MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4368404849 · doi:10.1108/jaar-08-2022-0215

Effect of market-based regulations on corporate carbon disclosure and carbon performance: global evidence

2023· article· en· W4368404849 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Accounting Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Social Responsibility Reporting
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityBusinessSample (material)AccountingCorporate social responsibility

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose In this study, the authors examine the relationships between market-based regulations and corporate carbon disclosure and carbon performance. The authors also investigate whether these relationships vary across emission-intensive and non-emission intensive industries. Design/methodology/approach The study sample consists of the world's 500 largest companies across most major industries over a recent five-year period. Country-specific random effect multiple regression analysis is used to test empirical models that predict relationships between market-based regulations and carbon disclosure and carbon performance. Findings Results indicate that market-based regulations significantly and positively affect corporate carbon performance. However, market-based regulations do not significantly affect corporate carbon disclosure. This study also finds that the association between regulatory pressures and carbon disclosure and carbon performance varies across emission-intensive and non-emission-intensive industries. Research limitations/implications The findings of this study have key implications for policymakers, practitioners and future researchers in terms of understanding the factors that drive businesses to increase their carbon performance and disclosure. The study sample consists of only large firms, and future researchers can undertake similar studies with small and medium-sized firms. Practical implications The results of this study are expected to help business managers to identify the benefits of adopting market-based regulations. Regulators can use this study’s results to evaluate if market-based regulations effectively improve corporate carbon performance and disclosure. Furthermore, stakeholders may use this study to evaluate and improve their businesses' reporting of carbon disclosure and performance. Originality/value In contrast to current literature that has used command and control regulations as a proxy for regulation, this study uses market-based regulations as a proxy for climate change regulations. In addition, this study uses a more comprehensive measure of carbon disclosure and carbon performance compared to the previous studies. It also uses global multi-sector data from carbon disclosure project (CDP) in contrast to most current studies that use national data from annual reports of sample firms of specific sectors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it