The Role of Carbon Risk Perception, Accountant Behavioral Compliance and Sustainability Mindset on the Accuracy of Carbon Performance Reporting
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70062/harmonymanagement.v2i4.470Keywords:
Behavioral Compliance, Bibliometric Analysis, Carbon Performance Reporting, Carbon Risk Perception, Sustainability MindsetAbstract
This study aims to analyze the development and scientific relationship between carbon risk perception, behavioral compliance of accountants, and sustainability mindset on the accuracy of carbon performance reporting through a bibliometric approach. This study is driven by the increasing need for accurate carbon reporting amidst global demands for sustainability transparency, as well as the limited understanding of the role of behavioral and psychological factors of accountants in ensuring the reliability of carbon reports. Research data was obtained from two leading scientific databases, namely Scopus and Google Scholar, with the main keywords "carbon risk perception," "behavioral compliance of accountants," "sustainability mindset," and "accuracy of carbon performance reporting." The data selection process was carried out using the PRISMA method to ensure the relevance and validity of the analyzed articles, while bibliometric analysis and visualization were performed using VOSviewer software. The results of the study indicate that the topic related to carbon reporting accuracy has evolved from a technical approach to a behavioral and psychological approach. Network and density visualizations show that behavioral compliance and sus-tainability mindset issues are still new but have high potential for development. Meanwhile, the authors' collaboration map demonstrates the geographic limitations of research, which remains concentrated in developed countries. These findings have important theoretical and practical implications, namely the need to integrate behavioral theory and professional ethics into sustainability accounting research and to en-hance accountants' capacity to understand carbon risks to ensure the accuracy of future sustainability re-porting.
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
Falagas, M. E., Pitsouni, E. I., Malietzis, G. A., & Pappas, G. (2008). Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: Strengths and weaknesses. FASEB Journal, 22(2), 338–342. https://doi.org/10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.
Gray, R., Owen, D., & Adams, C. (1996). Accounting and accountability: Changes and challenges in corporate social and environmental reporting. Prentice Hall.
Hsu, C. C., Lee, C. Y., & Chao, W. C. (2021). Determinants of carbon disclosure quality: The role of assurance and accountant professionalism. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 12(4), 665–689. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-01-2020-0021
Hummel, K., Schlick, C., & Fifka, M. (2022). Drivers of sustainability assurance in sustainability reporting: Ethical motivations or stakeholder pressure? Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2859
Kassel, K., Rimanoczy, I., & Mitchell, S. F. (2016). Developing a sustainability mindset in management education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2016.16659abstract
Kim, E. H., & Lyon, T. P. (2022). Greenwashing revisited: Corporate environmental disclosure and reputation. Organization Science, 33(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2021.1509
Krueger, P., Sautner, Z., & Starks, L. T. (2022). The importance of climate risks for institutional investors. Review of Financial Studies, 35(3), 1463–1514. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhab083
Larrán Jorge, M., Andrades Peña, F. J., & Muriel de los Reyes, M. J. (2020). An analysis of the compliance with CSR reporting standards in the accounting profession. Journal of Cleaner Production, 263, 121477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121477
Luo, L., & Tang, Q. (2023). Corporate carbon disclosure and reporting accuracy: The moderating role of institutional environment. Journal of Environmental Management, 325, 116456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.116456
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
Moldavska, A., & Welo, T. (2019). The concept of sustainable mindset: Implications for sustainability education. Journal of Cleaner Production, 214, 1048–1062. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.268
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Qian, W., & Schaltegger, S. (2017). Revisiting carbon disclosure and performance: Legitimacy and management views. British Accounting Review, 49(4), 365–379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2017.05.005
Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236(4799), 280–285. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3563507
Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00175
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331
Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2021). VOSviewer manual: Manual for VOSviewer version 1.6.17. Leiden University.
Victor, B., & Cullen, J. B. (1988). The organizational bases of ethical work climates. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33(1), 101–125. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392857
Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629
