CAPIC REVIEW

Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Business Management

ISSN 0718-4662

logo revista Capic Review
Vol. 22 (2024): CAPIC REVIEW
Investigation

Adoption of sustainability indicators and board characteristics in Chile post NCG 461

PDF (Español (España))
  • Digna Azúa Álvarez,
  • Luis Jara
Digna Azúa Álvarez
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso
Luis Jara
Universidad de Santiago de Chile
DOI: https://doi.org/10.35928/cr.vol22.2024.222
Categories

Published 2024-05-17

Keywords

  • CMF,
  • board composition,
  • SASB standards,
  • NCG 461,
  • sustainability

How to Cite

Azúa Álvarez, D., & Jara, L. (2024). Adoption of sustainability indicators and board characteristics in Chile post NCG 461. CAPIC REVIEW, 22, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.35928/cr.vol22.2024.222

Copyright (c) 2024 Digna Azúa Álvarez, Luis Jara

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Abstract

The implementation of General Character Norm 461 in the annual reports published since 2023 has resulted in a significant increase in the disclosed information by companies under the supervision of the Financial Market Commission in Chile. This increase is evident in the mandatory provision of sustainability information, encompassing environmental, social, and governance aspects. Many companies had previously been voluntarily disclosing this information, primarily based on GRI standards. This study examines a sample of 66 companies that published their integrated reports for the year 2022 following the guidelines of General Character Norm 461. A descriptive approach was employed to analyze the implementation of sustainability indicators based on industries as outlined in the SASB standards and mandated by General Character Norm 461. Additionally, the main characteristics of the board composition of the companies in the sample were identified. The results reveal a prevalence of companies declaring engagement in a single industry. The industry with the highest representation is "Electric Companies and Electric Generators," comprising 9 companies. A group of companies was observed to complementarily utilize the GRI standard in the preparation of sustainability information. Furthermore, a limited presence of women was noted within the boards of the companies in the sample.

PDF (Español (España))

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Adams, R. B., & Ferreira, D. (2009). Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of financial economics, 94(2), 291-309. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2008.10.007
  2. Bear, S., Rahman, N., & Post, C. (2010). The impact of board diversity and gender composition on corporate social responsibility and firm reputation. Journal of business ethics, 97, 207-221. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0505-2
  3. Ben-Amar, W., Chang, M., & McIlkenny, P. (2017). Board gender diversity and corporate response to sustainability initiatives: Evidence from the carbon disclosure project. Journal of business ethics, 142(2), 369-383. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2759-1
  4. Borgatti, S., Everett, M. & Johnson, J. (2013). Analyzing social networks. London: SAGE
  5. Borgatti, S., Everett, M., & Freeman, L. (2002). Ucinet 6 for Windows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard: Analytic Technologies.
  6. Burgess, Z., & Tharenou, P. (2002). Women board directors: Characteristics of the few. Journal of Business Ethics, 37, 39-49.
  7. Carmo, C., Alves, S., & Quaresma, B. (2022). Women on boards in Portuguese listed companies: Does gender diversity influence financial performance? Sustainability, 14(10), 6186. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su14106186
  8. Comisión para el Mercado Financiero -CMF-. (2021). Norma de Carácter General (PDF). Recuperado de: https://www.cmfchile.cl/normativa/ncg_461_2021.pdf
  9. Fifka, M. S. (2013). Corporate responsibility reporting and its determinants in comparative perspective–a review of the empirical literature and a meta‐analysis. Business Strategy and the Environment, 22(1), 1-35.
  10. Fuente, J. A., García-Sanchez, I. M., & Lozano, M. B. (2017). The role of the board of directors in the adoption of GRI guidelines for the disclosure of CSR information. Journal of Cleaner Production, 141, 737-750. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.155
  11. Gong, M., Zhang, Z., Jia, M., & Walls, J. L. (2021). Does having a critical mass of women on the board result in more corporate environmental actions? Evidence from China. Group & Organization Management, 46(6), 1106-1144. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601121998892
  12. GRI (30 de agosto de 2023). GRI y la Fundación IFRS. Recuperado de: https://www.globalreporting.org/public-policy-partnerships/the-reporting-landscape/#IFRS
  13. Gunawan, J., & Susilo, H. (2021). Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Reputation, and Share Price: a Study of Consumer Goods Industries Using Sustainable Accounting Standard Board (Sasb) Disclosures. Jurnal Magister Akuntansi Trisakti Vol, 8(1). Doi: https://doi.org/10.25105/jmat.v8i1.8770
  14. Harjoto, M., Laksmana, I., & Lee, R. (2015). Board diversity and corporate social responsibility. Journal of business ethics, 132, 641-660. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2343-0
  15. Ibáñez, J. E., Guerra, L., Loyola, F., Ciappa, C., Fermandois, E. y Albornoz, B. (2022). A diez años del lanzamiento de los Principios Rectores sobre las Empresas y los Derechos Humanos: herramientas e indicadores para medir su implementación en las empresas en Chile. En Centro de Políticas Públicas (ed.), Propuestas para Chile. Concurso de Políticas Públicas 2021. Santiago: Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, pp. 269-301.
  16. International Accounting Standards Board –IASB– (2022). Normas Internacionales de Información Financiera, Fundación IFRS, Londres.
  17. Jones, M. J., & Shoemaker, P. A. (1994). Accounting narratives: A review of empirical studies of content and readability. Journal of Accounting Literature, 13, 142.
  18. Korenkiewicz, D., & Maennig, W. (2023). Impact of women on corporate boards of directors on product quality. Journal of Management and Governance, 1-34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-023-09677-6
  19. Krippendorff, K. (1990). Metodología de análisis de contenido. Teoría y práctica. Madrid: Paidós Ibérica Ediciones.
  20. Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2011). Beyond constant comparison qualitative data analysis: Using NVivo. School Psychology Quarterly, 26(1), 70-84.
  21. Li, J., Sun, X., Dai, X., Zhang, J., & Liu, B. (2022). Policy analysis on recycling of solid waste resources in china—content analysis method of CNKI literature based on NVivo. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(13), 7919. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19137919
  22. Molina, B. R., y Giacommozi, A. M. (2016). La participación de mujeres y hombres en los directorios de las empresas más exitosas de Estados Unidos: ¿tiene alguna relación con el rendimiento de la compañía? Contabilidad y Negocios, 11(22), 102-114.
  23. ONU. (30 de agosto de 2023). La Agenda para el Desarrollo Sostenible. Recuperado de: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/es/development-agenda/
  24. Pizzi, S., Principale, S., & De Nuccio, E. (2023). Material sustainability information and reporting standards. Exploring the differences between GRI and SASB. Meditari Accountancy Research, 31(6), 1654-1674. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-11-2021-1486
  25. SASB (30 de agosto de 2023). The evolution of SASB Standards. Recuperado de: https://sasb.org/about/
  26. Schoonjans, E., Hottenrott, H. y Buchwald (2023). Welcome on Board? Appointment Dynamics of Women as Directors. Journal of Business Ethics. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05451-8.
  27. Sustainability Accounting Standards Board –SASB– (2018). SASB Standards. Recuperado de: https://sasb.org/standards/download/
  28. Torres, I. y Borges, H. (2022). Mujeres en los Directorios de empresas chilenas: ¿presión o convicción?, CAPIC Review, 20(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.35928/cr.vol 20.2022.131
  29. Tóth, Á., Szigeti, C., & Suta, A. (2021). Carbon accounting measurement with digital non-financial corporate reporting and a comparison to European automotive companies statements. Energies, 14(18), 5607. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/en14185607
  30. Zhu, J., Lin, H., Yang, X., Yang, X., Jiang, P., & Marin Del Valle, T. (2022). Social Network Relationships between Biomass Industry Stakeholders in the Agricultural Waste Power Generation Industry—A Case of Northern Jiangsu, China. Sustainability, 14(1), 571. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su14010571
  31. Zorio-Grima, A., García-Benau, M. A., y Sierra-García, L. (2015). Aseguramiento del informe de sostenibilidad en España y Latinoamérica. Innovar, 25(SPE), 85-101.

CHILEAN UNIVERSITIES

FOREIGN UNIVERSITIES

Code under GNU license: OJS PKP