. Furthermore, having a company location in a developed country is significantly and positively associated with climate change governance. Surprisingly, gender diversity in the corporate board or having a sustainability board committee did not show any significant correlation between a higher climate change governance level. The same was true for companies being active in either the extractive or non-extractive sector. Companies referring to the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) or UN Global Compact also did not score higher in climate change governance. Neither did corporate profitability or size play a significant role. Our results are robust to variations and provide valuable insights for researchers, academics, executives, practitioners as well as regulators. As more and more companies are shifting towards a climate change reporting framework, it is of paramount importance that we are able to determine the contributing variables that lead to effective climate change corporate governance. Our results are inconsistent with stakeholder theory and are strongly suggesting that a diversified board and the existence of a sustainability committee that meets often/sufficiently may not necessarily lead to a higher level of transparency/quality regarding climate change. While more research is needed, knowing that a dedicated sustainability executive as well as having a climate plan in place can make a difference in climate change reporting, can be very beneficial to many corporate stakeholders. Given the current urgent climate change situation and the crucial role that corporation play in it, dedicated sustainability positions and committees need to be established. The findings could be useful for managers as well as governmental standards setter and regulators who are interested in improving corporate practices dealing with climate change. This study applies STATA software with various regression models to empirically test the relationship between CG and other variables and corporate climate change reporting.

Despite growing convergence toward climate disclosure frameworks, research gaps remain in determinants of reporting quality, especially endogeneity and governance interrelationships. This study addresses these using Canadian listed firms as a test case.Drawing on agency, legitimacy, and stakeholder theories, we introduce a novel random-effects extended ordered probit model accounting for endogenous covariates and within-panel correlation. Using 2018–2022 panel data from Canadian publicly listed companies, we measure quality via CDP Scores.To tackle endogeneity in governance variables like independent board ratios, we use instrumental variables: governance committees and long-term executive compensation. Results show higher disclosure quality links to board gender diversity and independence, board size, UN SDG 13 commitment, sustainability auditing, financial climate risk exposure, emission reduction targets, and sector factors.​Our rigorous framework advances climate disclosure literature by overcoming endogeneity limits, informing global policymakers and standard-setters on governance drivers amid mandatory reporting trends.