Please wait a minute...

Frontiers of Engineering Management

Front. Eng    2019, Vol. 6 Issue (4) : 564-574     https://doi.org/10.1007/s42524-019-0067-7
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Relationship between Chief Executive Officer characteristics and corporate environmental information disclosure in Thailand
Dayuan LI, Aiqi LIN, Lu ZHANG()
Collaborative Innovation Center of Resource-Conserving & Environment-Friendly Society and Ecological Civilization, School of Business, Central South University, Changsha 410083, China
Download: PDF(157 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

This study focuses on the influence of Chief Executive Officer (CEO) characteristics on environmental information disclosure (EID) in the annual reports of companies listed on the Stock Exchange of Thailand. A regression analysis method is used to explore the relationship between CEO characteristics and corporate environmental disclosure. Pollution-intensive companies are taken as the samples in this study. Results show that financial expertise, educational level, and tenure of CEOs are positively correlated with corporate EID. By contrast, age or gender of CEOs is insignificantly related to EID.

Keywords CEO characteristics      environmental information disclosure      Thailand     
Corresponding Author(s): Lu ZHANG   
Just Accepted Date: 29 October 2019   Online First Date: 26 November 2019    Issue Date: 05 December 2019
 Cite this article:   
Dayuan LI,Aiqi LIN,Lu ZHANG. Relationship between Chief Executive Officer characteristics and corporate environmental information disclosure in Thailand[J]. Front. Eng, 2019, 6(4): 564-574.
 URL:  
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fem/EN/10.1007/s42524-019-0067-7
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fem/EN/Y2019/V6/I4/564
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
Dayuan LI
Aiqi LIN
Lu ZHANG
Industry Number of firms Percentage
Textile industry 7 11.67%
Coal industry 5 8.33%
Aluminum 4 6.67%
Petrochemical 8 13.33%
Steel 12 20%
Energy 8 13.33%
Construction materials 3 5%
Metal 1 1.67%
Chemicals 7 11.67%
Mining 1 1.67%
Pharmaceuticals 1 1.67%
Cement 3 5%
Total 60 100%
Tab.1  Sample description
(1) Corporate environmental policy information (5) Environmental consumption and pollution control information
1.1 Environmental policy, objectives, and annual plans 5.1 Annual consumption of various resources, such as material, fuel, and power
1.2 Environmental measures and strategies 5.2 Type, quantity, concentration, and target of gas emissions
1.3 Corporate executives’ attitude toward environmental protection 5.3 Type, quantity, concentration, and target of wastewater
1.4 Internal control system for environmental protection 5.4 Types, quantities, and targets for disposal and treatment of solid waste/toxic substances
(2) Environmental management activities and initiatives (6) Improvement of corporate environmental performance
2.1 Corporate environmental management systems 6.1 Unit products (such as raw materials, water, and energy) to reduce resource consumption
2.2 Environmental system certification 6.2 Unit products (such as exhaust, water, and major pollutants) to reduce pollutant emissions
2.3 Construction of corporate clean production 6.3 Environmental benefits, such as income, waste, environmental revenue, and wastewater cost savings
2.4 Construction and implementation of environmental protection facilities 6.4 Environmental benefits from energy conservation, pollutant reduction, or resource utilization
2.5 Received environmental awards (7) Compliance of the environmental law
2.6 Environmental protection-related employee education and training 7.1 Corporate compliance with air pollution
(3) Environmental issues and impact information 7.2 Corporate compliance with wastewater pollution
3.1 Effect of production and operation of a corporation on the environment 7.3 Corporate compliance with noise pollution
3.2 Environmental impact information on enterprise products and their production processes 7.4 Legality of the disposal of general industrial solid waste and hazardous waste
3.3 Paying emission fees to the government 7.5 Safety of the disposal of toxic or hazardous waste
3.4 Disclosure of detailed information related to environmental incidents 7.6 Sewage discharge permit and actual expenditure
3.5 Impact of corporate environmental responsibility on the company’s financial situation (8) Environmental charities’ activities and other information
3.6 The corporation has strict environmental regulations or none 8.1 Environmental charities, such as environmental education and afforestation
(4) Technology, investment, and expenditure information related to the environment 8.2 Potential environmental impacts of global warming, ozone layer, acid rain, or eutrophication of water bodies
4.1 Corporate investments in environmental governance 8.3 Other environmental information
4.2 Waste treatment is released
4.3 Waste recycling, utilization, and energy saving
4.4 Received environmental awards
4.5 Received tax deductions
Tab.2  Contents of EID.
Variable N Mean SD Max Min
EID 540 40.17 19.43 82 0
Expertise 540 0.25 0.43 1.00 0.00
Edu 540 0.92 0.27 1.00 0.00
Age 540 2.02 0.73 3.00 0.00
Tenure 540 1.23 0.26 1.89 0.30
Gender 540 0.08 0.28 1.00 0.00
Size 540 6.57 1.22 9.54 3.58
Firm-age 540 20.28 13.91 78.00 2.00
REG 540 0.25 0.43 1.00 0.00
TOP1 540 0.39 21.13 0.9994 0.0470
BI 540 0.41 0.11 0.93 0.16
Slack 540 -1.74 1.74 3.83 -8.76
Tab.3  Descriptive statistics of quantitative variables
  EID Expertise Edu Age Tenure Gender Size Firm-age REG TOP1 BI Slack
EID 1
Expertise 0.046 1
Edu 0.292*** 0.072 1
Age 0.114*** -0.122* 0.132* 1
Tenure 0.155*** -0.023 -0.025 -0.031 1
Gender -0.074* -0.143* 0.088* 0.056 0.012 1
Size 0.319*** -0.096* 0.118* 0.117* 0.136* -0.013 1
Firm-age 0.187*** -0.065 0.033 -0.041 0.901* -0.028 0.130* 1
REG 0.308*** -0.052 0.134* -0.069 -0.031 -0.157* 0.049 0.062 1
TOP1 -0.177*** 0.231* -0.017 -0.113* 0.015 -0.191* -0.036 -0.024 -0.122* 1
BI 0.223*** 0.024 0.026 -0.108* 0.151* -0.091* 0.006 0.210* 0.256* -0.024 1
Slack 0.140*** -0.159* 0.165* -0.038 0.173* 0.026 0.058 0.140* 0.127* -0.147* 0.025 1
Tab.4  Correlation analysis
Variable (1) EID (2) EID
Size 0.120**
(0.022)
0.127**
(0.017)
Firm-age 0.032***
(0.000)
0.004
(0.716)
REG 0.031
(0.686)
0.057
(0.440)
TOP1 -0.003
(0.374)
-0.001
(0.567)
BI 0.647**
(0.028)
0.625**
(0.036)
Slack 0.062**
(0.028)
0.049**
(0.021)
Expertise 0.193**
(0.047)
Edu 0.360**
(0.023)
Age 0.036
(0.494)
Tenure 1.096**
(0.050)
Gender -0.062
(0.555)
_cons 2.101***
(0.000)
0.760
(0.264)
R-squared 0.101 0.147
Tab.5  Regression analysis
Variable (1) EID (2) EID
Size 0.117**
(0.011)
0.123***
(0.005)
Firm-age 0.027***
(0.000)
0.009
(0.431)
REG 0.057
(0.400)
0.053
(0.431)
TOP1 -0.002
(0.360)
-0.002
(0.441)
BI 0.517**
(0.034)
0.517**
(0.044)
Slack 0.045*
(0.052)
0.032**
(0.020)
Expertise 0.230**
(0.041)
Edu 0.387**
(0.026)
Age 0.031
(0.563)
Tenure 0.637
(0.154)
Gender -0.124
(0.444)
_cons 2.2889***
(0.000)
1.323**
(0.020)
R-squared 0.118 0.172
Tab.6  Robustness test
1 H Al-Shaer, M Zaman (2016). Board gender diversity and sustainability reporting quality. Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics, 12(3): 210–222
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcae.2016.09.001
2 M D Amore, M Bennedsen, B Larsen, P Rosenbaum (2019). CEO education and corporate environmental footprint. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 94: 254–273
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2019.02.001
3 N A Amran, M Yusof, R Ishak, N Aripin (2014). Do characteristics of CEO and chairman influence government-linked companies performance? Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 109: 799–803
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.546
4 P Bansal, K Roth (2000). Why companies go green: A model of ecological responsiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4): 717–736
5 III V L Barker, G C Mueller (2002). CEO characteristics and firm R&D spending. Management Science Journal, 48(6): 782–801
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.48.6.782.187
6 W Ben-Amar, P McIlkenny (2015). Board effectiveness and the voluntary disclosure of climate change information. Business Strategy and the Environment, 24(8): 704–719
https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1840
7 D M Buss (2005). The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons
8 W T Chen, G S Zhou, X K Zhu (2019). CEO tenure and corporate social responsibility performance. Journal of Business Research, 95: 292–302
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.08.018
9 E C M Cheng, S M Courtenay (2006). Board composition, regulatory regime and voluntary disclosure. International Journal of Accounting, 41(3): 262–289
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intacc.2006.07.001
10 C H Cho, D M Patten (2007). The role of environmental disclosures as tools of legitimacy: A research note. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32(7–8): 639–647
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2006.09.009
11 C H Cho, R W Roberts, D M Patten (2010). The language of US corporate environmental disclosure. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 35(4): 431–443
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2009.10.002
12 M Cordano, I H Frieze (2000). Pollution reduction preferences of US environmental managers: Applying Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4): 627–641
13 I Criado-Jiménez, M Fernández-Chulián, C Larrinage-González, F J Husillos-Carqués (2008). Compliance with mandatory environmental reporting in financial statements: The case of Spain (2001–2003). Journal of Business Ethics, 79(3): 245–262
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9375-7
14 M A Delmas, M W Toffel (2008). Organizational responses to environmental demands: Opening the black box. Strategic Management Journal, 29(10): 1027–1055
https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.701
15 F Doni, A Corvino, S B Martini (2019). Servitization and sustainability actions. Evidence from European manufacturing companies. Journal of Environmental Management, 234: 367–378
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.01.004 pmid: 30639860
16 S El Ghoul, O Guedhami, H Wang, C C Y Kwok (2016). Family control and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Banking & Finance, 73: 131–146
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2016.08.008
17 M F Evans, S M Gilpatric, L Liu (2009). Regulation with direct benefits of information disclosure and imperfect monitoring. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 57(3): 284–292
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2008.08.003
18 S Finkelstein, D C Hambrick (1990). Top-management-team tenure and organizational outcomes: The moderating role of managerial discretion. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(3): 484–503
https://doi.org/10.2307/2393314
19 S Finkelstein, D Hambrick, A A Cannella (1996). Strategic Leadership. St. Paul, MN: West Educational Publishing
20 S Finkelstein, S F B Cannella, D C Hambrick, A A Cannella (2009). Strategic Leadership: Theory and Research on Executives, Top Management Teams, and Boards. New York: Oxford University Press
21 A Forte (2004). Antecedents of managers moral reasoning. Journal of Business Ethics, 51(4): 315–347
https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000032501.59580.33
22 R E Freeman, J McVea (2001). A stakeholder approach to strategic management. In: Hitt M A, Freeman R E, Harrison J S, eds. Handbook of Strategic Management. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 189–207
23 R E Freeman (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press
24 R E Freeman, A C Wicks, B Parmar (2004). Stakeholder theory and the corporate objective revisited. Organization Science, 15(3): 364–369
https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0066
25 K Fukukawa, W E Shafer, G M Lee (2007). Values and attitudes toward social and environmental accountability: A study of MBA students. Journal of Business Ethics, 71(4): 381–394
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-005-3893-y
26 I M García-Sánchez, J Martínez-Ferrero (2019). Chief executive officer ability, corporate social responsibility, and financial performance: The moderating role of the environment. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(4): 542–555
27 E George, P Chattopadhyay, S B Sitkin, J Barden (2006). Cognitive underpinnings of institutional persistence and change: A framing perspective. Academy of Management Review, 31(2): 347–365
https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2006.20208685
28 H P Gunz, R M Jalland (1996). Managerial careers and business strategies. Academy of Management Review, 21(3): 718–756
https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1996.9702100313
29 D C Hambrick (2007). Upper echelons theory: An update. Academy of Management Review, 32(2): 334–343
https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.24345254
30 D C Hambrick, P A Mason (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9(2): 193–206
https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1984.4277628
31 M A Harjoto, I Laksmana, Y W Yang (2018). Board diversity and corporate investment oversight. Journal of Business Research, 90: 40–47
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.04.033
32 J J He, X Tian (2013). The dark side of analyst coverage: The case of innovation. Journal of Financial Economics, 109(3): 856–878
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2013.04.001
33 B E Hermalin, M S Weisbach (1991). The effects of board composition and direct incentives on firm performance. Financial Management, 20(4): 101–112
https://doi.org/10.2307/3665716
34 P Herrmann, D K Datta (2006). CEO experiences: Effects on the choice of FDI entry mode. Journal of Management Studies, 43(4): 755–778
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00610.x
35 C Herzig, T Viere, R Burritt, S Schaltegger (2006). Understanding and supporting management decision-making—South East Asian case studies on environmental management accounting. In: Sustainability Accounting and Reporting. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer, 491–507
36 B Holmstrom (2005). Pay without performance and the managerial power hypothesis: A comment. Journal of Corporation Law, 30(4): 703–715
37 S N N Htay, H M A Rashid, M A Adnan, A K M Meera (2012). Impact of corporate governance on social and environmental information disclosure of Malaysian listed banks: Panel data analysis. Asian Journal of Finance & Accounting, 4(1): 1–24
38 S K Huang (2013). The impact of CEO characteristics on corporate sustainable development. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 20(4): 234–244
https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1295
39 D Huitema, S Meijerink (2009). Understanding and managing water transitions: A policy science perspective. In: Amsterdam Conference on Earth System Governance. Amsterdam, Netherlands
40 E Hyun, D Yang, H Jung, K Hong (2016). Women on boards and corporate social responsibility. Sustainability, 8(4): 300
https://doi.org/10.3390/su8040300
41 G E Iatridis (2013). Environmental disclosure quality: Evidence on environmental performance, corporate governance and value relevance. Emerging Markets Review, 14: 55–75
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ememar.2012.11.003
42 I M García-Sánchez, L Rodríguez-Domínguez, I Gallego-Álvarez (2013). CEO qualities and codes of ethics. European Journal of Law and Economics, 35(2): 295–312
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-011-9248-5
43 M C Jensen (2002). Value maximization, stakeholder theory and the corporate objective function. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(2): 235–256
https://doi.org/10.2307/3857812
44 M I Jizi, A Salama, R Dixon, R Stratling (2014). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility disclosure: Evidence from the US banking sector. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(4): 601–615
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1929-2
45 J U Kalu, A Buang, G U Aliagha (2016). Determinants of voluntary carbon disclosure in the corporate real estate sector of Malaysia. Journal of Environmental Management, 182: 519–524
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.08.011 pmid: 27529312
46 B Kim, S Lee, K H Kang (2018). The moderating role of CEO narcissism on the relationship between uncertainty avoidance and CSR. Tourism Management, 67: 203–213
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.01.018
47 A Kollmuss, J Agyeman (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8(3): 239–260
https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620220145401
48 B W Lewis, J L Walls, G W S Dowell (2014). Difference in degrees: CEO characteristics and firm environmental disclosure. Strategic Management Journal, 35(5): 712–722
https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2127
49 D Li, M Huang, S Ren, X Chen, L Ning (2018). Environmental legitimacy, green innovation, and corporate carbon disclosure: Evidence from CDP China 100. Journal of Business Ethics, 150(4): 1089–1104
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3187-6
50 L Liao, L Luo, Q L Tang (2015). Gender diversity, board independence, environmental committee and greenhouse gas disclosure. British Accounting Review, 47(4): 409–424
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2014.01.002
51 M C Ramón-Llorens, E García-Meca, A Duréndez (2017). Influence of CEO characteristics in family firms internationalization. International Business Review, 26(4): 786–799
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2017.01.007
52 S McCarthy, B Oliver, S Song (2017). Corporate social responsibility and CEO confidence. Journal of Banking & Finance, 75: 280–291
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2016.11.024
53 X H Meng, S X Zeng, J J Shi, G Y Qi, Z B Zhang (2014). The relationship between corporate environmental performance and environmental disclosure: An empirical study in China. Journal of Environmental Management, 145: 357–367
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.07.009 pmid: 25113230
54 T J Mock, S S Rao, R P Srivastava (2013). The development of worldwide sustainability reporting assurance. Australian Accounting Review, 23(4): 280–294
https://doi.org/10.1111/auar.12013
55 M A Naseem, S Riaz, R U Rehman, A Ikram, F Malik (2017). Impact of board characteristics on corporate social responsibility disclosure. Journal of Applied Business Research, 33(4): 801–810
56 M Nekhili, H Nagati, T Chtioui, A Nekhili (2017). Gender-diverse board and the relevance of voluntary CSR reporting. International Review of Financial Analysis, 50: 81–100
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2017.02.003
57 W Y Oh, Y K Chang, R Jung (2018). Experience-based human capital or fixed paradigm problem? CEO tenure, contextual influences, and corporate social (ir) responsibility. Journal of Business Research, 90: 325–333
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.05.034
58 R Orens, A M Reheul (2013). Do CEO demographics explain cash holdings in SMEs? European Management Journal, 31(6): 549–563
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2013.01.003
59 P Ane (2012). An assessment of the quality of environmental information disclosure of corporation in China. Systems Engineering Procedia, 5: 420–426
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sepro.2012.04.064
60 C Post, N Rahman, C McQuillen (2015). From board composition to corporate environmental performance through sustainability-themed alliances. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(2): 423–435
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2231-7
61 E M Reid, M W Toffel (2009). Responding to public and private politics: Corporate disclosure of climate change strategies. Strategic Management Journal, 30(11): 1157–1178
https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.796
62 K H Rupley, D Brown, R S Marshall (2012). Governance, media and the quality of environmental disclosure. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 31(6): 610–640
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2012.09.002
63 S Sharma (2000). Managerial interpretations and organizational context as predictors of corporate choice of environmental strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4): 681–697
64 S Sharma, A Pablo, H Vredenburg (1999). Corporate environmental responsiveness strategies. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 35(1): 87–108
https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886399351008
65 S Sheikh (2018). Is corporate social responsibility a value-increasing investment? Evidence from antitakeover provisions. Global Finance Journal, 38: 1–12
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2017.08.002
66 T Sitthipongpanich, P Polsiri (2015). Do CEO and board characteristics matter? A study of Thai family firms. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 6(2): 119–129
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfbs.2015.01.002
67 Y M Suárez-Rico, M Gómez-Villegas, M A García-Benau (2018). Exploring twitter for CSR disclosure: Influence of CEO and firm characteristics in Latin American companies. Sustainability, 10(8): 2617
https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082617
68 M Suttipun, P Stanton (2012). A study of environmental disclosures by Thai listed companies on websites. Procedia Economics and Finance, 2: 9–15
https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(12)00059-7
69 I W K Ting, N A B Azizan, Q L Kweh (2015). Upper echelon theory revisited: The relationship between CEO personal characteristics and financial leverage decision. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 195: 686–694
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.276
70 D A V Brust, C Liston-Heyes (2010). Environmental management intentions: An empirical investigation of Argentina’s polluting firms. Journal of Environmental Management, 91(5): 1111–1122
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.01.005 pmid: 20110148
71 F Wang, Z H Cheng, C Keung, A Reisner (2015). Impact of manager characteristics on corporate environmental behavior at heavy-polluting firms in Shaanxi, China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 108: 707–715
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.059
72 J Wei, Z Ouyang, H A Chen (2018). CEO characteristics and corporate philanthropic giving in an emerging market: The case of China. Journal of Business Research, 87: 1–11
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.02.018
73 M F Wiersema, K A Bantel (1992). Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Academy of Management Journal, 3(1): 91–121
74 W L Yew, Z Zhu (2019). Innovative autocrats? Environmental innovation in public participation in China and Malaysia. Journal of Environmental Management, 234: 28–35
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.12.081 pmid: 30599327
75 L Zhang, S G Ren, X H Chen, D Y Li, D J Y Yin (2018). CEO Hubris and firm pollution: State and market contingencies in a transitional economy. Journal of Business Ethics: 1–20
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3987-y
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed