arbiter
JournalsAccount

Global warming and corporate disclosures: A comparative analysis of companies from the European Union, Japan and Canada

Martin Freedman & Bikki Jaggi

Advances in Environmental Accounting and Management2009https://doi.org/10.1108/s1479-3598(2010)0000004009book-chapter
AJG 1ABDC B
Weight
0.61

Abstract

This chapter evaluates whether disclosures on global warming by companies from the European Union are more extensive than disclosures by Japanese and Canadian firms. The study is based on disclosures made on websites, annual reports, social, environmental and sustainability reports and on a questionnaire developed by the Carbon Disclosure Project by 282 of the largest firms from these countries. Content analysis is utilized to asses their disclosures. The results indicate that the EU firms make significantly less global warming disclosures than firms from Japan or Canada. We also find no relation between the changes in carbon emissions and global warming disclosures indicating that these disclosures do not truly reflect emission performance. These findings suggest that the EU requirements of reducing GHG pollution have not improved GHG disclosures. Regulatory disclosure requirements may be the answer to improve disclosures.

78 citations

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/s1479-3598(2010)0000004009

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{martin2009,
  title        = {{Global warming and corporate disclosures: A comparative analysis of companies from the European Union, Japan and Canada}},
  author       = {Martin Freedman & Bikki Jaggi},
  journal      = {Advances in Environmental Accounting and Management},
  year         = {2009},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/s1479-3598(2010)0000004009},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Global warming and corporate disclosures: A comparative analysis of companies from the European Union, Japan and Canada

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.61

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.70 × 0.4 = 0.28
M · momentum0.69 × 0.15 = 0.10
V · venue signal0.50 × 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.