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

Cho, C.H., Michelon, G., Patten, D.M. and Roberts, R.W. (2015). "CSR Disclosure: The More Things Change…?", Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 28(1), 14-35.

View Paper

Abstract Purpose – CSR disclosure is receiving increased attention from the mainstream accounting research community. In general, this recently published research has failed to engage significantly with prior CSRthemed studies. The purpose of this paper is threefold. First, it examines whether more recent CSR reporting differs from that of the 1970s. Second, it investigates whether one of the major findings of prior CSR research – that disclosure appears to be largely a function of exposure to legitimacy factors – continues to hold in more recent reporting. Third, it examines whether, as argued within the more recent CSR-themed studies, disclosure is valued by market participants. Design/methodology/approach – Using Fortune 500 data from the late 1970s (from Ernst & Ernst, 1978) and a more recent sample (2010), we identify differences in CSR disclosure by computing adequate measures in terms of disclosure breadth and comparing them for any potential changes in the influence of legitimacy factors between 1977 and 2010. In the second stage of our analysis, we use a standard valuation model to compare the association between CSR and firm value between the two time periods. Findings – We first find that the breadth of CSR disclosure increased significantly, with respect to both environmental and social information provision. Second, we find that the relationship among legitimacy factors and CSR disclosure does not differ across our two time periods. However, our analysis focusing on environmental disclosure provides evidence that industry membership is less powerfully related to differences in reporting, but only for the weighted disclosure score. Finally, our results indicate that CSR disclosure, in apparent contrast to the arguments of the more recent mainstream investigations, is not positively valued by investors. Research limitations/implications – We explore changes in CSR disclosure only for industrial firms and as such we cannot generalize findings to companies in other industries. Similarly, we focus only on companies in the United States while different relationships may hold in other countries. Further, our disclosure metrics are limited by the availability of firm-specific information provided by Ernst & Ernst. Limitations aside, however, our findings appear to suggest that the failure of the new wave of CSR research in the mainstream accounting community to acknowledge and consider prior research into social and environmental accounting is potentially troublesome. Specifically, recent CSR disclosure research published in mainstream journals often lends credence to voluntary disclosure arguments that ignore previous contradictory findings and well-established alternative explanations for observed empirical relationships. Practical implications – This paper provides supporting evidence that the unquestioned acceptance by the new wave of CSR researchers that the disclosure is about informing investors as opposed to being a tool of legitimation and image enhancement makes it less likely that such disclosure will ever move meaningfully toward transparent accountability. Originality/value – Our study suggests that CSR disclosure, while used more extensively today than three decades ago, may still largely be driven by concerns with corporate legitimacy, and still fails to provide information that is relevant for assessing firm value. As such, the failure of the mainstream accounting community to acknowledge this possib