Organic versus cosmetic efforts of the quality of carbon reporting by top New Zealand firms. Does market reward or penalise?

Simple item page
dc.citation.issue1
dc.citation.volume32
dc.contributor.authorKhan HZ
dc.contributor.authorHouqe MN
dc.contributor.authorIelemia IK
dc.date.accessioned2024-02-14T02:17:47Z
dc.date.accessioned2024-07-25T06:34:55Z
dc.date.available2022-06-20
dc.date.available2024-02-14T02:17:47Z
dc.date.available2024-07-25T06:34:55Z
dc.date.issued2023-01-06
dc.description.abstractThis study explores the quality of carbon reporting (QCR) by New Zealand (NZ) firms and its changes over time. It also explores the impact of QCR on the market reputation of firms. Using a sample of 300 company-year observations between 2015 and 2020 from top listed firms of NZ, the study develops a 14-item QCR index. The study finds that the company-level QCR reporting by NZ firms overall is not praiseworthy, as firms need to improve QCR in many aspects (both in-house efforts as well as external reporting). Although QCR has increased over time, firms' QCR efforts cannot be treated completely authentic. Majority of firms in NZ have disclosed unaudited carbon information to investors and other stakeholders. Additionally, our study finds that QCR positively affects the market reputations of firms, and the market behaves accordingly. Specifically, firms' organic carbon efforts are paid-off (through increased market reputation) by the market players and cosmetic/decoupled behaviour is penalised (through decreased market reputation). This study is the first on QCR reporting using a sample of NZ firms and an account of their initiatives towards the carbon emission reduction initiative and related disclosures. The study's findings have policy implications.
dc.description.confidentialfalse
dc.edition.editionJanuary 2023
dc.format.pagination686-703
dc.identifier.citationKhan HZ, Houqe MN, Ielemia IK. (2023). Organic versus cosmetic efforts of the quality of carbon reporting by top New Zealand firms. Does market reward or penalise?. Business Strategy and the Environment. 32. 1. (pp. 686-703).
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/bse.3169
dc.identifier.eissn1099-0836
dc.identifier.elements-typejournal-article
dc.identifier.issn0964-4733
dc.identifier.urihttps://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/70468
dc.languageEnglish
dc.publisherERP Environment and John Wiley and Sons Ltd
dc.publisher.urihttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bse.3169
dc.relation.isPartOfBusiness Strategy and the Environment
dc.rights(c) 2022 The Author/s
dc.rightsCC BY 4.0
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectcosmetic
dc.subjectlegitimacy
dc.subjectmarket reputation
dc.subjectNew Zealand
dc.subjectorganic
dc.subjectquality of carbon reporting
dc.titleOrganic versus cosmetic efforts of the quality of carbon reporting by top New Zealand firms. Does market reward or penalise?
dc.typeJournal article
pubs.elements-id454119
pubs.organisational-groupOther
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Published version
Size:
435.08 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
Collections
Journal Articles