Corporate reporting on corruption: An international comparison

Abstract

Building on an institutionalist framework of the various organizational field-level pressures on firms to engage with the challenge of corruption, we analyse anti-corruption disclosures across a sample of 933 sustainability reports. Such reporting complements anti-corruption initiatives, as it allows the company to demonstrate its commitment. Our results show clear country- and sector-level differences in the extent to which companies communicate their anti-corruption engagement. However, the more a company is exposed to corruption, the less likely it appears to openly communicate its anti-corruption engagement. Hence, our results cast doubt on the effectiveness of anti-corruption disclosures as part of wider sustainability reporting.

Keywords:

• Anti-corruption
• Institutional theory
• International comparison
• Organizational fields
• Sustainability reporting

Notes

1 Another often cited definition defines corruption as the “abuse (or misuse) of public power for private (personal) benefit” (Doh, Rodriguez, Uhlenbruck, Collins, & Eden, 2003: 115).

Hypothesis 1 There will be regional-level differences in terms of the extent to which companies communicate their anti-corruption engagement.

Hypothesis 2 There will be industry-level differences in terms of the extent to which companies communicate their anti-corruption engagement.

Hypothesis 3 Participation in multi-stakeholder initiatives dedicated to anti-corruption will make it more likely that a company publically communicates it anti-corruption commitment.

2 G3 refers to the third generation of the GRI Guidelines.