Search results

This study aims to examine the extent to which corporate governance structures and ownership types are associated with the level of corporate social responsibility disclosures (CSRD) in a developing country.

Multiple regression techniques are used to estimate the effect of corporate governance structures and ownership types on CSRD using a sample of Libyan oil and gas companies between 2009 and 2013.

First, the study results suggest that although the level of CSRD in Libya is low in comparison to its western counterparts, ownership factors have a significant positive influence on CSRD. Second, the authors find board meetings to have a positive impact on CSRD. However, the authors fail to find any significant effect of board size and presence of corporate social responsibility (CSR) committees on CSRD. Overall, the results support prior theoretical evidence that pressures exerted by the government and external stakeholders have a considerable influence in promoting firm-level CSRD activities, specifically as a legitimising mechanism in fragile states.

First, this study is based on the annual reports, and it did not examine any other reports or other mass communication mechanism that companies’ management may use to disclose CSR information. Future studies might consider disclosures in other channels, if any, such as the internet, CSR reports, etc. Additionally, this study adopts the neo-institutional theory perspective. Future studies might integrate multi-theoretical lenses to offer a richer basis for understanding and explaining CSRD determinants.

This study contributes to the literature by first providing additional evidence for existing studies, which suggest that on average, better-governed companies are more liable to follow a more socially responsible agenda than poorly governed companies as a legitimising mechanism in fragile states. Also, this study overcomes a major weakness in existing Libyan studies, which have mainly used descriptive data.

This study aims to examine the impact of board structure on risk-taking measured by research and development (R&D) intensity in OECD countries.

The study uses a panel data of 200 companies on Forbes global 2000 over the 2010-2014 period. It uses the ordinary least square multiple regression analysis techniques to examine the hypotheses.

The results show that the frequency of board meetings and board size are significantly and negatively related to risk-taking measured by R&D intensity, with a greater significance among Anglo-American countries than among Continental European countries. The rationale for this is that the legal and accounting systems in the Anglo American countries have greater protection through greater emphasis on compliance and disclosure, and therefore, allowing for less risk-taking.

Future research could investigate risk-taking using different arrangements, conducting face-to-face meetings with the firm’s directors and shareholders.

The results suggest that better-governed firms at the firm- or national-level have a high expectancy of less risk-taking. These results offer regulators a resilient incentive to pursue corporate governance (CG) and disclosure reforms officially and mutually with national-level governance. Thus, these results show the monitoring and legitimacy benefits of governance, resulting in less risk-taking. Finally, the findings offer investors the opportunity to build specific expectations about risk-taking behaviour in terms of R&D intensity in OECD countries.

This study extends and contributes to the extant CG literature, by offering new evidence on the effect of board structure on risk-taking. The findings will help policymakers in different countries in estimating the sufficiency of the available CG reforms to prevent management mishandle and disgrace.