11.Vol. 0002 Call_for_Paper No. 2_KNI Ismail & AH Ibrahim_pp198-210

7/31/2019 11.Vol. 0002www.iiste.org Call_for_Paper No. 2_KNI Ismail & AH Ibrahim_pp198-210

1/14

Introduction

Companies are now becoming more sen-sitive and aware of their roles and re-sponsibilities towards the society andenvironment, resulting in a growing

trend in social and environmental report-ing. Subsequently, researchers havebegun to examine the extent of dis-closures, including types and nature,form, quality and quantity of informa-tion disclosed. Most of these studies

Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting

Vol. 2, No. 2 Dec 2008/Jan 2009Pp. 198-210

Social and Environmental Disclosure in theAnnual Reports of Jordanian Companies

Ku Nor Izah Ku IsmailAbdul Hadi Ibrahim

College of Business

Universiti Utara Malaysia

Abstract

Recently, much attention has been devoted by researchers to study social and environmentaldisclosure among corporations. Most of the studies were conducted in developed countries,with only a handful being undertaken in developing countries. This study aims to investigatethe extent of social and environmental disclosure in the annual reports of Jordanian companiesand examine if the level of disclosure is influenced by size of firm, government ownership andindustry. In particular, disclosure with regard to environmental issues, community involvementand human resource are examined. Using a sample of 60 companies in the manufacturing andservice sectors, content analysis is used to measure the level of disclosure. The findings indi-cate that 85% of the companies somehow disclose social and environmental information. Hu-man resource is the most disclosed theme while the environmental issue had the lowestdisclosure among the companies. In addition, a significant positive association is found be-tween company size and social and environmental disclosure, and companies with high govern-ment ownership tend to have a lower level of disclosure compared to companies with low gov-ernment ownership. On the overall, no significant relationship was found between industry typeand the level of social and environmental disclosure. However, when only environmental issuesare examined, manufacturing companies tend to disclose more of the items compared to servicecompanies.

Keywords : social and environmental disclosure, social reporting, environmental reporting,

annual reports.

Corresponding author: Ku Nor Izah Ku Ismail, Associate Professor, College of Business, Universiti Utara Malaysia,Sintok, Kedah, Malaysia, E-mail: [email protected]


2/14

K.N.I Ku Ismail, A.H. Ibrahim / Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting 2 (2008/2009) 198-210 199

were carried out in the context of

developed countries (see Adams et al.,1998; Brown and Deegan, 1998),while only a handful were conductedin developing countries.

Corporate social and environmental dis-closure (CSED) is a process of commu-nicating the social and environmentaleffects of organizations economic ac-tions to the society (Gray et al. 1987). Inthe case of Jordan, like any other devel-oping country, there is a lack of studies

on CSED (see for example Abu-Bakerand Naser, 2000; Al-Khadash, 2003;Jahamani, 2003). A low level of disclo-sure was found by these studies, despitethe laws and regulations that mandatethe Jordanian organizations to disclosesocial and environmental reporting intheir annual reports, such as the Law of Environmental Protection 1995, and theSecurities Commission Law of 1998 (Al-Khadash, 2003).

Over the past several years, the Jorda-nian economy has improved, with theGDP growing at a rate of 6.2% in 2006(Jordan Economic Reports, 2006). In2006, the Jordanian government hastaken a positive economic measure bysignificantly reducing its debt-to-GDPratio (The 2008 World Fact Book). Cou-pled with increased political stability,this measure would help Jordan becomemore attractive to foreign investors.Consequently, we expect that there willbe an increased quality of corporate an-nual reports and thus social and environ-mental reporting reported in the annualreports.

Accordingly, this study examines thecurrent practice of social and environ-mental reporting in Jordan. In particular,this study measures the extent of CSED

among Jordanian listed companies and

examine if company characteristics(namely firm size, industry type andgovernment ownership) influence theamount of disclosure.

This study is important because it willalso include companies in the servicesector, which previous studies tend toignore. Previously, CSED studies tend tofocus on the manufacturing sector. Theservice sector also plays a significantrole in the Jordanian economy, and con-

stitutes 66 percent of the countrys GDP(Jordan economic reports 2006). In addi-tion, only a few studies were carried outin Jordan that investigate the role of ownership structure in influencing thelevel of disclosure, despite the fact thatthe Jordanian government holds a major-ity of companies shares in most bigcompanies (Naser (1998) cited in Naseret al. (2002)). In a developing countrylike Jordan, government ownership of companies is viewed as a supervisingmechanism that may influence the qual-ity of information disclosed (Nasser etal., 2002).

The remaining of this paper is organizedas follows. In the next section, this paperprovides a review of literature. Next, wepresent the research methods and hy-pothesis development. The findings of the study will be presented next. Finally,we will provide the conclusions.

Literature Review

The term corporate social reporting(CSR) or corporate social disclosure asoften been used, has a very broad mean-ing. Guthrie and Mathews (1985) de-fined corporate social disclosure as theprovision of financial and non-financial


3/14

200 K.N.I Ku Ismail, A.H. Ibrahim / Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting 2 (2008/2009) 198-210

information relating to an organizations

interaction with its physical and socialenvironment as stated in corporate an-nual reports or separate social reports.Environment is one of the most com-mon categories of social disclosure; assuch, most research has considered envi-ronment as a stand-alone category (Tilt,2000), and some others use the termCSED to highlight such significance.

CSED in Developed Countries

Corporate social and environmentalreporting issues have received grow-ing attention, particularly from re-searchers in developed countries(see for example, Ernst and Ernst,1978; Patten, 1992; Guthrie and Parker,1990; Adams et al., 1998, Gray, 2001;and Araya, 2006). These studies reviewthe social and environmental disclosurepolicies of entities around the world.They provide evidence that there hasbeen an improved corporate socialreporting over the years. Adams etal. (1998) for example examined theannual reports of six European coun-tries (namely the UK, Germany,France, Netherlands, Sweden, andSwitzerland) and found that there wasan increased amount of disclosureamong all countries especially in theUK and Germany.

Prior studies also suggest that informa-tion related to human resource, as com-pared to that of community involve-ment and environment issues, was themost common information provided inthe annual reports (see for example,Guthrie and Parker, 1990; Roberts,1990; and Adams et al., 1998) althoughthere is an increasing awareness amongcompanies to disclose environmental

information in their annual reports

(Gray, 2001). Countries vary in the typesof human resource information they dis-close. Roberts (1990) concludes thatEuropean, South African and Australiancompanies are more likely than compa-nies in other parts of the world to dis-close employment policies, health andsafety information, or have separate sec-tions on employment data. There is alsoevidence to suggest that companiesdomiciled in a more developed nation islikely to report more extensively in the

developed nation than it is to report inthe lesser developed countries in whichit operates (see, for example, United Na-tions, 1992).

Environmental reporting has a long his-tory. However, only during the late1980s and early 1990s did it becomewidespread in Western Europe (Gray etal. 1996). Roberts (1991) provides evi-dence that the disclosure level for envi-ronmental information in Germany ishigher than in any other European coun-try, in which more than 80 percent of German companies provided at least oneitem of environmental information intheir annual reports. According to Araya(2006), multinational enterprises fromdeveloped countries are the leading pro-ducers of environmental reports. Duringthe period from 1990 to 2003, 58 percent of all separate environmental reports publishedaround the world came from Europe, 20percent from the Americas (two thirds fromthe US and one third from Canada and Bra-zil ), 20 percent from Asia (mainly Japan)and Australasia, and only 2 percent fromAfrica and the Middle East.

CSED in Developing Countries

Little attention has been given to


4/14


CSR issues in developing countries

(Al-Khater and Naser, 2003). Lack of regulation was one of the most com-mon problems that authorities in thesecountries faced in their efforts to en-courage corporations to disclose theirenvironmental and social reports (AbuShiraz, 1998). Abu Shiraz also arguedthat the shortage of qualified account-ants in developing countries is part of the problem because introducing so-cial and environmental issues into thereporting system requires a combina-

tion of expertise in various fields in-cluding law, engineering, and sociol-ogy. In addition, reporting on socialand environmental issues presents ad-ditional costs (Al-Khater and Naser,2003). Although evidence shows thatthe volume of CSED in developingcountries increases (Tsang, 1998 andAl-Khater and Naser, 2003), the vol-ume is still low despite the increas-ing awareness of companies to-wards the social and environmentalissues (see Imam, 1999). Like in de-veloped countries, disclosure ismainly on human resource (see forexample Thompson and Zakaria,2004). Environmental information isleast likely to be reported (Rahmanand Muttakin, 2005).

Within the Arab world, Al-Khater andNaser (2003) investigated the percep-tions of various user groups of Qatarscorporate reports about different as-pects of corporate social responsibilitydisclosure. The findings show that re-spondents support the idea that compa-nies should report some kind of CSR to

justify their existence within the soci-ety. They felt that the inclusion of CSED in annual reports would reflectsocial responsibility to the public. An-other study of CSED in the Arab world

is by Jahamani (2003), which examined

the extent of environmental reporting forUnited Arab Emirate companies in 1998.The results show that only 12 percent of the companies in the UAE issued envi-ronmental reports.

In Jordan, research on social and envi-ronmental disclosure was limited (Al-Khadash, 2003) and is still in the earlystage (Jahamani, 2003). One of the stud-ies is by Abu-Baker (2000), who exam-ined the extent of CSED of Jordanian

listed companies in 1997. Using a sam-ple of 143 companies chosen from threedifferent industry groups(manufacturing, insurance, and bank-ing), he concluded that all companiesmade some kind of CSR in their annualreports. On average, about half of a pagein the annual report is devoted to socialdisclosure. He also found that environ-mental, product and energy reportingneed a lot of attention and concentrationby Jordanian companies. On the otherhand, human resources and communityinvolvement were the most themes com-monly disclosed across the Jordanianshareholding companies. In anotherstudy, Al-Khadash (2003), examined thelevel of social and environmental disclo-sure in the annual reports of the Indus-trial Jordanian Shareholding Companies(IJSCs) over the period 1998 to 2000.He found that 26 percent of the IJSCsdid not have social and environmentaldisclosure in the annual reports, and thelevel of social and environmental disclo-sure in the IJSCs has increased over theperiod of 1998 to 2000. In addition, thefindings showed significant relationshipsbetween the companys size and man-agement risk with the level of social andenvironmental disclosure. On the otherhand, the study did not support any sig-nificant relationship between financial


5/14


performance and the level of social and

environmental disclosure. Jahamani(2003) who examined the extent, aware-ness and level of environmental respon-sibility of Jordanian companies foundthat only 10 percent of the companiesissued environmental reports as part of their annual reports. The amount of in-formation varied from nine pages to afew paragraphs. The study concludedthat the environmental, product and en-ergy reporting need a lot of attention andconcentration by Jordanian companies.

Hypothesis

Firm SizeIn general, large companies have morestakeholders and are thus more visible tothe public than smaller companies. Firth(1979) suggests that firms which aremore visible to the public are morelikely to disclose information to enhancetheir corporate reputation and to reducepolitical costs. It is also argued that re-vealing more information allows largefirms to obtain new funds at lower costs.Large firms often possess sufficient re-sources for collecting, analyzing, andpresenting extensive amounts of data atminimal cost. Although evidence on theassociation between size and CSED ismixed, expectedly, numerous studiesfound the association to be positive (seefor example, Andrew et al., 1989; Ad-ams, 1998; Hackston and Milne 1998;Al-Khadash, 2003 and Alsaeed, 2006;) .

Based on the above arguments and priorfindings, the following hypothesis istested:H1: There is a positive association be-tween firm size and the level of socialand environmental disclosure.

Industry Type

It is argued that industry may have aninfluence on the amount of disclosure.Patten (1991) suggests that the nature of the industry is a more important factoron social responsibility disclosure. Inthis study, companies are classified intoeither manufacturing or services follow-ing the Amman Stock Exchange (ASE)classification. It is expected that manu-facturing companies are more likely toprovide more disclosure. This is becausethey have greater environmental impacts

on the society than other companies.Manufacturers are known to be greaterpolluters and more visible to the society.Furthermore, they are expected to influ-ence political visibility (Hackston andMilne, 1998). Thus, manufacturing com-panies would disclosure more to reducepolitical costs and the pressure from so-cial activists.

Evidence of the association betweenindustry type and the level of CSED isprovided for example by Halme andHuse (1997) and Hackston and Milne(1998). The latter found that manufac-turing companies with high profit dis-close more CSED than non-manufacturing companies. Abu-Baker(2000) found that manufacturing sectorsare more likely to disclose informationthan other sectors (for e.g. service,banking, and insurance).

This leads us to the second hypothesis asfollows:H2: Manufacturing companies disclosemore social and environmental informa-tion than service companies.

Government OwnershipIn general, a wider spread in share own-ership is argued to have a positive im-pact on the depth of information dis-


6/14


closed in the annual reports of listed

companies (Fama and Jensen, 1983). Inthe case of Jordan, the government holdsa significant number of shares in mostcompanies (Naser et al., 2002). Huafangand Jiangu (2007) argued that enhancingshareholder value may not be the pri-mary objective of government owner-ship. In addition, the government wouldalso be able to obtain information fromother sources and be more likely to gaineasier access to different channels of financing than non-government firms

(Eng and Mak, 2003). Consequent, wehypothesize the following:H3: Companies with high governmentownership tend to disclose less informa-tion than those with a low governmentownership.

Research Methods

This study examines the level of CSEDin annual reports of Jordanian compa-nies for the year 2006. There were 240companies listed on the Amman Stock Exchange (ASE) as of December 2006(112 and 128 companies are listed on themain board and the second board, respec-tively). The companies are classifiedinto four major sectors banking, insur-ance, manufacturing and services com-panies. The focus of this study is onmanufacturing and service companieslisted on the main board. There were 44

service and 41 manufacturing companieson the main board. However, only 30companies from each of the manufactur-ing and service sectors are randomly se-lected and examined. Companies in thebanking and insurance sectors (14 and13, respectively) are excluded. This isbecause the accounting and disclosurerequirements for the sectors in some

ways are different from those of the

manufacturing and service sectors.

This study uses ordinary least square(OLS) regression model to examine theinfluence of the selected firm character-istics on CSED. The following model isestimated:

CSED = + b1 SIZE + b2 INDUSTRY+ b3 OWNERSHIP + Where:CSED = the level of CSED disclosure

measured by the number of sentencesused,SIZE = size of a company measured bytotal assets,INDUSTRY = 1 if it is a manufactur-ing company, and 0 if a service com-pany,OWNERSHIP = percentage of govern-ment ownership in a company, and = the error term.

Content analysis is used to analyze so-cial and environmental reporting in theannual reports. Number of sentences(instead of number of words or numberof pages) was used to measure the levelof CSED. This is because the number of sentences may be counted with less useof judgment. Moreover, the counting of sentences has been associated withfewer errors compared to the counting of words (Unerman, 2000, cited by Nik Ahmad and Sulaiman, 2004)..

Based on the works of Abu-Baker(2000) and Al-Khadash (2003), the so-cial and environmental information isclassified into three themes - human re-source, community involvement, andenvironmental issues. In addition, thesethemes are further broken down intothirteen items of information.


7/14


8/14


Table 2 provides the descriptive statis-

tics of the variables. In terms of firmsize, total assets range from 1.8 millionto 597 million Jordanian Dinars with a

mean of 61 million Dinars. With respect

to ownership structure, the governmentowns between zero to 43.1 percent, witha mean of 5.34 percent.

N Min. Max. Mean Std. Deviation CSED (number of sen-tences) 60 0 94.00 21.68 20.657

SIZE (Total assets in mil-lion Jordanian Dinars) 60 1.8 597 61 110

INDUSTRY 60 .00 1.00 .5000 .504OWNERSHIP 60 .00 43.10% 5.34% 10.34

Table 2Descriptive Statistics

Table 3 shows the results of PearsonCorrelation between the independentvariables. It provides evidence that there

is no multicollinearity problem in themodel.

INDUSTRY OWNERSHIP SIZE -.051

(.699)-.060(.650)

INDUSTRY .142(.278)

Table 3Pearson Correlation Coefficients

Results of the OLS regression is exhib-ited in Table 4. The adjusted R-Squareof 0.21 implies that the independent

variables explain 21 percent of the varia-tion in disclosure, and the F-ratio (6.407)shows that the model is significant.

Unstandardized Coefficients t Sig.B Std. Error

(Constant) 16.054 3.765 4.264 .000

SIZE 7.784E-08 .000 3.592 .001***

INDUSTRY 7.069 4.777 1.480 .145

OWNERSHIP -.491 .233 -2.109 .039**

F-ratio = 6.407 (Sig. F = 0.001) Adjusted R 2 = 0.216

Table 4Regression Results - Overall

*** Significant at 1 percent ** Significant at 5 percent


9/14


There is a significant and positive asso-

ciation between the level of CSED andsize of a company, which indicates thatlarger companies disclose more CSEDcompared to smaller companies. There-fore, the results support the first hy-pothesis and is consistent with previousstudies (see for example, Andrew et al.,1989; Hackston and Milne, 1998; Ad-ams, 1998; Al-Khadash, 2003; Nik Ahmad and Sulaiman, 2004; Rahmanand Muttakin, 2005). As discussed ear-lier, large firms are closely watched by

stakeholders, and they have the ability toabsorb extra costs for improved disclo-sure (Alsaeed, 2006). Moreover, largercompanies tend to have more sharehold-ers who might also be concerned withthe social and environmental programsundertaken by the company. On theother hand, smaller companies might notreceive the same level of public pres-sure. Smaller companies may tend tocommunicate information about socialprograms through more informal chan-nels than through the annual reports(Cowen et al., 1987).

In addition, this study provides evidencethat government ownership has a nega-tive and significant association with thelevel of social and environmental disclo-sure. Companies listed on the AmmanStock Exchange (ASE) with high gov-ernment ownership tend to disclose lessCSED than companies with a low gov-ernment ownership. Likewise, this isconsistent with the study of Huafang andJiangu (2007) which found a negativeassociation between state ownership andthe level of voluntary disclosure inChina. However, there is no significantassociation between industry type andthe level of CSED. This result is consis-tent with Davey (1982) which failed tofind an association between industry

type and CSED for New Zealand com-

panies.

Table 5 shows the regression results of the effect of the variables on each of thethree disclosure themes. The F-valuesindicate that the models are significantand the adjusted R 2 values show that theindependent variables explain 20 per-cent, 23 percent and 29 percent of thevariations in environmental, communityinvolvement and human resource disclo-sure, respectively. It is evident from the

table that an industry type and size of acompany are associated with disclosureof environmental issues (at a 10 percentsignificant level). Large and manufactur-ing companies tend to disclose moreinformation on environmental issuesthan service companies. This is expectedas manufacturing companies greatly af-fect the environment. Dierkes and Pre-ston (1977) contend that companieswhose economic activities modify theenvironment, are more likely to discloseinformation about their environmentalimpacts than are companies in other in-dustries. Because these companies aremore prone to pollution, environmentalinformation is disclosed to reduce politi-cal cost and enhance their image. As forhuman resource and community involve-ment, the results resemble the overallresults in which size and governmentownership influence the level of disclo-sure in the expected direction.

Conclusion

The main purpose of this study is to ex-amine the level of social and environ-mental reporting in Jordanian companieslisted on the ASE. In addition, this studydetermines if firm size, governmentownership and industry type influence


10/14


the extent of CSED. Results show that85% of companies made some kind of social and environmental disclosure withan average of 22 sentences. This resultperhaps is a positive indication of thedevelopment of CSED in Jordaniancompanies. Secondly, the results of theanalysis showed that company size andthe government ownership are associ-ated with the level of social and environ-mental disclosure. On the other hand,

there is no association between socialand environmental disclosure and indus-try type. One possible explanation forthe lack of association may be that it israther simplistic to use a binary classifi-cation for manufacturing and servicecompanies. The specific type of manu-facturing industry may be more appro-priate than the general measure of manu-facturing.

Companies that make social and envi-ronmental disclosures are generallycharacterized by larger size and lessgovernment ownership. However, thebreakdown analysis provides evidencethat manufacturing companies providemore environmental disclosure than ser-vice companies do.

This study provides some understandingof Jordanian firms disclose strategy,

thus enabling the relevant authorities tobe in a better position to supervise thedisclosure requirement. At the sametime, this study may encourage the Jor-danian government to reconsider thepolicy related to social and environ-mental activities especially in firms withhigh government ownership that have alower level of CSED. Future research isnecessary for Jordanian researchers to

Table 5

Regression Results by Themes

Significant at 10%*, 5 %** and 1%***

Environmental Issues F-ratio = 4.32 (Sig. F = 0.001) Adjusted R 2 = 0.20

Unstandardized Coefficients T Sig.B Std. Error

(Constant) .598 .824 .726 .471SIZE 8.478E-09 .000 1.786 .079*INDUSTRY 2.023 1.046 1.934 .058*OWNERSHIP -.033 .051 -.638 .526Community Involvement F-ratio = 5.24 (Sig. F = 0.001) Adjusted R 2 = 0.23

(Constant) 5.729 1.583 3.620 .001SIZE 2.381E-08 .000 2.613 .012**INDUSTRY 1.171 2.008 .583 .562OWNERSHIP -.207 .098 -2.118 .039**

Human Resource F-ratio = 4.32 (Sig. F = 0.001) Adjusted R 2 = 0.29

(Constant) 9.726 2.118 4.593 .000SIZE 4.556E-08 .000 3.737 .000***INDUSTRY 3.875 2.687 1.442 .155OWNERSHIP -.251 .131 -1.919 .060*


11/14


determine why some companies do not

disclose such information in their annualreports. Moreover, future researchshould also address the environmentalissue, which is now a crucial issue fac-ing the Jordanian authorities.

References

Abu-Baker, N. (2000) Corporate socialreporting and disclosure practicein Jordan: An empirical investiga-tion, Dirasat Journal, Adminis-trative Sciences , Vol. 27, No. 1,pp. 249-263.

Abu Shiraz, (1998) Social reporting:Nice idea, but, Australian CPA ,November, pp. 58-59.

Adams, C.A., Hill W.Y. & Roberts C.B.(1998) Corporate social reportingpractices in Western Europe: Le-gitimating corporate behaviors?

British Accounting Review , Vol.30, No. 1, 1-21.

Al-Khadash, Husam Aldeen (2003)The accounting disclosure of social and environmental activi-ties: A comparative study for theindustrial Jordanian shareholdingcompanies, Abhath Al-Yarmouk

Journal: Humanities and SocialSciences , Vol. 19, pp. 21-39.Available at SSRN: http:// ssrn.com/abstract=572821.

Al-Khater, K. & Naser, K. (2003)

Users perception of corporatesocial responsibility and account-ability: Evidence from an emerg-ing economy, Managerial Audit-ing Journal , Vol. 18, No. 6, pp.538-548.

Alsaeed, K. (2006) The association be-tween firm-specific characteristicsand disclosure, Managerial Au-diting Journal , Vol. 12, No. 6, pp.

476-498.

Andrew, H., Gul, A,. Guthrie. E. &Teoh. H.Y. (1989) A note oncorporate disclosure practices indeveloping countries: The case of Malaysia and Singapore, British

Accounting Review , Vol. 21, No.4, pp. 371-376.

Araya, (2006) Determinants of environ-mental disclosure and reporting incorporate Latin America, A dis-sertation presented to the Facultyof Graduate School, Yale Univer-

sity.Brown, N. & Deegan, C. (1998) The

public disclosure of environ-mental performance information:A dual test of media agenda, set-ting theory and legitimacy the-ory, Accounting and Business

Research, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 21-41.

Cowen, S., Ferrari, B., & Parker, L.D.(1987) The impact of corporatecharacteristics on social responsi-bility disclosure: A typology andfrequency-based analysis, Ac-counting, Organizations and Soci-ety , Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 111-122.

Davey, H.B. (1982) Corporate socialresponsibility disclosure in NewZealand: An empirical investiga-tion, Unpublished working pa-per, Massey University, Palm-erston North.

Dierkes, M. & Preston, E. (1977)Corporate social accounting andreporting for the physical environ-ment: A critical review and imple-mentation proposal, Accounting,Organizations and Society , Vol. 2,No. 1, pp. 3-22.

Ernst & Ernst, (1978) Social responsibil-ity disclosure: survey of Fortune500 annual reports . Cleveland.Ohio.


12/14


Fama, E.F. & Jensen, M.J. (1983)

Separation of Ownership andControl, Journal of Law and Economics , Vol. 26, No. 2, pp.301-325.

Firth, M. (1979) The Impact to Size,Stock Market Listing, and Audi-tors on Voluntary Disclosure inCorporate Annual Reports, Ac-counting and Business Research ,Vol. 9, pp. 273- 280.

Gray, R. (2001) Thirty years of socialaccounting, reporting and audit-

ing: What if anything we havelearnt, Business Ethics: A Euro-

pean Review , Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 9-15.

________, Owen, D. & Adam. C.A.(1996) Accounting and Account-ability: Changes and Challengesin Corporate Social and Environ-mental Reporting . London, UnitedKingdom: Prentice Hall.

________, ________ & Maunders, K.(1987) Corporate Social Report-ing: Accounting and Accountabil-ity. London: Prentice Hall.

Guthrie, J. & Mathews, M.R. (1985)Corporate social accounting inAustralian, In Preston,L.E. (Ed.),

Research in Corporate SocialPerformance and Policy , Vol. 7,pp. 251.

________ & Parker, L.D. (1990)Corporate Social Reporting: AComparative International Analy-sis, Advances in Public Interest

Accounting , 3, 159-175.Hackston, D. & Milne, Markus J. (1998)

Some Determinants of Socialand Environmental Disclosures inNew Zealand Companies, Ac-counting Auditing & Accountabil-ity Journal , Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 77-108.

Halme, M., & Huse, M. (1997) The

Influence of Corporate Govern-

ance, Industry and Country Fac-tors on Environmental Report-ing, Scandinavian Journal of

Management , Vol. 13, No. 2, pp.137-15.

Huafang, X. & Jianguo, Y. (2007)Ownership structure, board com-position and corporate voluntarydisclosure, Managerial Auditing

Journal , Vol. 22, No. 6, pp. 604-619.

Imam, S. (1999) Environmental report-

ing in Bangladesh, Social and Environmental Accounting , Vol.19, No. 2, pp. 12-13.

Jahamani, Y. (2003) Green accountingin developing countries: The caseof U.A.E and Jordan, Manage-rial Finance , Vol. 29, No. 8, pp.37-45.

Jordan Economic Reports (2006) Avail-a b l e o n l i n e a twww.bandqueaudi.com.

Naser, K. (1998) Comprehensives of disclosure of non-financial com-panies listed on Amman financialmarket, International Journal of Commerce and Management , Vol.2, No. 8, pp. 88-119.

________, Al-Khatib, K. & Karbhari, Y.(2002) Empirical evidence on thedepth of corporate informationdisclosure in developing coun-tries: The case of Jordan, Inter-national Journal of Commerce &

Management , Vol. 12, No. 3&,pp. 122-155.

Nik Ahmad, N. N., & Sulaiman, M.,(2004) Environmental disclosurein Malaysia annual reports: A le-gitimacy theory perspective, In-ternational Journal of Commerce&Management , Vol. 14, No. 1,pp. 44-58.

Patten, D.M. (1991) Exposure, Legiti-


13/14


macy, and Social Disclosure,

Journal of Accounting and PublicPolicy , Vol. 10, pp. 277-308._________ (1992) Intra-industry envi-

ronmental disclosures in responseto the Alaskan oil spill: A Note onlegitimacy theory, Accounting,Organization and Society , Vol. l7,No. 5, pp. 471-175.

Rahman, M. & Muttakin, M. (2005)Corporate Environmental Re-porting Practices in Bangladesh:A Study of Some Selected Com-

panies, The Cost and Manage-ment (Bangladesh) , Vol. 33, No.4, pp. 13-21.

Roberts, C. (1990) International trendsin social and employee reporting,London: ACCA. Occasional Re-search Paper , Vol. 6.

_________ (1991) Environmental dis-closures: A note on reportingpractices in Mainland Europe,

Accounting, Auditing & Account-ability Journal , Vol. 4, No. 3, pp.62-71.

The 2008 World Fact Book, Jordon Economy 2008 . Available online

at http://www.theodora.com/

w f b c u r r e n t / j o r d a n / jordan_economy.html.Thompson, P. & Zakaria, Z. (2004)

Corporate Social ResponsibilityReporting in Malaysia: Progressand prospects, Journal of Corpo-rate Citizenship , Vol. 13, pp. 125-136.

Tilt, C.A. (2000) The content and dis-closure of Australian corporateenvironmental polices, Account-ing, Auditing& Accountability

Journal , Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 90-212.

Tsang, E W.K. (1998) A longitudinalstudy of corporate social reportingin Singapore: The case of thebanking, food and beverage andhotel industries, Accounting, Au-diting & Accounting Journal , Vol.11, No. 5, pp. 624-635.

United Nations (1992) Environmentaldisclosures: International surveyof corporate reporting practices,

Report of the Secretary General ,New York: UN.


14/14

International Journals Call for Paper he IISTE, a U.S. publisher, is currently hosting the academic journals listed below. The peer review process of the following journalsually takes LESS THAN 14 business days and IISTE usually publishes a qualified article within 30 days . Authors shouldnd their full paper to the following email address. More information can be found in the IISTE website : www.iiste.org

usiness, Economics, Finance and Management PAPER SUBMISSION EMAIL

uropean Journal of Business and Management [email protected]

esearch Journal of Finance and Accounting [email protected]

urnal of Economics and Sustainable Development [email protected]

formation and Knowledge Management [email protected]

eveloping Country Studies [email protected]

dustrial Engineering Letters [email protected]

hysical Sciences, Mathematics and Chemistry PAPER SUBMISSION EMAIL

urnal of Natural Sciences Research [email protected]

hemistry and Materials Research [email protected]

athematical Theory and Modeling [email protected]

dvances in Physics Theories and Applications [email protected]

hemical and Process Engineering Research [email protected]

ngineering, Technology and Systems PAPER SUBMISSION EMAIL

omputer Engineering and Intelligent Systems [email protected]

novative Systems Design and Engineering [email protected]

urnal of Energy Technologies and Policy [email protected]

formation and Knowledge Management [email protected]

ontrol Theory and Informatics [email protected]

urnal of Information Engineering and Applications [email protected]

dustrial Engineering Letters [email protected]

etwork and Complex Systems [email protected]

nvironment, Civil, Materials Sciences PAPER SUBMISSION EMAIL

urnal of Environment and Earth Science [email protected]

ivil and Environmental Research [email protected]


ivil and Environmental Research [email protected]

fe Science, Food and Medical Sciences PAPER SUBMISSION EMAIL


urnal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare [email protected]

ood Science and Quality Management [email protected]

hemistry and Materials Research [email protected]

ducation, and other Social Sciences PAPER SUBMISSION EMAIL

urnal of Education and Practice [email protected]

urnal of Law, Policy and Globalization [email protected]

ew Media and Mass Communication [email protected]

urnal of Energy Technologies and Policy [email protected]

istorical Research Letter [email protected]

ublic Policy and Administration Research

[email protected] Affairs and Global Strategy [email protected]

esearch on Humanities and Social Sciences [email protected]

eveloping Country Studies [email protected]

rts and Design Studies [email protected]

Global knowledge sharing:

EBSCO, Index Copernicus, Ulrich'sPeriodicals Directory, JournalTOCS, PKPOpen Archives Harvester, BielefeldAcademic Search Engine, Elektronische

Zeitschriftenbibliothek EZB, Open J-Gate,OCLC WorldCat, Universe Digtial Library ,NewJour, Google Scholar.

IISTE is member of CrossRef . All journalshave high IC Impact Factor Values (ICV).
http://www.iiste.org/http://www.iiste.org/http://www.iiste.org/http://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/EJBMhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/EJBMhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/RJFAhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/RJFAhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEDS/indexhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEDS/indexhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/IKMhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/IKMhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/DCShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/DCShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/IELhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/IELhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JNSRhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JNSRhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CMRhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CMRhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/MTMhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/MTMhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/APTAhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/APTAhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CPERhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CPERhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CEIShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CEIShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/ISDEhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/ISDEhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JETPhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/IKMhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/IKMhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CTIhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CTIhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JIEAhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JIEAhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/IELhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/IELhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/NCShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/NCShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEEShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEEShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CERhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CERhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JNSRhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JNSRhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CERhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CERhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JNSRhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JNSRhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JBAHhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JBAHhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/FSQMhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/FSQMhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CMRhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CMRhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEPhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEPhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JLPGhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/NMMChttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/NMMChttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JETPhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/HRLhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/HRLhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/PPARhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/PPARhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/IAGShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/IAGShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/RHSShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/RHSShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/DCShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/DCShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/ADShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/ADShttp://www.crossref.org/01company/17crossref_members.htmlhttp://www.crossref.org/01company/17crossref_members.htmlhttp://www.crossref.org/01company/17crossref_members.htmlhttp://www.crossref.org/01company/17crossref_members.htmlhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/ADShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/DCShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/RHSShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/IAGShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/PPARhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/HRLhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JETPhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/NMMChttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JLPGhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEPhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CMRhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/FSQMhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JBAHhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JNSRhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CERhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JNSRhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CERhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEEShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/NCShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/IELhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JIEAhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CTIhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/IKMhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JETPhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/ISDEhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CEIShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CPERhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/APTAhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/MTMhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/CMRhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JNSRhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/IELhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/DCShttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/IKMhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEDS/indexhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/RJFAhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/EJBMhttp://www.iiste.org/

11.Vol. 0002 Call_for_Paper No. 2_KNI Ismail & AH Ibrahim_pp198-210

Documents

Transcript of 11.Vol. 0002 Call_for_Paper No. 2_KNI Ismail & AH Ibrahim_pp198-210