Communication via responsibility reporting and its effect on firm value in Finland

By Hannu Schadewitz, Mikael Niskala. 2010

282 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5c502991f5488bb7dac811aaa62fc3a383ad58ff

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance: An Empirical Analysis on Greek Companies (2010, methodology): “Schadewitz and Niskala (2010) shared the opinion that companies may obtain higher stock returns if they apply GRI guidelines, something that is reassured by their research.”
Corporate social responsibility, country-level predispositions, and the consequences of choosing a level of disclosure (2016, methodology): “All three studies use a GRI guideline-based measure of CSR disclosure and find CSR disclosure to have a positive association with firm value in Finland (Schadéwitz and Niskala 2010), South Africa (De Klerk and De Villiers 2012), and the UK (De Klerk et al. 2015).”
Sustainability Reporting and Firms’ Economic Performance: Evidence from Asia and Africa (2020, background): “Finally, a limited number of existing studies have analysed the sustainability reporting and its impact on firm performance (Ameer and Othman 2012; Bachoo et al. 2013), and evaluation (Lo and Sheu 2007; Schadewitz and Niskala 2010; Berthelot et al. 2012).”
Value Relevance of Accounting Information Under an Integrated Reporting Approach: A Research Note (2016, background): “…is evidence which indicates that voluntary sustainability reporting has both a direct impact on a firm’s market valuation (Berthelot et al., 2012; Schadewitz & Niskala, 2010) and an indirect impact by affecting the value relevance of a firm’s book value of equity (Hughes, 2000) and earnings…”
Impact of Sustainability Performance of Company on its Financial Performance: A Study of Listed Indian Companies (2013, unknown): “…2012; N. Burhan & Rahmanti, 2012; Khaveh et al., 2012; de Klerk & de Villiers, 2012; Ngwakwe, 2009; Ameer & Othman, 2012; Guindry & Patten, 2010; Schadewitz & Niskala, 2010) to negative (Lopez et al., 2007; Detre & Gunderson, 2011) to mixed (Jones, 2005; Brammer et al., 2006; Mohd Taib & Ameer,…”
How Does the Market Value Corporate Sustainability Performance? (2011, unknown): “This approach is currently used in empirical studies on the value relevance of non-financial information (e.g., Rajgopal et al. 2003; Hassel et al. 2005; Matolcsy and Wyatt 2008; Johnston et al. 2008; Sinkin et al. 2008; Schadewitz and Niskala 2010).”
The worldwide diffusion of the global reporting initiative: what is the point? (2012, background): “Consistent with this reasoning, Schadewitz and Niskala (2010) stated that the GRI is one of the most important communication tools for decreasing information asymmetry between a firm and its investors and other stakeholders.”
A Closer Look at the ‘Global Reporting Initiative’ Sustainability Reporting as a Tool to Implement Environmental and Social Policies: A Worldwide Sector Analysis (2014, background): “Moreover, although more research is needed, previous research has found a significant relationship between market value and responsibility disclosure under GRI guidelines (Schadewitz and Niskala, 2010).”
The Value Relevance of Reputation for Sustainability Leadership (2014, background): “(Berthelot et al. 2012; Schadewitz and Niskala 2010) or social or environmental performance (Lourenço et al.”