Search

In response to demand from investors and other stakeholders, companies have increased voluntary disclosure of climate change-related policies and performance. Information intermediaries have correspondingly emerged to provide needed credibility and commensurability of climate disclosures. However, the provision of performance ratings and lax audit capabilities creates opportunities for firms to manipulate those ratings for impression management. This article explains how firms may attain an intermediary's favorable assessment of climate performance using varied methods of strategic disclosure. Using data from a prominent climate intermediary (CDP, formerly the Carbon Disclosure Project), I find that strategic disclosure is widespread and effective in attaining higher ratings, particularly through disclosure of forward-looking factors, suggesting that ratings may not be an accurate indicator of a firm's true underlying performance. This article contributes to commensuration and impression management literatures, offers guidance for mechanism design to improve the reliability of intermediated voluntary disclosure, and highlights important areas for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Voluntary nonfinancial disclosures are an increasingly relevant element of corporate sustainability strategies. Despite their importance, research is conflicted on how the transparency of such disclosures affects market and nonmarket outcomes. A possible reason is that transparency consists of multiple dimensions, each of which may be valued differently by market and nonmarket actors. Drawing on insights from attribution theory, we explore the effects that different information traits of voluntary disclosures have on market and nonmarket actors. We suggest that the completeness, clarity, and accuracy of voluntary nonfinancial disclosures affect both market (i.e., market valuation) and nonmarket (i.e., reputation risk) reactions. Using data from the Carbon Disclosure Project, we find that these actors react differently to three distinct dimensions of transparency: completeness, clarity, and accuracy. Our findings highlight the importance of the nuanced relationship between transparency and market and nonmarket actor reactions, which has implications for broader, sustainability-related outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Voluntary environmental programs (VEPs) offer opportunities for companies and stakeholders to improve environmental outcomes valued by society in the absence of regulatory mandates. Research has addressed numerous antecedents for firm adoption of VEPs, enhancing knowledge of how stakeholders and firms engage on substantive issues of public importance. However, program adoption is dynamic, and stagnant participation rates may threaten program longevity when firms do not realize expected benefits. Prior literature has not sufficiently addressed the factors that compel firms to drop out. In this study I articulate three consequential drivers of firm commitment to VEPs—transparency, effort, and achievement—and empirically estimate their effects on firm disengagement from one such prominent program: CDP (formerly known as Carbon Disclosure Project). Findings indicate that firm transparency and effort represent powerful commitment mechanisms driving continued program participation. This study contributes to theory over multiple literatures related to VEP participation and offers practical guidance for both VEPs and firms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]