4.7 Article

Corporate governance and risk reporting in South Africa: A study of corporate risk disclosures in the pre- and post-2007/2008 global financial crisis periods

Journal

INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
Volume 30, Issue -, Pages 363-383

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.irfa.2013.07.001

Keywords

Corporate governance; Risk management and reporting; Multiple theoretical perspectives; 2007/2008 global financial crisis; King Reports and South Africa

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The 2007/2008 global financial crisis has reignited the debate regarding the need for effective corporate governance (CG) through sound risk management and reporting practices. This paper, therefore, examines the crucial policy question of whether the quality of firm-level CG has any effect on the quality and extent of corporate risk disclosures (CRD) in South Africa (SA) with particular focus on the pre- and post-2007/2008 global financial crisis periods. Using one of the largest datasets to-date on CG and CRD, from 2002 to 2011, and distinctively drawing on a multiple theoretical perspective, we find that CRD are largely 'non-financial', 'historical', 'good news' and 'qualitative' in nature over the ten-year period investigated. We also find that block ownership and institutional ownership are negatively associated with the extent of CRD, whilst board diversity, board size and independent non-executive directors are positively related to the extent of CRD. By contrast, dual board leadership structure has no significant connection with the extent of CRD. Our results are robust across a raft of econometric models that adequately address different types of endogeneity problems, as well as alternative CG and CRD proxies. Our findings are largely consistent with the predictions of our multi-theoretical framework that incorporates insights from agency, legitimacy, institutional, resource-dependence, and stakeholder theories. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available