Environmental disclosure quality in large German companies: Economic incentives, public pressures or institutional conditions?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Investors and stakeholders in continental Europe are becoming increasingly concerned about corporate environmental policies. As a result, many firms are voluntarily increasing the extent of their environmental disclosure in their annual report. While mostly unregulated, corporate environmental disclosure does have potential economic significance considering the scarcity of alternative information sources. The purpose of this study is to identify determinants of corporate environmental disclosure using multi-theoretical lenses that rely on economic incentives, public pressures and institutional theory. The study focuses on large firms from a continental Europe country, Germany, with a distinct legal and regulatory context and where environmental concerns are especially acute. Results show that Risk, Ownership, Fixed Assets Age, Firm Size as well as routine determine the level of environmental disclosure by German firms in a given year. Moreover, consistent with institutional theory, results suggest that German firms' disclosure is converging over time. Overall, results strongly suggest that environmental disclosure is multidimensional and is driven by complementary forces.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it