Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/34182
|
| Title: | 年報環境揭露與合理性理論-以上市公司為例 |
| Authors: | 王佩如
Wang, Pei-Ju |
| Contributors: | 周玲臺
Chou, Ling-Tai Lynette
王佩如
Wang, Pei-Ju |
| Keywords: | 環境揭露
環境保護
合理性理論
Environmental Disclosures
Environmental protection
Legitimacy theory |
| Date: | 2002 |
| Issue Date: | 2009-09-18 |
| Abstract: | 合理性理論認為，公司實際的環境績效必須與攸關公眾的期望一致，否則便出現合理性威脅。有合理性威脅的公司，必須向握有公司存續經營准駁權的攸關公眾揭露環境資訊，以合理化其永續經營的權利。為了探究管理當局公開環境揭露的誘因，本研究即根據合理性理論，以我國上市公司中合理性出現威脅的公司為對象，針對該等公司的年報環境揭露程度進行研究，探討攸關公眾之期望與公司年報環境揭露程度間的關係。
本研究之樣本係為60家過去環境績效表現不佳的上市公司，研究期間為民國89年，同時採用數量評估和品質評估兩種評分方式，在對資料之分配進行常態性檢定後，以Spearman等級相關和Mann-Whitney U test進行檢定。
實證結果顯示：（一）在敘述性統計方面，各公司均以「公開發行公司年報應行記載事項準則」所規定的應行記載事項為揭露架構，且多以表格或分點、逐項的方式進行說明，揭露項目雖然一致但揭露內容卻有各自表述的情形。若將數量和品質評估進行比較，染整業及染顏料業之揭露係以宣揚和美化性質的陳述為多，較少論及具體的環保措施，而石化業、化工業和鋼鐵業所揭露資訊的質和量則均高。（二）在假說檢定方面，年報環境揭露程度與平面媒體報導程度、公司規模、所有權結構成顯著正相關。食品、飼料及肥料業可能因為污染問題以及環保訴求略異於其他產業，故年報環境揭露程度顯著異於他業；石化業和化工業則可能因為長年積累的污染問題，使得攸關公眾關切甚殷，故受到合理性威脅的影響較大，其年報環境揭露程度亦顯著異於其他產業。綜合本研究的實證結果，以揭露品質進行的測試多為顯著正相關，較能支持合理性理論的推論，可見國內管理當局認為，當公司實際的環境績效不符攸關公眾之預期，在年報中採取較高程度的環境揭露品質能有助化解合理性威脅，以爭取公司之永續經營權利。
Legitimacy itself has been defined by Lindblom（1994）as a condition or status which exists when an entity，s value system is congruent with the value system of the larger social system of which the entity is a part. When a disparity, actual or optional, exists between the two value systems, there is a threat to the entity，s legitimacy. Based on the social contract concepts described above, legitimacy theory posits that environmental disclosures（EDs） are made as reactions to disparities, which threaten the sustaining rights of corporations, between relevant publics， expectations and actual performance. In other words, corporations legitimize its existence through making EDs.
This study，s objective was to investigate management，s motivations of publicizing EDs voluntarily based on the legitimacy theory. We sampled 60 listed companies which had unsatisfactory past environmental performance. We studied the relationship between their annual reports， ED levels and relevant publics， expectations. After coding these companies， EDs on their 2000 annual reports by using both quantity assessment and quality assessment, we tested hypotheses with Spearman rank-order correlation and Mann-Whitney U test.
The results were summarized below. First, based on descriptive statistics, we found most companies， EDs were in compliance with the required disclosure items regulated by law. However, every company had its own interpretation of what each requirement really meant. Regarding the results of two methods of enumeration, the Dyeing industry，s quantitative disclosure levels were high but its qualitative disclosure levels were lower. Petroleum and chemical industries， disclosure levels were very high in terms of both methods. Second, hypothesis testing showed that annual reports， ED levels were positively correlated with the level of print media coverage, firm size, and ownership structure. In addition to food, feed and fertilizers industries, petroleum and chemical industries， ED levels were also significantly different from other industries. Additionally, the qualitative disclosure evidence presented more persuasive results than the quantitative one in our findings. The hypothesis that corporations facing more print media coverage on their environmental performance would legitimize their sustaining rights by making better quality environmental disclosures was supported. |
| Reference: | 中文部分
田靜枝，1996，綠化意識與其公開揭露體系，國立政治大學會計研究所未出版碩士論文。
白馥禎，1997，環保績效與揭露行為之實證研究，私立文化大學會計研究所未出版碩士論文。
吳靜怡，1994，污染防治設備投資與企業經營績效之實證研究，國立成功大學會計研究所未出版碩士論文。
李俊瑩，1999，我國公營事業民化之檢討與法制變革重點建議，國立台灣大學法律研究所未出版碩士論文。
李麗凰，1996，環境會計與環境稽核，國立中興大學會計研究所未出版碩士論文。
沈華榮，2002，日本較美國更顯積極 樹狀與矩陣各有優勢 淺談綠色會計制度，會計研究月刊，第199期（6月）：61-67。
周文賢，2001，多變量統計分析－SAS/STAT之應用，智勝文化。
周玲臺，1994，我國上市公司財務報告環保資訊之內容研究，行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計劃成果報告。
林秀娟、張紹評、張紹勳，2000，SPSS for Windows統計分析：初等統計與高等統計，台北，松崗。
林愛蕙，1999，輿論與環保資本支出之關聯性研究，國立政治大學會計系未出版碩士論文。
林嬋娟，2001，我國採行綠色會計可行性研究，行政院經濟建設委員會專題研究報告。
林嬋娟、劉嘉雯、薛敏正，2002，綠色會計之國際現況與相關指引－兼論改進國內綠色會計之道，會計研究月刊，第199期（6月）：68-82。
張伊易，2002，環保事件對股價行為影響之研究─以台塑汞污泥事件為例，私立東吳大學會計研究所未出版碩士論文。
張倩綾，2001，我國上市公司環保資訊增額資訊內涵之研究，國立政治大學會計研究所未出版之碩士論文。
張紹勳，2000，研究方法，台中，滄海書局。
張嘉麟，1996，環境保護資訊內涵之初探，國立政治大學會計研究所未出版之碩士論文。
許戎彥，1999，影響廠商從事污染防治支出因素之分析，國立台北大學資源管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
陳依蘋，2002，環境承諾 社會責任 追求永續經營的綠色競爭力，會計研究月刊，第199期（6月）：45-50。
陳崇美，1996，探討我國實施環境保護政策之經濟後果，國立中興大學會計研究所未出版之碩士論文。
陳毓樺，1995，社會責任會計揭露與公司特性相關性研究，私立文化大學國際企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
陳鴻志，1999，企業環境報告研究，國立政治大學科技管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
黃姵蓉，2001，環保支出資訊價值攸關性之研究，國立中正大學會計系未出版碩士論文。
楊之遠、蔡勳雄，1999，綠色世紀之國家發展研討會，1998「與全球同步跨越世紀」系列研討會實錄2，救國團社會研究院。
劉文翔，2000，台灣企業環境報告書現況分析－兼論利害相關者之看法，國立南華大學環境管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
蔡靜如，1998，環保資本支出與公司特徵之關聯性研究－以上市製造業為例，國立政治大學會計研究所未出版碩士論文。
鄭惠之，2002，人、車、自然共生 績效、成本、綠色有成 裕隆汽車與綠色會計，會計研究月刊，第199期（6月）：51-60。
瞿文芳，2001，報紙報導環保事件議題建構過程之研究~以阿瑪斯號漏油污染事件為例，私立世新大學傳播研究所未出版碩士論文。
羅伯特•韋伯，1989，內容分析法導論，林義男等譯，台北：巨流圖書公司。
中時電子報，2003.2.23，遜！我永續指數全球第119名。
全國法規資料庫入口網站-法規檢索，http://law.moj.gov.tw/fl.asp。
行政院環保署全球資訊網，http://www.epa.gov.tw/。
空保處，2000，八十八下半年及八十九年度北區工廠污染防治評鑑計劃，行政院環保署。
空保處，2000，八十八年下半年及八十九年度中區工廠污染防治評鑑專案工作計畫報告書，行政院環保署。
空保處，2000，八十八年下半年及八十九年度中區工廠污染防治評鑑專案計畫，行政院環保署。
空保處，2000，八十八年下半年及八十九年度南區工廠污染防治評鑑專案計畫，行政院環保署。
英文部分
Brown, N., and C. Deegan. 1998. The Public disclosure of environmental performance information－a dual test of media agenda setting theory and legitimacy theiry. Accounting and Business Research 29（1）：21-41.
Buhr, N. 1998. Environmental performance, legislation and annual report disclosure: the case of acid rain and Falconbridge. Accounting, Auditing ＆ Accountability Journal 11（2）：163-190.
Cooke, T. E. 1989. Voluntary disclosure by Swedish companies. Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting 1（2）：1-25.
Cormier, D., and I. M. Gordon. 2001. An examination of social and environmental reporting strategies. Accounting, Auditing ＆ Accountability Journal 14（5）：587-616.
Cowen, S., L. B. Ferreri, and L. D. Parker. 1987. The impact of corporate characteristics on social responsibility disclosure: A typology and frequency-based analysis. Accounting, Organizations and Society 12（2）：111-122.
Deegan, C, M. Rankin, and J. Tobin. 2002. An examination of the corporate social and environmental disclosures of BHP from 1983-1997: A test of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing ＆ Accountability Journal 15（3）：312-343.
Deegan, C. 2002. Introduction: The legitimizing effect of social and environmental disclosures－a theoretical foundation. Accounting, Auditing ＆ Accountability Journal 15（3）：282-311.
Deegan, C., and B. Gordan. 1996. A study of the environmental disclosure practices of Australian corporations. Accounting and Business Research 26（3）：187-199.
Deegan, C., and M. Rankin. 1996. Do Australian companies report environmental news objectively? An analysis of environmental disclosures by firms prosecuted successfully by the Environmental Protection Authority. Accounting, Auditing＆Accountability Journal 9（2）：50-67.
Deegan, G., M. Rankin, and P. Voght. 2000. Firm’s disclosure reactions to major social incidents: Australian evidence. Accounting Forum 24（1）：101-130.
Dowling, J, and J. Pfeffer. 1975. Organizational legitimacy: Social values and organizational behavior. Pacific Sociological Review 18（1）：122-136.
Gamble, G. O., K. Hsu, C. Jackson, and C. D. Tollerson. 1996. Environmental disclosures in annual reports: An International Perspective. The International Journal of Accounting 31（3）：293-331.
Gamble, G. O., K. Hsu, D. Kite, and R. R. Radtke. 1995. Environmental disclosures in annual reports and 10Ks: An examination. Accounting Horizons 9（3）：34-54.
Gray, R., M. Javad, D. M. Power, and C. D. Sinclair. 2001. Social and Environmental Disclosure and Corporate Characteristics: A Research Note and Extension. Journal of Business Finance ＆ Accounting （April/May）：327-356.
Gray, R., R. Kouhy, and S. Lavers. 1995. Corporate social and environmental reporting：A review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure. Accounting, Auditing ＆ Accountability Journal 8（2）：47-77.
Gray, R., R. Kouhy, and S. Lavers. 1995. Methodological themes: Constructing a research database of social and environmental reporting by UK companies. Accounting, Auditing ＆ Accountability Journal 8（2）：78-101.
Gray, R., D. Owen, and C. Adams. 1996. Accounting ＆ Accountability. Prentice Hall Europe.
Guthrie, J., and L. Parker. 1989. Corporate social reporting：A rebuttal of Legitimacy Theory. Accounting and Business Research 9（76）：343-352.
＊Guthrie, J., and L. Parker. 1990. Corporate social disclosure practice：A comparative international analysis. Advances in Public Interest Accounting 3：159-176.
Hackston, D., and M. Milne. 1996. Some determination of social and environmental disclosures in New Zealand. Accounting, Auditing＆Accountability Journal 9（1）：77-108.
＊Hogner, R.H. 1982. Corporate social reporting：Eight decades of development at US Steel. Research in Corporate Performance and Policy：243-250.
Krippendorff, K. 1980. Content Analysis：An introduction to its methodology. Sage. Beverly Hills.
Lindblom, C. K. 1994. The implications of organizational legitimacy for corporate social performance and disclosure. Paper presented at the Critical Perspectives on Accounting Conference. New York.
＊Mathews, M. R. 1993. Socially responsible accounting. Chapman Hall London.
Mathews, M. R. 1997. Twenty-five years of social and environmental accounting research： Is there a silver jubilee to celebrate? Accounting, Auditing ＆ Accountability Journal 10（4）：481-531.
Milne, M. J., and D. M. Patten. 2002. Securing organizational legitimacy：An experimental decision case examining the impact of environmental disclosures. Accounting, Auditing ＆ Accountability Journal 15（3）：372-405.
Neu, D., H. Warsame, and K. Pedwell. 1998. Managing public impressions: Environmental disclosures in annual reports. Accounting, Organizations and Society 23（3）：265-282.
＊O’Donovan, G. 1999. Managing legitimacy through increased corporate environmental reporting: An exploratory story. Interdisciplinary Environmental Review 1（1）：66-99.
O’Donovan, G. 2002. Environmental disclosures in the annual report: Extending the applicability and predictive power of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing ＆ Accountability Journal 15（3）：344-371.
O’Dwyer, B. 2002. Managerial perceptions of corporate social disclosure：An Irish story. Accounting, Auditing ＆ Accountability Journal 15（3）：406-436.
Patten, D. M. 1991. Exposure, legitimacy and social disclosure. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 10：297-308.
Patten, D. M. 1992. Intra-industry environmental disclosures in response to the Alaskan Oil Spill：A note on Legitimacy Theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society 17（5）：471-475.
＊Shocker, A. D., and S. P. Sethi. 1974. An approach to incorporating social preferences in devoloping corporate action strategies. In Sethi, S. P. （ed.）, The Unstable Ground：Corporate social policy in a dynamic society：67-80.
Tilt, C. A. 1994. The influence of external pressure groups on corporate social disclosure：Some empirical evidence. Accounting, Auditing ＆ Accountability Journal 7（4）：47-72.
Trotman, K. T. 1979. Social responsibility disclosures by Australian companies. Chartered Accountant in Australia（March）：24-28.
Trotman, K. T., and G. W. Bradley. 1981. Associations between social responsibility disclosure and characteristics of companies. Accounting, Organizations and Society 6（4）：355-362.
Walden, W. D., and B. N. Schwartz. 1997. Environmental disclosures and public policy pressure. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 16：125-154.
Wilmshurst, T. D., and G. R. Frost. 2000. Corporate environmental reporting：A test of Legitimacy Theory. Accounting, Auditing ＆ Accountability Journal 13（1）：10-26.
Wiseman, J. 1982. An envalution of environmental disclosures made in corporate annual reports. Accounting, Organizations and Society 7（1）：53-63.
＊：表示轉載自其他文章，作者本身並未直接參閱 |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
會計研究所
89353019
91 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0089353019 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [會計學系] 學位論文
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
