Short communication

Determinants of corporate social and environmental

reporting in Hong Kong: a research note
Simon S. Gao a, , Saeed Heravi b, 1 , Jason Zezheng Xiao b, 2
a

School of Accounting and Economics, Napier University, Craiglockhart Campus, Edinburgh EH14 1DJ,
Scotland, UK
b
Cardiff Business School, Cardiff University, Colum Drive, Cardiff CF10 3EU, UK

Abstract
The patterns and determinants of corporate social and environmental disclosure (CSED) in Hong
Kong (HK) are examined by analysing 154 annual reports of 33 HK listed companies from 1993 to
1997. The research nds that industry difference has an impact on the amount, content theme and
location of CSED. There is a positive correlation between company size and the level of CSED. Utility
companies disclose more CSED than property and banking rms.
2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Annual reports; Hong Kong; Social and environmental voluntary disclosure

1. Introduction
Corporate reporting practices including corporate social and environmental disclosure
(CSED) are different between countries (Hope, 2003). The literature has provided little
systematic empirical examination of the patterns of CSED in a newly industrialized country.
It would be dangerous to generalize the results of studies on developed nations to newly
developed countries as the stage of economic development is likely to be an important factor
affecting CSED practices (Tsang, 1998). Although anecdotal evidence suggests a low level

Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 131 455 4446; fax: +44 131 455 4460.
E-mail addresses: s.gao@napier.ac.uk (S.S. Gao), haraviS@cardiff.ac.uk (S. Heravi), xiao@cf.ac.uk
(J.Z. Xiao).
1
Tel.: +44 29 20875787; fax: +44 29 20874419.
2
Tel.: +44 29 20875374; fax: +44 29 20874419.
0155-9982/$ see front matter 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.accfor.2005.01.002

234

S.S. Gao et al. / Accounting Forum 29 (2005) 233242

of CSED by HK companies compared to companies in many developed economies, little

evidence is available concerning current CSED in HK. Lynn (1992) provides a study of
CSED in HK, however, Lynns study, based on an analysis of the annual reports prepared
for 1989, needs to be updated, as in the 1990s substantial changes took place in HKs
economy (including the 1997 handling over of HK sovereignty back to China) which have
inuenced HKs corporate behaviour and disclosure practice.
This study aims to investigate the patterns and determinants of current CSED in HK
by examining the amount, content themes and location of CSED through content analysis
of 154 annual reports prepared by HK companies from 1993 to 1997. The ndings of this
study, which can be compared with the earlier ones by Lynn (1992), provide an insight into
the changes and current practice of CSED in HK.
HK companies have traditionally faced little external pressures for disclosing social
and environmental information (Lynn, 1992; Ng, 2000). Although Friends of the Earth
established its ofces in HK in 1983, it has made little fundamental difference on the way
HK businesses operate. Pollution, safety and many other social problems have accompanied
economic achievements causing the HK government to introduce some environmental and
social related regulations. Enforcement of social and environmental legislation has been
lax. Ng (2000, p. 65) observes: As yet, Hong Kong does not stipulate regulations on how
to account for environmental factors and include such into nancial data. Jaggi and Zhao
(1996) thus call for making CSED mandatory in HK.

2. Literature review
CSED has attracted considerable academic research since the 1980s (for reviews see
Deegan (2002), Gray (2002), and Mathews (1997)). Research on voluntary disclosure has
attempted to examine the nature and patterns of CSED (e.g., Buhr & Freedman, 2001) and
investigate the determinants, such as size, prot and industry afliation, of CSED (e.g.,
Cormier & Magnan, 2003). The literature recognizes that CSED practices are different
across countries (Adams, Hill, & Roberts, 1998) and inter alia, between developed and
developing countries (Imam, 2000), and the nature and patterns of CSED vary between
different sectors (Gray, Javad, Power, & Sinclair, 2001). Surveys of CSED practices in
the western developed countries reveal that companies place the greatest emphasis on the
disclosure of human resources (Gray et al., 2001), including employee numbers and remuneration, equal opportunities, employee share ownership, disability policy and employee
training. Little disclosure exists in sensitive areas such as trade union activities, pay awards
and redundancy schemes and costs (Adams et al., 1998). The vast majority of disclosures
are qualitative in nature.
Although determinants have been identied, mixed ndings are presented in prior studies
for some commonly examined variables such as size, industry classication and ownership
structure. For example, Gray et al. (2001) suggest that large and high-prole companies
disclosed more CSED than other companies, while Cowen, Ferri, and Parker (1987) nd that
size is related only for certain areas of disclosure. Lynn (1992) nds no relationship between
company size and the level of CSED. Hackston and Milne (1996) report no relationship
between prot measures and CSED.

S.S. Gao et al. / Accounting Forum 29 (2005) 233242

235

Four dedicated studies of CSED in HK have been published, but of these, only Lynns
(1992) research covers both social and environmental reporting. Based on 264 HK public companies annual reports for 1989, he nds that HK had the lowest rate of CSED
of any jurisdiction; only 17 companies made disclosures with an average history of disclosure of 2.5 years. HKs reporting was not under pressure from consumers and other
interest groups. The political arrangement at the time made social issues a less important topic. The market and the whole economy were traditionally considered a casino
(p. 109), which paid little attention to public interests. HK society was family-centred;
family responsibility overwhelmed corporate responsibility. Lynn nds that industry membership had a signicant relationship with CSED. While the property and construction companies disclosed least, two-thirds of utility companies account for more than a
third of all those making disclosures. Lynn also nds that size had no impact on CSED
in HK.
Ho, Ng, and Ng (1994) nds a low level of environmental disclosure made by HK
companies, and comment: . . . it is very disappointing to nd that very few companies indeed
disclose such information to the public through their annual reports. Also the disclosures
are crude and limited to non-nancial narrative statements expressing the rms support
on environmental protection and reporting on progress of environmental project (p. 62).
Jaggi and Zhao (1996) reports that, among 100 sampled HK companies, only 13 had been
consistently disclosing environmental information from 1992 to 1994, only 3 provided
quantitative information, and most companies did not disclose any nancial information on
their environmental activities. All disclosures were located in the directors report, the annual
review, or the chairmans statement. Their study indicates the existence of an expectation
gap between what the managers believe should be disclosed and what was actually being
disclosed.
Ng (2000) nds that 9% of the 200 HK listed companies reported environmental information in the published accounts and no company disclosed nancial data concerning
environmental performance. Disclosures were contained in either the directors report or
the chairmans statement. The disclosures were found to be general statements indicating
company support for environmental protection and describing projects undertaken to reduce
pollution and save energy and resources.
Williams and Pei (1999) compare Web-based CSED in Australia, Singapore, HK, and
Malaysia and nd that the level of disclosure is higher in the rst two countries. They suggest
that CSED is heavily inuenced by national rather than global factors and concerns. Their
study also nds that HK companies disclose more social information than environmental
information.

3. Hypotheses and research design

3.1. Hypotheses
3.1.1. Size effect on CSED
Prior studies (e.g., Cormier & Magnan, 2003) have found a positive relationship between
company size and the overall level of disclosure in a number of countries. However, the

236

S.S. Gao et al. / Accounting Forum 29 (2005) 233242

size effect has not been studied recently in the context of HKs CSED. Hence the following
hypothesis follows.
H1. There is a positive association between company size and the level of CSED.
3.1.2. Industry effect on the level of CSED
Industry memberships have been identied by many theoretical and empirical researchers
as a factor that affects CSED (e.g., Cormier & Magnan, 2003). Different industries have
different characteristics, which may relate to risks to society, potential growth,
employment opportunities, competition and government interference. These may provide
scope
for
differential CSED policy between sectors. There is much evidence to suggest that the level and
type of CSED are industry-specic. For instance, corporations in high prole industries are
expected to have higher levels of social responsibility disclosures (Roberts, 1992). Harte and
Owen (1991) suggest that industry sensitivity towards the environment inuences the level
of CSED. For example, environment-sensitive companies are more likely to provide information about their environmental performance than less environment-sensitive companies.
Hence the following hypothesis follows.
H2. There is a signicant difference in the level of CSED among different industries.
3.1.3. Location of CSED
The literature (e.g., Bartlett & Chandler, 1997; Lee & Tweedie, 1975a,b) suggests that
investors consider some sections of the annual report more important than others. It is
argued that the location of CSED in different sections of the annual report (e.g., Mission
statement, Chairmans statement, Directors report, Operations review, Financial statement,
Separate environmental and social activities section, and Notes to the accounts) might reect
the perceived level of importance that a company attaches to its social and environmental
activities and performance (Roberts, 1990). Accordingly, we test the following hypothesis
to examine whether industries differ in the location of CSED in the annual report sections.
H3. There is a signicant difference in the level of CSED in different annual report sections.
3.1.4. Content themes of CSED
It is argued that different industries place different emphasis on the content of CSED.
Environmental sensitive sectors like electricity/utility companies are more likely to disclose
environmental issues (e.g., waste recycling, energy conservation and pollution control) as
a result of greater public inuence. In the nancial and banking industry, human resources
are regarded as one of the most important assets. To boost a good public image, banks and
nancial service companies tend to disclose more employee-related issues (e.g., training
and development program, pay and benet scheme, pension scheme and employee share
ownership scheme). Accordingly, a signicant difference is anticipated in the disclosure
content between industries. Hence the following hypothesis follows.
H4. There is a signicant difference in the content themes of disclosure.

S.S. Gao et al. / Accounting Forum 29 (2005) 233242

237

4. Research design and methodology

4.1. Content themes
This study uses content analysis with word count. Based on the mainstream literature,
this study considers six content categories/themes, i.e., Environment, Energy, Health and
safety, Human resources, Community involvement, and Fair business practices. Table 1

Table 1
CSED content themes and sub-themes
Content themes

Sub-themes

(1) Environment

Pollution control (air, water, land, noise, visual)

Prevention of environmental damage
Waste recycling
Conservation of natural resources
Research and development
Environmental audit
Environmental policy
Other environmental disclosure

(2) Energy

Conservation and energy saving

Development/exploration of new sources
Use of new sources
Other energy-related disclosure

(3) Health and safety

Health and safety at work

Customer safety
Product safety
Accidents rate
Compensation
Other health-related disclosure

(4) Human resources

Employee development/training programs

Pay and benets (prot sharing scheme)
Pension scheme
Loan to employee
Employee share ownership scheme
Sport and recreation
Other employee related disclosure

(5) Community involvement

Charitable donation and service

Political donation and service
Social activity sponsorship
Other community activity disclosure

(6) Fair business practices

Employment of women (sexual equality)

Employment of minority (racial equality)
Employment of disabled people
Customer complaints
Legal proceedings, litigation and liabilities
Quality/ISO
Other fair business practice disclosure

238

S.S. Gao et al. / Accounting Forum 29 (2005) 233242

provides the details of these categories and subcategories. Sport and Recreation, and
Quality/ISO are two new sub-categories that have not been previously examined. They
are included because companies increasingly recognise their employees health as a direct
cost arising from employees sick leave and medical insurance (Sin & Cheng, 1995) and
because Quality/ISO has also become a label for companies with quality service and
product (Chin, Tummala, & Chan, 2002).
4.2. Sampling
The top 100 companies listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange were selected as
the sampling frame. Only three sectors were examined: property (including land development and property construction), banking and utilities. Property companies account for a signicant percentage of total market capitalization in HK, and the banking industry plays a dominant role in HKs economy. Utilities were selected because
they are more sensitive towards the environment. Thirty-eight companies in property, banking and utilities were in the top 100. After screening for mergers, changes
in accounting dates and registration outside HK, a nal list of 33 companies were
selected.
The annual reports for 5 years (19931997) were obtained for each company. The period commenced with 1993 to update Lynns (1992) study which covered both social and
environmental reporting. In total, 154 reports were collected, 47 from 10 banks, 78 from
17 property companies, and 29 from 6 utility rms.
4.3. Measurement for CSEDand data analysis
Some previous studies measured CSED on the dichotomous basis of disclosure/nondisclosure (e.g., Lynn, 1992). This method fails to indicate the degree or extent of the
reporting entitys involvement in CSED. Alternative units of analysis tend to include
counts of sentences, lines and pages. While these approaches show the amount/level of
CSED and provide an overall picture of CSED patterns, they have limitations regarding
the comparison of reports with different fonts, page margins and components (pictures
and graphs). Also, one sentence, line or page may contain more than one category of information and the researcher may have difculty in categorizing the sentence/line/page.
Word counting is used in this study because words lend themselves to a more controllable analysis. In this study, two pieces of information were obtained: the number of words
disclosed and the location of the disclosure. To enhance the reliability of analysis and
measurement, two coders were employed, as suggested by Milne and Adler (1999). The
reliability test revealed an average variance of 0.68% between the rst time coding and the
re-analysis.

5. Research ndings
All 33 companies had disclosed CSED over the years. Plate 1 shows that for all the
industries there are increasing trends in the mean disclosure.

S.S. Gao et al. / Accounting Forum 29 (2005) 233242

239

Plate 1. Trends of mean disclosure in CSED in HK.

5.1. Size effect (H1)

Company size is measured by HK$ turnover for utility and property rms, and by interest
received and receivable for banks. Pearson correlation between company size and the amount
of disclosure is calculated as 0.548 (N = 33), signicant at 0.01. Therefore, H1 is
supported. This nding is consistent with prior studies on CSED in other countries
(e.g., Cormier & Magnan, 2003) but contradictory to Lynns (1992) study, which nds
no size effect in HK.
5.2. The amount of disclosure by industry (H2)
Table 2 reports the amount of information disclosed by the companies in the three sectors.
Utility rms publish the largest amount of CSED measured in the number of words and
property companies disclose the least. The ANOVA results, with or without controlling for
rm size, indicate a signicant difference in the amount of CSED between the industries.
Thus, there is sufcient evidence to support H2. This nding is similar to Lynns (1992) in
that the industry sector has a signicant impact on the amount of disclosure. This supports
Table 2
Disclosure by INDUSTRY and ANOVA results
Industry

Number of companies

Banking
10
Property
17
Utility
6
Total
33
F ratio (one-way ANOVA)
F ratio (ANOVA with size control)

Signicant at the 0.05 level.

Mean of word count

Standard deviation

1712
1438
3063
1817
3.486*
4.465*

855
1415
1577
1403

240

S.S. Gao et al. / Accounting Forum 29 (2005) 233242

Table 3
ANOVA with LOCATIONS, INDUSTRIES and interactions between LOCATIONS and INDUSTRIES

INDUSTRY (between subjects)

LOCATION (within subjects)
LOCATION INDUSTRY (interaction)

F ratio

F ratio (size control)

3.486*
14.837**
2.183**

4.465*
6.277**
2.219**

Signicant at the 0.05

level. Signicant at the
0.01 level.

the argument that different industries consider corporate social and environmental issues
differently.
5.3. The location of CSED(H3)
To test H3, an ANOVA was undertaken. The results are displayed in Table 3. With or
without controlling for company size, consistent results for INDUSTRY, LOCATION
and
interaction between LOCATION and INDUSTRY are obtained. All F ratios are statistically
signicant at least at 0.05. Therefore, H3 is supported. Further ANOVA results show that
industries do not differ signicantly in the amount of disclosure in a particular location
(as none of the F ratios are statistically signicant). Moreover, the most likely sections of
the annual report for CSED are Operations review and Notes to the accounts. This
suggests that social and environmental information did not feature highly in HK rms
annual reports.
5.4. Content themes (H4)
To test H4, an ANOVA was performed on INDUSTRY, content THEME and the interaction between INDUSTRY and THEME. The results are shown in Table 4, which indicates
that the amount of disclosure between content themes is signicantly different at 0.01. Also,
the interaction between INDUSTRY and THEME has a signicant effect on the amount of
disclosure. These results remain unchanged when company size is controlled. In addition,
HK businesses disclosed little or no information on those themes strongly sensitive to the
environment (i.e., Environment, Energy, and Health and safety). This nding supports H4.
In order to investigate the impact of industry membership on a particular theme of
disclosure, one-way ANOVA was carried out. The results show that utilities disclosed
more
information on Environment and Human Resources than banks and property companies.
Table 4
ANOVA with content THEMES, INDUSTRIES and interactions between content THEMES and INDUSTRIES

INDUSTRY (between subjects)

THEME (within subjects)
THEME INDUSTRY (interaction)

Si
g

nicant at the 0.05

level.
Signicant at the
0.01 level.

F ratio
*

**

3.486 58.89 4.06

**

F ratio
(size
control)
4
.
4
6
5
*

3
4
.
5
2
*
*

4
.
1
0
*
*

S.S. Gao et al. / Accounting Forum 29 (2005) 233242

241

The difference is statistically signicant at 0.05. In addition, the amounts of disclosure on

Community and Fair Business Practices are not statistically different between the
three sectors. No companies in the three sectors disclosed information on energy.

6. Conclusion
This research note has investigated the patterns and determinants of CSED in HK.
There are ve main ndings. First, HK companies have increased CSED between 1993
and
1997.
Second, size has an impact on the level of CSED in HK. Third, the three sectors did not differ
signicantly in the amount of disclosure in a particular location of annual reports and in
the amount of disclosure on Community and Fair Business Practices. Fourth, the level
of CSED is inuenced by industry membership. Utility rms publish the largest amount
of CSED and property companies disclose the least. Finally, HK businesses disclosed little
information on those themes such as Environment and Health and Safety, which are
strongly sensitive to the environment, and no industry disclosed information on the Energy
theme.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge Yuk Cheung for her assistance at the earlier
stages of the work and Glen Lehman (the editor) and John Courtis (the referee) for their
useful comments on an earlier version of the paper. All errors remain the responsibility of
the authors.

References
Adams, C. A., Hill, W. Y., & Roberts, C. B. (1998). Corporate social reporting practices in Western
Europe: Legitimating corporate behaviour? The British Accounting Review, 30(1), 121.
Bartlett, S. A., & Chandler, R. A. (1997). The corporate report and the private shareholder: Lee and Tweedie
twenty years on. The British Accounting Review, 29(3), 245261.
Buhr, N., & Freedman, M. (2001). Culture institutional factors and differences in environmental disclosure between
Canada and the United States. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 12(3), 293322.
Chin, K. S., Tummala, V. M. R., & Chan, K. M. (2002). Quality management practices based on seven core
elements in Hong Kong manufacturing industries. Technovation, 22(4), 213230.
Cormier, D., & Magnan, M. (2003). Environmental reporting management: A continental European perspective.
Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 22(1), 4362.
Cowen, S. S., Ferri, L. B., & Parker, L. D. (1987). The impact of corporate characteristics on social
responsibility disclosure: A typology and frequency-based analysis. Accounting Organizations and Society,
12(2), 111122. Deegan, C. (2002). The legitimising effect of social and environmental disclosuresA
theoretical foundation.
Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal, 15(3), 282311.
Gray, R. (2002). The social accounting project and accounting organisations and societyPrivileging engagement, imaginings, new accountings and pragmatism over critique? Accounting Organizations and Society,
27, 687708.
Gray, R. H., Javad, M., Power, D. M., & Sinclair, C. D. (2001). Social and environmental disclosure and

corporate
characteristics: A research note and extension. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 28(3/4), 327356.

242

S.S. Gao et al. / Accounting Forum 29 (2005) 233242

Hackston, D., & Milne, M. J. (1996). Some determinants of social and environmental disclosures in New
Zealand companies. Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal, 9(1), 77108.
Harte, G., & Owen, D. L. (1991). Environmental disclosure in the annual reports of British companies: A
research note. Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal, 4(3), 5161.
Ho, S., Ng, P., & Ng, A. (1994). A study of environmental reporting in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Accountant,
5(1), 6265.
Hope, O.-K. (2003). Firm-level disclosures and the relative roles of culture and legal origin. Journal of International
Financial Management and Accounting, 14(3), 218248.
Imam, S. (2000). Corporate social performance reporting in Bangladesh. Managerial Auditing Journal, 15(3),
133141.
Jaggi, B., & Zhao, R. (1996). Environmental performance and reporting: Perceptions of managers and accounting
professionals in Hong Kong. The International Journal of Accounting, 31(3), 333346.
Lee, T. A., & Tweedie, D. P. (1975a). Accounting information: An investigation of private shareholder
usage. Accounting and Business Research, 5(20), 280291.
Lee, T. A., & Tweedie, D. P. (1975b). Accounting information: An investigation of private shareholder
under-standing. Accounting and Business Research, 6(21), 317.
Lynn, M. (1992). A note on corporate social disclosure in Hong Kong. The British Accounting Review, 2(2),
105110.
Mathews, M. R. (1997). Twenty-ve years of social and environmental accounting research: Is there a silver jubilee
to celebrate? Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal, 10(4), 481531.
Milne, M. J., & Adler, R. W. (1999). Exploring the reliability of social and environmental disclosures content
analysis. Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal, 12(2), 237256.
Ng, A. Y. (2000). Going green: More cause than concern. Australian CPA, 70(7), 6465.
Roberts, C. B. (1990). Environmental disclosures in corporate annual reports in Western Europe. In D. L. Owen
(Ed.), Green reporting: accountancy and the challenge of the nineties (pp. 139165). London: Chapman &
Hall.
Roberts, R. W. (1992). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An application of stakeholder
theory. Accounting Organizations and Society, 17, 595612.
Sin, L., & Cheng, D. (1995). Occupational stress and health among business executives: An exploratory study in
an oriental culture. International Journal of Management, 12(1), 1425.
Tsang, E. W. K. (1998). A longitudinal study of corporate social reporting in Singapore: The case of the banking,
food and beverages and hotel industries. Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal, 11(5), 624635.
Williams, S. M., & Pei, C. A. H. W. (1999). Corporate social disclosures by listed companies on their websites:
An international comparison. The International Journal of Accounting, 34(3), 389419.