Analysis of corporate governance disclosure: a study through BRICS countries

In: Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, Band 16, Heft 5, S. 923-940

Abstract

Purpose
The study aims to analyze the level of the disclosure of corporate governance practices by the companies that belong to the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) countries according to normative recommendations and coercive requirements considering the enforcement of laws and norms in the different legal systems and to explain it in the light of the institutional theory approach.


Design/methodology/approach
The practices disclosed by a sample of the 20 largest companies listed on the stock exchanges of each of the BRICS countries were analysed, and the 52 practices recommended by UNCTAD (2009) were used as a parameter. The corporate governance practices of the companies were confronted with the laws, rules and norms that require or recommend their adoption and disclosure.


Findings
China has 49 practices required by own national law in face of 52 recommended by UNCTAD/International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) followed by South Africa with 44, Russia with 33, Brazil with 28 and India with 24. Brazil has 47 practices recommended by own national governance code in face of 52 recommended by UNCTAD/Intergovernmental Working group of Experts on International Standards of Accounting and Reporting (ISAR), followed by Russia with 45, China with 44, South Africa with 41 and India with 22. It was found that Brazil has the higher median of number of companies disclosing corporate governance practices with 17, followed by India with 13, Russia with 11, South Africa and China with 7.


Research limitations/implications
This research shows that more studies are necessary using the institutional theory to investigate how the normative and coercive pressures influence the disclosure of corporate governance information considering the enforcement of laws and norms in the different legal systems.


Practical implications
The differences observed in this study about normative and coercive forces are presented as an opportunity in the legal sphere of some countries to implement mechanisms to increase their level of enforcement.


Originality/value
This research contributes to various audiences such as governmental institutions, professional associations, market institutions to better understand their role in the improvement of the adoption of corporate governance practices and disclosure of information related to it.