Stakeholders’ Perceptions of Environmental Accounting and Reporting towards Organizational Value
Mohammad Main Uddin et al.
What the paper says
Bangladesh is highly vulnerable to climate change. Stakeholders demand environmental accounting and reporting (EAR) to better understand corporate environmental responsibility and transparency. This study examines factors that influence how EAR contributes to organizational value in climate change adaptation, focusing on stakeholders’ perceptions. Data were collected through a self-administered, structured, closed-ended questionnaire covering personal details, background information, and stakeholders' opinions on various aspects of EAR. A total of 500 respondents were selected for interviews using purposive sampling. The sample was narrowed to 400 participants after removing inconsistencies for hypothesis testing. Smart PLS version 4.1.0.0 was used for analysis. The results indicated that stakeholders' perceptions of EAR are significantly influenced by the General Elements of EAR (GEEAR), Management Accounting and Costing of EAR (MACEAR), External Audit and Reporting of EAR (EAREAR), Environmental Excellence toward EAR (EEEAR), and Societal Engagement in EAR (SEEAR). Furthermore, positive perceptions of EAR significantly enhance the organization's goodwill, reputation, financial performance, and environmental sustainability. By effectively managing these factors, a company may also benefit from better financial outcomes, improved environmental sustainability, and a stronger reputation. This study, for the first time, identified the factors affecting stakeholders' perceptions of EAR in relation to corporate performance in Bangladesh. Although EAR is not yet widespread in Bangladesh, stakeholders strongly believe that businesses should disclose environmental data to strengthen corporate environmental governance, accountability, and transparency. Additionally, this study emphasizes the urgency of stakeholders' active participation in EAR practices to address social and environmental responsibility issues.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.