Publications Database

Welcome to the new Schulich Peer-Reviewed Publication Database!

The database is currently in beta-testing and will be updated with more features as time goes on. In the meantime, stakeholders are free to explore our faculty’s numerous works. The left-hand panel affords the ability to search by the following:

  • Faculty Member’s Name;
  • Area of Expertise;
  • Whether the Publication is Open-Access (free for public download);
  • Journal Name; and
  • Date Range.

At present, the database covers publications from 2012 to 2020, but will extend further back in the future. In addition to listing publications, the database includes two types of impact metrics: Altmetrics and Plum. The database will be updated annually with most recent publications from our faculty.

If you have any questions or input, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.


Search Results

Dobija, D., Cho, C.H., She, C., Zarzycka, E., Krasodomska, J. and Jemielniak, D. (Forthcoming). "Involuntary Disclosures and Stakeholder-Initiated Communication on Social Media", Organization and Environment.

Open Access Download

Abstract This study explores firm responses to stakeholder-initiated involuntary disclosures, which are disclosures made by stakeholders about an organization but are against the will of managers, and subsequent stakeholder reactions. We analyzed 134,977 firm Twitter replies from seven companies to identify their responses to involuntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosures and find that companies demonstrate different attitudes toward engagement in the exchange about involuntary disclosures. Whereas some companies communicate with stakeholders, others are almost silent. When a company engages in communication with its stakeholders, the communication is mostly one-way, and mortification or dissent is the likely response strategy. We also find that while stakeholders generally do not continue to engage with corporate communications, they are likely to respond when companies deny the information revealed by involuntary disclosure. Our results suggest that involuntary disclosures on social media are not able to improve communication between stakeholders and companies.

Mirza, M., Dordi, T., Alguindigue, P., Johnson, R., & Weber, O. (2023). "Sustainability in Private Capital Investing: A Systematic Literature Review", Journal of Management and Sustainability, 13(1), 119-138.

Open Access Download

Abstract The private capital asset class has grown to over $10 trillion in assets under management and has significant potential to contribute to environmental, social, and governance (ESG) goals. However, there is a dearth of academic research about ESG with regards to private capital investing. This literature review adopted a mixed-methods approach, combining a quantitative (bibliometric) analysis with a qualitative review of the articles. It was found that less than 1% of the literature, written in English, between 1960−2020 on private equity and venture capital addresses topics related to sustainability. It was also observed that the 46 papers which address sustainability topics can be categorized into 13 themes, including certifications and standards, impact investing, and corporate social responsibility. Investment in private securities grew at twice the rate as public securities during the end of this time-period and interest in sustainability integration in private capital investing is growing. Incentives for private equity and venture firms to engage with sustainable investments are being driven by institutional investors, such as pension funds and insurance companies. The focus of sustainability research has typically been on public markets, hindering the potential of private capital investment to influence sustainable policy and practices. The objective of this paper is to provide evidence of the dearth of academic literature on the topic of private capital markets and sustainable investment, while identifying current themes in the existing literature so that future work may address gaps in research.

Cho, C.H., Bohr, K., Choi, T.J., Partridge, K. Shah, J.M. and Swierszcz, A. (2020). "Advancing Sustainability Reporting in Canada: 2019 Report on Progress.", Accounting Perspectives, 19(3), 181-204.

View Paper

Abstract This study examines the progress Canada's largest companies are making in their environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosures. Given the introduction of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Standards and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs) as well as the issuance of the Task Force on Climate‐Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) recommendations, our research reflects the uptake of these guidance documents by both mature and new reporters. Our analysis suggests that challenges persist—processes and progress often fail to reach investors as they are “lost in translation” when issued through third‐party ESG information providers, and reporters are also pressured to respond to a myriad of requests for information from rating and reporting agencies. Nevertheless, we note that Canada has new reporting sectors that must mature to survive the scrutiny of the markets and also hope that stock markets will respond to the recent announcement by the 181 CEOs of the U.S. Business Roundtable, who committed to lead their companies for the benefit of all stakeholders—customers, employees, suppliers, communities, and shareholders. Overall, we believe that our research will provide food for thought for companies interested in continuous improvement.

Chung, J. and Cho, C.H. (2018). "Current Trends within Social and Environmental Accounting Research: A Literature Review", Accounting Perspectives, 17(2), 207-239.

View Paper

Abstract Given the recent rise in the evolution and maturity of social and environmental accounting (SEA) research and scholarship, we provide a literature review of the current trends within this area in a concise and harmonized manner for a wider audience in academia and practice. More specifically, we visit the current state of scholarly work, which can be useful in facilitating future research questions and further development of SEA research associated with relations between corporate social performance (CSP), corporate social disclosure (CSD), and corporate financial performance (CFP). Our goal is to offer insights to the current state of SEA research that is informative to both novice and expert SEA scholars, with the hope to promote and stimulate further advancement of research in this particular area. Drawing knowledge from relevant disciplines such as accounting, management, finance, and economics, this article visits the current trends within SEA research in terms of definition, research topics, theoretical viewpoints, methodological approaches, as well as suggestions for future research.

Cecil, L., LaGore, W., Mahoney, L. and Thorne, L. (2013). "A Research Note on Standalone Corporate Social Responsibility Reports: Signaling or Greenwashing", Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 24, 350-359.

View Paper

Abstract Over the past two decades, more and more U.S. firms are voluntarily issuing costly standalone Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Reports. Nevertheless, firms’ motivations for issuing standalone CSR Reports are not clear. In this paper, we consider two different explanations: signaling and greenwashing. The first explanation, signaling, proposes that firms use standalone CSR Reports as a signal of their superior commitment to CSR, which suggests firms with stronger social and environmental records will be more likely to issue standalone CSR Reports as compared to those without. The second explanation, greenwashing, proposes that firms use standalone CSR Reports to pose as “good” corporate citizens even when they do not have stronger social and environmental records. To provide insight into these explanations we compare the CSR performance scores of firms that issue CSR reports to those firms that do not. We control for firm size, leverage, profitability and industry. We find that firms that voluntarily issue standalone CSR Reports generally have higher CSR performance scores, which suggests that firms are using voluntary CSR Reports to publicize stronger social and environmental records to stakeholders.

Cho, C.H. and Patten, D.M. (2013). "Green Accounting: Reflections from a CSR and Environmental Disclosure Perspective", Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 24(6), 443-447.

View Paper

Abstract In this commentary, we reflect on Thornton's (2013) extension to his original CA Magazine article on environmental accounting (Thornton, 1993) as well as the original contribution. Given our background in social and environmental disclosure research, we question Thornton's narrow focus on environmental accounting as it relates to the debits and credits of financial reporting, and we attempt to illustrate the problems that voluntary environmental disclosure creates with respect to reduced incentives for companies to improve environmental performance. We conclude by identifying our concerns with the future of environmental accounting given the recent ‘rediscovery’ of the topic by mainstream accounting researchers.

Cho, C.H., Freedman, M. and Patten, D.M. (2012). "Corporate Disclosure of Environmental Capital Expenditures: A Test of Alternative Theories", Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 25(3), 486-507.

View Paper

Abstract The purpose of this paper is to examine three potential explanations for the corporate choice to disclose environmental capital spending amounts. Using archival data from a sample of Fortune 500 US firms operating in industries subject to both the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) TRI program and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's Hazard Communication Standards, the authors conduct quantitative threshold tests to first investigate whether disclosure appears to be a function of the materiality of the spending. Using statistical tests, including multiple regression analyses, the authors next attempt to differentiate the choice to disclose across voluntary disclosure theory and legitimacy theory arguments. First, the authors find that, for the overwhelming majority of observations, the disclosed amounts are not quantitatively material. This suggests that non‐disclosure is likely due to immateriality. Next, their findings show that disclosing firms do not exhibit improved subsequent environmental performance relative to non‐disclosing companies. Further, controlling for firm size and industry class, they find the choice to disclose is associated with worse environmental performance. The sample includes only relatively larger firms from certain industries and this limits the generalizability of the findings. Smaller firms and those from excluded industries may have other reasons to choose to disclose environmental information. Further, the authors rely on TRI data to assess pollution performance, but TRI is self‐reported and its reliability is only as good as the inputs. Finally, although environmental capital spending is potentially relevant information, this investigation does not examine other types of environmental information disclosure. This paper provides corroborating evidence that companies use the disclosure of environmental capital spending as a strategic tool to address their exposures to political and regulatory concerns. Hence, interpreting disclosed environmental information would appear to require careful understanding of the underlying motivations. This paper extends the environmental accounting and reporting literature by contributing to the unresolved question of what drives differences in the corporate disclosure of environmental information. The authors add to this body of research by investigating the disclosure of one specific piece of environmental information, the amount of capital expenditures incurred for pollution abatement and control.