Open Access
Issue
SHS Web Conf.
Volume 36, 2017
The 2016 4th International Conference on Governance and Accountability (2016 ICGA)
Article Number 00003
Number of page(s) 14
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20173600003
Published online 24 July 2017
  1. Auger, P., Devinney, T.M., and Louveniere, J.J. (2003). What will consumers pay for social product features? Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 43, no.3, pp. 281–304 [CrossRef]
  2. Cavaco, S. And Crifo, P (2009). The CSP-CFP missing link: Complementarity between environmental, social and governance practices? Journal of Economic Literature
  3. Choi, J., Kwak, Y., & Choe, C., (2010). Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Financial Performance: Evidence from Korea. Australian Journal of Management, vol. 35, no.3, pp. 291–311 [CrossRef]
  4. Dalilawati Zainal, Norhayah Zulkifli and zakiah Salleh (2013). Corporate social Responsibility in Malaysia: A Comparison between Shariah and Non-Shariah Approved Firms, Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, vol. 15, no. 7, pp. 1035–1046
  5. Everaert, P., Bouten, L., Van Liedekerke, L., De Moor, L. and Christiaens, J. (2009). Discovering Patterns in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Reporting: A transparent framework based on Global Reporting Initiatives (GRI) Sustainability Reporting Guidelines. Working papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium
  6. Haslinda, Y., and Lehman, G. (2008), International differences on corporate environmental accounting developments: A comparison between Malaysia and Australia accounting and finance in transition, vol.4, Greenwich University press, pp. 92–124
  7. Ibrahim Thamby Chek, Zam Zuriyati Mohamad, Jamal Yunus and Norlia Mat Nawawi (2013). Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Disclosure in Consumer Products and Plantation Industry in Malaysia, American International Journal of Contemporary Research, vol. 3, no. 5, pp. 118–12
  8. Inoue, Y & Lee, S (2010). ‘Effects of different dimensions of Corporate Social Responsibility on corporate financial performance in tourism-related industries’, Tourism Management, vol.32, no.2, pp. 790–804 [CrossRef]
  9. Ioannuo, I. & Serafeim, G (2012). What drives corporate social performance? International evidence from Social, Environmental and Governance Scores, HBS Working Paper
  10. Jenkins, H & Yakovleva, N (2006). ‘Corporate Social Responsibility in the mining industry: Exploring trends in social and environmental disclosure’, Journal of Cleaner Production, vol.14, no.3, pp.271–84 [CrossRef]
  11. Mahoney, L.S. & Robert, R.W (2007). Corporate Social Performance, financial performance and institutional ownership in Canadian firms, Accounting Forum, vol. 31, pp. 233–253 [CrossRef]
  12. Margolis, J.D., Elfenbein, H. & Walsh, J.P. (2007). Does it pay to be good? A Meta analysis and redirection of reserach on the relationship between Corporate Social and financial performance, working paper
  13. McWilliams, A., Siegel, D.S., & Wright. P.M, (2000). Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance: Correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal, vol. 21, no.5, pp. 603–609 [CrossRef]
  14. Miller, J.G. (1994). Cultural Diversity in the morality of caring. Individually oriented versus duty-based interpersonal moral codes, Cross Cultural Research, vol. 28, no.1, pp. 3–39
  15. Mustaruddin Saleh (2009). Corporate social responsibility disclosure in an emerging market: A longitudinal analysis approach. International Business Research, vol. 2 no. 1, pp. 131–141
  16. Mustaruddin Saleh, Norhayah Zulkifli & Rusnah Muhamad (2011). Looking for evidence of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance in an emerging market, Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, vol. 3 no.2, 2011, pp.165–190
  17. Mwangi, C. I., and Jerotich, O.J. (2013). The relationship between corporate social responsibility practices and financial performance of firm in manufacturing, construction and allied sector of the Nairobi Securities Exchange. International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology, vol. 3(2)
  18. Norhawani, Mustaffa & Norashfah (2011). CSR disclosures and its determinants: evidence from Malaysian government link companies, Social Responsibility Journal, vol. 7, no.2, pp.181 – 201 [CrossRef]
  19. Orlitzky, M., James, G., Schmidt, F.L., & Rynes, S.L. (2003). Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis, Organization Studies, vol. 24, pp. 403–441 [CrossRef]
  20. Othman, S., Darus, F. and Arshad, R. (2011). The influence of coercive isomorphism on corporate social responsibility reporting and reputation. Socially responsibility Journal, vol.1, no. 1, pp.119–132 [CrossRef]
  21. Ruf, B.M., Muralidhar, K., Brown. R.M., Janney, JJ & Paul, K. (2001). An empirical investigation of the relationship between change in corporate social performance and financial performance: A stakeholder theory perspective, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 32, pp. 143–156 [CrossRef]
  22. Sheveta Kapoor & Sandhu, H.S (2010). Does it pay to be socially responsible? An empirical examination of impact of corporate social responsibility on financial performance. Global Business Review, vol. 11, no.85, pp. 185–208 [CrossRef]
  23. Thompson, P. and Zurina, Z. (2004). Corporate social responsibility reporting in Malaysia progress and prospects. Journal of Business Corporate Citizenship, vol. 13, pp. 125–136 [CrossRef]
  24. Tsoutsoura, M. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: In possession of Centre of Responsible Business, Working paper series, Paper 7, University of California, Berkeley
  25. Turban, D.B. and Greening, D.W. (1997). Corporate Social Performance and Organizational Attractiveness to Perspective Employees, Academy of Management Journal, pp. 658–672 [CrossRef]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.