Project Paper

Value relevance of reporting on the Sustainable Development Goals

Vienna University of Economics and Business

Master’s Program in Finance & Accounting

Supervisor: Students:
Dr. Katrin Hummel Georg Edwin Strohl, BSc. (WU)
Ovidiu-Ioan Haiduc, BSc. (WU)
Table of contents

List of tables.................................................................................................................I
List of abbreviations...................................................................................................II
Abstract.......................................................................................................................III
1. Introduction.............................................................................................................1
2. Literature review......................................................................................................5
2.1 Sustainability Reporting.......................................................................................5
2.1.1 History of Sustainability Reporting................................................................5
2.1.3 CSR...............................................................................................................6
2.1.3 Tripple Bottom Line.......................................................................................6
2.2 Voluntary Disclosure Theory...............................................................................7
2.2.1 Agency Theory..............................................................................................7
2.2.2 Capital needs theory.....................................................................................7
2.2.3 Stakeholder theory........................................................................................7
2.2.4 Legitimacy theory..........................................................................................8
2.2.5 Signalling theory...........................................................................................8
3. Hypothesis Development.......................................................................................9
4. Research Method..................................................................................................10
4.1 Sample Selection...............................................................................................10
4.2 Dependent variable...........................................................................................10
4.3 Independent (control) variables.........................................................................10
5. Results...................................................................................................................12
5.1 Descriptive Statistics.........................................................................................12
5.2 Multiple linear regression...................................................................................12
6. Discussion.............................................................................................................14
7. Conclusion.............................................................................................................15
References.................................................................................................................16
Tables.........................................................................................................................17
Appendix....................................................................................................................18
List of tables

Table 1: Descriptive statistics……………………………….…………………………...13

Table 2: Regression results………………………………………………………...……14

I
List of abbreviations

BVE Book Value of Equity

CSR Corporate Social Responsibility
EPSY Earnings per Share at Year-end
MDG Millennium Development Goals
SDG Sustainable Development Goals
SR Sustainability Reporting
TBL Tripple Bottom Line

II
Abstract

The purpose of this working paper is to investigate the value relevance of non-
financial information, the disclosure of the SDGs in the annual reports, for the market
value of firms listed in the STOXX Europe-600 Index. In this study, we answer the
following research question: "Does reporting on the Sustainable Development Goals
(SDGs) have an impact on the share price of companies listed in the STOXX Europe-
600 Index"? Therefore, a modified Ohlson (1995) model is implemented to examine
the relationship between SDG disclosure and the share price among companies in
the STOXX Europe-600 index. Our findings suggest that there is no relation between
the disclosure of the SDGs and the company's share price. However, among the
companies that disclose on the SDGs, a higher disclosure level has an influence on
the share price compared to a lower disclosure level.

III
1. Introduction

As part of this working paper, we set the goal of investigating the effect and value
relevance of SDG's voluntary reporting. The studies conducted to date have not yet
revealed any clear understanding of the relationship between sustainable corporate
performance and its disclosure. We are mainly concerned with two theoretical
concepts, the theory of voluntary disclosure theory and legitimacy theory. According
to the voluntary disclosure theory, the effect should be positive, but legitimacy theory
could indicate a possible adverse effect. (Hummel & Schlick, 2016). In general,
transparency and disclosure are among the pillars of corporate governance. Various
interest groups consider corporate disclosure in their decision-making process.
Disclosure in accounting literature is "informing the public through the company's
financial statements" (Ağca & Önder, 2007: 241). Voluntary disclosure is defined by
Meek et al. (1995: 555) as "providing free management choice, accounting and other
information deemed relevant to the decision-making needs of users of their annual
reports." Also, a voluntary disclosure may include disclosure "recommended by a
relevant code or body." (Hassan & Marston, 2010: 7). Legitimacy theory, on the other
hand, is based on the perception of society and says that management is forced to
disclose information so that external users' opinion of their company does not change
to the detriment of the company. (Cormier & Gordon, 2001). Previous research has
not yet provided a consistent understanding of the relationship between sustainability
performance and sustainability information. On the one hand, the theory of voluntary
disclosure predicts that a company with excellent sustainability performance has an
incentive to disclose information about its performance in order to increase its market
value. This stream of research establishes a definite link between sustainability
performance and the amount of sustainability disclosure (i.e., better sustainability
performance discloses more). On the other hand, legitimacy theory argues that
companies use sustainability disclosure to improve public perception of their
sustainability performance. Consequently, researchers find a negative relationship
between sustainability performance and the number of sustainability claims (i.e., poor
sustainability performers reveal more) as an indication of the applicability of the
legitimacy theory. Thus, these two theories provide contradictory predictions about

1
the relationship between sustainability performance and sustainability pricing, and
the mixed empirical results from previous studies have not yet clarified this
relationship (for a positive relationship between sustainability performance and
sustainability pricing (see Al-Tuwaijri et al., 2004; Clarkson et al., 2008; for a negative
relationship see Cho and Patten, 2007; de Villiers and van Staden, 2006).

Before we present our research results, we give an overview of the SDG's, the
Sustainable Development Goals. The first question is, what are the SDG's? The
SDGs are the successors of the MDGs (the Millennium Development Goals). The
MDGs set an essential target for development activities. Through the targeted
activities and measures, poverty was combated, and the health and education
system improved. These measures were implemented in developing countries. The
SDGs replaced the MDGs in 2015. The SDGs are much broader in scope than the
MDGs. The SDGs addresses a broader range of related issues, which are mainly
within the three dimensions of sustainability that are economical, social, and
environmental. The elaboration of the SDGs represents a process of inclusion never
before experienced in the history of the United Nations. Valuable contributions came
from all sectors and parts of the world. The SDGs are primarily addressed to
governments, but all organizations are addressed and invited to participate in their
implementation. They have been designed for both developed and developing
countries. The SDGs are developed by a group of participants with a variety of
backgrounds, including contributions from the business community. The goals
developed thus, represent a framework for sustainability. The aspirations and
priorities developed and set in this context give a central role above all to business
and its actors.

"The private sector is an indispensable partner for achieving the Sustainable

Development Goals. Companies can contribute within the framework of their core
business. We, therefore, call on companies around the world to assess the impact of
their actions, set ambitious goals, and transparently communicate their progress." -
Ban Ki-moon, former Secretary-General of the United Nations

2
As a key contributor, business is expected to develop and deliver solutions to
implement the SDGs. This will create new opportunities for all participants to grow
together sustainably, but also to benefit from more favorable risk profiles. The
solutions and innovative business practices developed by companies can contribute
to sustainable development. SDGs encourage companies to minimize their adverse
impacts and eliminate them wherever possible. The SDGS is a suitable framework to
set, develop, steer, and control strategies, goals, and business activities, and now for
us the most relevant aspect how to communicate and report effectively the
company’s contributions regarding the achievement of the SDGS. The SDGs provide
an effective and appropriate communication framework in communicating with
stakeholders about the company's sustainability performance. (SDG Compass)

The SDGs consist of 17 objectives. The sustainability goals of the Rio+20 Summit on
Climate Change play a vital role in the development of the SDGs. The 17 objectives
include 169 objectives for sustainable development. The SDGS are valid for all
countries worldwide and not only for the countries of the Global South, as was the
case with the MDGs. In the SDGs, the human being is more in focus and,
accordingly, the primary concern of the SDGs is to end extreme poverty "in all forms
and everywhere in the world."

The 17 objectives for sustainable development:

1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere

2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable
agriculture
3. Ensure a healthy life and promote well-being for all people at all ages
4. Ensure inclusive, equitable and quality education and promote lifelong learning
opportunities for all
5. Gender justice and empowerment for all women and girls
6. Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation facilities
and sanitation systems
7. Securing access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all

3
8. Achieve sustainable, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and
productive employment and decent work for all
9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization
and support innovation
10. Reduce inequality within and between countries
11. Make cities and settlements more inclusive, safer, more resilient and more
sustainable
12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production structures
13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its effects
14. Conserve and use oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable
development
15. Protect, restore, and promote the sustainable use of the Earth's ecosystems.
Sustainable management of forests, combating desertification, revitalizing barren
land, and halting the loss of biodiversity.
16. Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide
access to justice for all, and build effective, reliable, accountable and inclusive
institutions at all levels
17. Strengthen means to implement and revitalize the Global Partnership for
Sustainable Development.
(Bebbington and Unerman, 2017)

4
2. Literature review

2.1 Sustainability Reporting

The overall concept of Sustainability Reporting comprises terms such as CSR

(corporate social responsibility), triple bottom line, and environmental reporting.
According to (Brannen, 2007) sustainability reporting expels to the reporting practice
by firms of non-financial factors that eventually have an impact on the firm's future
income, performance, and value preservation.

2.1.1 History of Sustainability Reporting

The term sustainability was first used in the forestry sector in 1713 by Hans Carl von
Carlowitz, head of the Saxon mining industry, in his publication “Sylvicultura
Oeconomica." In his publication, he describes the sustainable use of forests,
whereby only as much wood is felled as it grows back so the forest can always
regenerate. The proposed measures were already innovative in terms of
sustainability at that time. For example, Hans Carl von Carlowitz recommended the
use of energy-saving kitchen stoves, thermal insulation to reduce energy
requirements and the search for alternative energy sources. The initial situation for
this was wood, the primary raw-material, became scarce due to intensive mining or
fleet construction. (Kaminske, G. & Bauer, J., 2008: 155f)

The term sustainability as we know it today originated at the UN Conference on

Human Nature and the publication of the report "Limits to Growth" by the Club of
Rome in 1972, in which different scenarios of the world economy in the future
showed that the world could not be exploited indefinitely and without consequences
(Padberg, E., 2010:84) In 1987 the “World Commission on Environment and
Development” published the report “Brundtland Report: Our common future”.

Development can be considered sustainable if the consumption of resources,

investment, technological development, and industrial change harmonize. In this

5
way, both current and future possibilities for satisfying needs are improved. (United
Nations 1987: 54)
In political implementation, the concept of sustainable development was
supplemented by the three-pillar model, which means that environmental, social, and
economic goals are implemented simultaneously and on an equal footing.

2.1.3 CSR

CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) describes the responsibility of the economy

towards society and includes voluntary entrepreneurial action to improve social and
environmental issues (Aguilera et al., 2007, p836-863)

2.1.3 Tripple Bottom Line

“What is the bottom line, when there is no bottom line” (Drucker, 1982)
Reporting for the triple bottom line, which is reporting on financial, ecological, and
social success in companies, is regarded as a groundbreaking innovation within
accounting in recent years. There has been a real boom in sustainability reporting
with competing accounting requirements (e.g., guidelines of the Global Reporting
Initiative for sustainability reporting, Integrated Reporting Framework of the
Integrated Reporting Council, and Directive of the European Commission on the
disclosure of non-financial information). (Theuvsen et al., 2017)

6
2.2 Voluntary Disclosure Theory

In accounting literature, there are several theories which investigate the disclosure
practices of firms. Therefore, the most important ones explaining voluntary disclosure
are provided in the following section:

2.2.1 Agency Theory

Agency theory explains the relationships among a company´s management (agent)

and its shareholders (principal) and expresses the managers' behavior of maximizing
their benefit. Furthermore, since the management can recall corporate information to
a greater extent than shareholders, the relationship of the agency directs to the
problem of the information asymmetry (Jensen and Meckling, 1976). Uyar (2011)
mentioned in his study that agency costs incurred as an outcome from the dispute of
interests and especially the information asymmetry among the shareholders and
managers. Therefore, the management is motivated to increase the level of
disclosure in order to decrease agency costs (Hossain et al., 1995) and (Watson et
al., 2002).

2.2.2 Capital needs theory

Because firms target to allure external finance to scale up their debt or equity capital,
capital need theory expresses that the voluntary disclosure of information supports a
company´s attempt to procure capital at a low level of cost (Choi, 1973).

2.2.3 Stakeholder theory

Stakeholder theory is another accounting theory that may be utilized to justify the
reason why companies voluntarily disclose information. Stakeholders are, for
example, the firm's management, shareholders, debt holders, clients, government,
and the general community (Uyar and Kılıç, 2012a). For the stakeholders backing the
companies have to intercommunicate with them (Smith et al., 2005). Conclusively,

7
companies are motivated to disclose information voluntarily in order to satisfy their
stakeholders´ need for further information (Uyar et al., 2013).

2.2.4 Legitimacy theory

Dowling and Pfeffer (1975) and Magnes (2006) stated in their studies that a company
´s right to exist is predicated to its values perceived as matched with the ones of
society in general. Therefore, the notion of the legitimacy theory simulates a social
contract between companies on the one hand and society, on the other hand
(Magness, 2006). Consequently, the management is intended to provide information
that would have a positive impact on the investors' view of the company (Cormier and
Gordon, 2001). Dyball (1998) and O´Donovan (2002) suggested in their studies that
the annual report is a highly relevant source of legitimation. Legitimization can be
found in financial statements as disclosure provided mandatory and in the annual
report as disclosure provided voluntary (Magness, 2006) and (Lightstone and
Driscoll, 2008).

2.2.5 Signalling theory

Signaling theory ought to explain labor market´s information asymmetry. However, in

accounting literature, it has been applied to clarify the voluntary disclosure policy in
corporate reporting (Ross, 1977). Verrecchia (1983) stated that the information
asymmetry problem results in companies providing specific information to investors
in order to show their market superiority to attract investments and increase their
reputation. Conclusively, companies disclose more information than they are
obligated by laws and regulations for the purpose to signal that they are superior
(Campbell et al., 2001).

8
3. Hypothesis Development

Managers use the voluntary disclosure of non-financial information, such as CSR

reporting, to communicate with shareholders about the company's environmental and
social actions (Healy & Palepu, 2001). According to Dhaliwal et al. (2011), increased
CSR reporting may attract long-term institutional investors. Cormier et al. (2009)
state that managers assess the costs and benefits when defining the extent of
voluntary disclosure. What is more, managers often receive share-based payments
or bonuses that are related to the company's earnings and the performance of the
share price. Therefore, according to agency theory, managers have an incentive to
provide voluntary CSR disclosure to increase the company’s share price. In
conclusion, reporting on the SDGs, which is voluntary, should increase a company’s
share-price and therefore, the following hypothesis is stated as:

H1: "Reporting on SDGs has a significant impact on share-price."

9
4. Research Method

4.1 Sample Selection

The sample of companies we use in this paper is from the STOXX-Europe 600 index,
which contains the 600 largest European companies. The reporting period was from
2015 to 2017, which results in 1800 observations. The sample is constituted by a
compound ranking of share price, book value of equity, and earnings per share. The
companies in the sample belong to 11 industry groups, namely Communication
Services, Consumer Discretionary, Consumer Staples, Energy, Financials, Health
Care, Industrials, Information Technology, Materials, Real Estate, and Utilities. What
is more, the sample consists of companies from 18 countries. Of these 1800
observations, 1157 times the SDGs are not published, 481 times the SDGs are
published, and 162 times no information regarding publication is given. After
eliminating observations with missing information on one of the variables used for our
analysis, the final sample consists of 1602 observations.

4.2 Dependent variable

Price: Price is the share price at fiscal year-end

4.3 Independent (control) variables

We follow previous accounting literature on the value relevance of non-financial

information and add additional variables to this study to control for, size and
profitability.

Hence, the regression is estimated, including the following control variables: BVE,
EPSY, AR_SDG_text, AR_SDG_ANY.

BVE: BVE is the book value on equity, particularly, common equity at fiscal year-end,
divided by the number of outstanding shares.

10
EPSY: EPSY is the earnings per share at fiscal year-end.

AR_SDG_text: AR_SDG_text is a boilerplate-adjusted similarity of the firm's

disclosure with a vocabulary that reflects disclosure on the sustainable development
goals methodology, according to Hummel/Rötzel (2019).

AR_SDG_ANY: AR_SDG_ANY is a dummy variable that assumes the value one if

the firm refers to the SDGs in its annual report and 0 if the firm does not refer to the
SDGs.

5. Results

5.1 Descriptive Statistics

Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics of our analysis. On average, the share price
in our sample is 162.49 (median 20.48) with a maximum of 69,457.92 and a
minimum of 0.36. The book value of equity is 48.10 on average (median 8.42) with a
minimum of -11.75 and a maximum of 14,553.64. The earnings per share have a
maximum of 1643.58 and a minimum of -84.37, with an average of 5.57 (median
1.01). The Variable AR_SDG_text has an average of 0.01 (median 0.00) with a
maximum of 1.00 and a minimum of -0.01.

Insert table 1 around here

5.2 Multiple linear regression

For our regression analysis, we use a modified model which is based on Ohlson
(1995). The aim is to evaluate whether the reporting on the SDGs is related to share
prices in the period of 2015-2017. The model of Ohlson (1995) is based on the
condition that the equity value is a result of book value, financial accounting
information, and non-accounting information. The model of Ohlson (1995), or
modified versions thereof has been used comprehensively in the CSR research (e.g.,
Clarkson et a., 2013, De Klerk & De Villiers, 2012)

11
To assess the effect of each independent variable on the dependent variable, a
multiple linear regression model was performed. The multivariate test is evaluated on
the following model:

P=β 0 + β 1 BVE + β 2 EPSY + β3 AR ¿i + β 4 AR ¿ +ε

where: P = Share price at fiscal year-end
β0 = Regression intercept

Table 2 presents the results of the multiple linear regression and shows that the
regression model is highly significant. Moreover, the adjusted coefficient of
determination (R2) explains 98.18% of the relation between the dependent variable
and the independent variables. The coefficients for BVE and EPSY are highly
significant. The coefficient for AR_SDG_ANY is not statistically significant, while the
coefficient for AR_SDG_text is significant.

Insert table 2 around here

6. Discussion

The results of the regression that are displayed in Table 2 show that the F-ratio is
21592.69 and significant. Thus, the result statistically maintains the significance of
the regression model. The adjusted coefficient of determination (R 2) of 0.9818
indicates that the four independent variables explain 98.18% of the variance in the
share prices. This high value indicates that the model executed is reasonable to
explain the sample companies’ share price. The empirical evidence inferred from the
regression model suggests that AR_SDG_ANY is insignificant, and thus, the
hypothesis is not provided. However, the sign of AR_SDG_text is positive and
significant. This indicates that companies that disclose more on the SDGs have a
higher share price that the ones that have a lower disclosure practice on the SDGs.
BVE and EPSY are also found to be significant.

12
7. Conclusion

“Does reporting on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have an impact on

the share price of companies listed in the STOXX Europe-600 Index”? This study
aims to answer this research question about the value relevance of reporting of the
SDGs in the annual reports of companies listed on the STOXX Europe 600 Index
during the period 2015-2017. The results show that the disclosure of the SDGs does
not have an impact on the companies’ share price. However, the results indicate that
companies with a higher disclosure level on the SDGs tend to have a higher share
price than the ones with a lower disclosure level on the SDGs. The leading
reasonable explanation for this is found in agency theory, which is provided in section
two of this working paper. We contemplate the results of our study as a significant
impact on any further research in this area. One of the limiting factors of this study is
undoubtedly the factor that only 1602 of the 1800 observations were finally usable for
the regression analysis. However, we find that this is only a small limiting factor. The
second limiting factor was the use of the STOXX-Europe 600 index. Although this
was an excellent index for analysis, other indices, especially from overseas, could be
used in further studies. The last limiting factor is variable AR_SDG_text. This
ultimately follows its algorithm and makes the variable somehow subjective.
Nevertheless, the study should be an incentive for companies to primarily adopt or
increase their already existing reporting on the SDGs. The results show that
companies with higher SDG disclosure tend to have a higher share price than ones
with lower SDG disclosure. Therefore, extensive reporting on the SDGs could
increase the company's share price, which is essential for the companies'
shareholders.
What is more, too, reporting on the SDGs might have a positive signal for
stakeholders, that the company cares about sustainability. In conclusion, this study
creates a contribution to accounting literature, especially the literature on the
disclosure of non-financial information and its value relevance. The results of this
study should also be an impetus for companies to deal with today's problems of
corporate sustainability and the impact each company can create. Further studies

13
could analyze the development of the share price following the first publication of the
SDGs and in subsequent years.

14
 References

Ağca, A., Önder, Ş., 2007. Voluntary disclosure in Turkey: A study on firms listed in
Istanbul Stock Exchange (ISE). Management 5, 3–1.

Aguilera, R.V., Rupp, D.E., Williams, C.A., Ganapathi, J., 2007. Putting the S back in
corporate social responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change in organizations.
AMR 32, 836-863.

Al-Tuwaijri, S.A., Christensen, T.E., Hughes, K.E., 2004. The relations among
environmental disclosure, environmental performance, and economic performance: a
simultaneous equations approach — accounting, Organizations and Society 29, 447–
471.

Azar, N., Zakaria, Z., Sulaiman, N.A., 2019. The Quality of Accounting Information:
Relevance or Value-Relevance? Asian Journal of Accounting Perspectives; Vol 12
No 1 (2019): Asian Journal of Accounting Perspectives.

Bebbington, J., Unerman, J., 2017. Achieving the United Nations Sustainable
Development Goals: An enabling role for accounting research. Acc Auditing
Accountability J 31, 2–24.

Brannen, L., 2007. The sustainability reporting evolution. Business Finance., 13(2).

Brooks, C., Oikonomou, I., 2018. The effects of environmental, social, and governance
disclosures and performance on firm value: A review of the literature in accounting
and finance. The British Accounting Review 50, 1–15.

Cadiz Dyball, M., 1998. Corporate annual reports as promotional tools: the case of
Australian National Industries Limited. Asian Review of Accounting 6, 25–53.

Cahan, S.F., De Villiers, C., Jeter, D.C., Naiker, V., Van Staden, C.J., 2016. Are CSR
Disclosures Value Relevant? Cross-Country Evidence. European Accounting Review
25, 579–611.

Campbell, D., Shrives, P., Bohmbach‐Saager, H., 2001. Voluntary disclosure of mission
statements in corporate annual reports: signaling what and to whom? Business and
society review 106, 65–87.

Cho, C.H., Patten, D.M., 2007. The role of environmental disclosures as tools of
legitimacy: A research note. Accounting, Organizations, and Society 32, 639–647.

15
Choi, F.D., 1973. Financial disclosure and entry to the European capital market. Journal
of accounting research 159–175.
Clarkson, P.M., Li, Y., Richardson, G.D., Vasvari, F.P., 2008. Revisiting the relation
between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: An empirical
analysis. Accounting, Organizations, and Society 33, 303–327.

Cormier, D., Aerts, W., Ledoux, M.-J., Magnan, M., 2009. Attributes of social and human
capital disclosure and information asymmetry between managers and investors.
Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de
l’Administration 26, 71–88.

Cormier, D., Gordon, I.M., 2001a. An examination of social and environmental reporting
strategies. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 14, 587–617.

Cormier, D., Gordon, I.M., 2001b. An examination of social and environmental reporting
strategies. Acc Auditing Accountability J 14, 587–617.

Cortesi, A., Vena, L., 2019. Disclosure quality under Integrated Reporting: A value
relevance approach. Journal of Cleaner Production 220, 745–755.

De Klerk, M., de Villiers, C., 2012. The value relevance of corporate responsibility
reporting: South African evidence. Meditari Accountancy Research 20, 21–38.

De Villiers, C., Marques, A., 2016. Corporate social responsibility, country-level

predispositions, and the consequences of choosing a level of disclosure. Accounting
and Business Research 46, 167–195.

De Villiers, C., van Staden, C.J., 2006. Can less environmental disclosure have a
legitimizing effect? Evidence from Africa. Accounting, Organizations, and Society 31,
763–781.

Dhaliwal, D.S., Li, O.Z., Tsang, A., Yang, Y.G., 2011. Voluntary nonfinancial disclosure
and the cost of equity capital: The initiation of corporate social responsibility
reporting. The accounting review 86, 59–100.

Dowling, J., Pfeffer, J., 1975. Organizational legitimacy: Social values and organizational
behavior. Pacific sociological review 18, 122–136.

Drucker, P., 1982. What Is the Bottom Line When There Is No ‘Bottom line’“. Managing
Non-Profit Organization.

16
Fatemi, A., Glaum, M., Kaiser, S., 2018. ESG performance and firm value: The
moderating role of the disclosure. Global Finance Journal 38, 45–64.

Hassan, O.A., Marston, C., 2010. Disclosure measurement in the empirical accounting
literature-a review article.
Hassel, L., Nilsson, H., Nyquist, S., 2005. The value relevance of environmental
performance. European Accounting Review 14, 41–61.

Healy, P.M., Palepu, K.G., 2001. Information asymmetry, corporate disclosure, and the
capital markets: A review of the empirical disclosure literature. Journal of Accounting
and Economics 31, 405–440.

Hossain, M., Perera, M.H.B., Rahman, A.R., 1995. Voluntary disclosure in the annual
reports of New Zealand companies. Journal of International Financial Management &
Accounting 6, 69–87.

Hummel, K., Rötzel, P., 2019. Mandating the Sustainability Disclosure in Annual Reports
—Evidence from the United Kingdom. Schmalenbach Business Review.

Hummel, K., Schlick, C., 2016. The relationship between sustainability performance and
sustainability disclosure – Reconciling voluntary disclosure theory and legitimacy
theory. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 35, 455–476.

Jensen, M.C., Meckling, W.H., 1976. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency
costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics 3, 305–360.

Kamiske, G.F., Brauer, J.-P., n.d. Qualitätsmanagement von A bis Z : wichtige Begriffe
des Qualitätsmanagements und ihre Bedeutung, 7., aktualisierte u. erw. Aufl. ed,
Qualitätsmanagement von A bis Z. München Wien.

Lee, D., Psaros, J., Bae Choi, B., 2013. An analysis of Australian company carbon
emission disclosures. Pacific Accounting Review 25, 58–79.

Li, Y., Gong, M., Zhang, X.-Y., Koh, L., 2018. The impact of environmental, social, and
governance disclosure on firm value: The role of CEO power. The British Accounting
Review 50, 60–75.

Lightstone, K., Driscoll, C., 2008. Disclosing elements of disclosure: a test of legitimacy
theory and company ethics. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue
Canadienne des Sciences de l’Administration 25, 7–21.

17
Magness, V., 2006. Strategic posture, financial performance, and environmental
disclosure: An empirical test of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing &
Accountability Journal 19, 540–563.

Meek, G.K., Roberts, C.B., Gray, S.J., 1995. Factors Influencing Voluntary Annual Report
Disclosures By U.S., U.K., and Continental European Multinational Corporations.
Journal of International Business Studies 26, 555–572.
Moneva, J.M., Cuellar, B., 2009. The Value Relevance of Financial and Non-Financial
Environmental Reporting. Environmental and Resource Economics 44, 441–456.

O’Donovan, G., 2002. Environmental disclosures in the annual report: Extending the
applicability and predictive power of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing &
Accountability Journal 15, 344–371.

OHLSON, J.A., 1995. Earnings, Book Values, and Dividends in Equity Valuation*.
Contemporary Accounting Research 11, 661–687.

Padberg, E., n.d. Management by Excellence.

Plumlee, M., Brown, D., Hayes, R.M., Marshall, R.S., 2015. Voluntary environmental
disclosure quality and firm value: Further evidence. Journal of Accounting and Public
Policy 34, 336–361.

Ross, S.A., 1977. The determination of financial structure: the incentive-signaling

approach. The Bell Journal of Economics 23–40.

Shehata Nermeen F. (2014) Theories and Determinants of Voluntary Disclosure

SDG Kompass -Leitfaden für Unternehmensaktivitäten zu den SDGs-

Singha Gerald G., Andrés M. Cisneros-Montemayora, Wilf Swartzb, William Cheunga, J.

Adam Guyc, Tiff-Annie Kennyd, Chris J. McOwene, Rebecca Aschf, Jan Laurens
Gefferte,g, Colette C.C. Wabnitza,h, Rashid Sumailai, Quentin Hanichj, Yoshitaka
Otak (2017) A rapid assessment of co-benefits and trade-offs among Sustainable
Development Goals by

Theuvsen, L., Andeßner, R., Gmür, M., Greiling, D., 2017. Nonprofit-Organisationen und
Nachhaltigkeit. Springer.

Uyar, A., 2011. Firm characteristics and voluntary disclosure of graphs in annual reports
of Turkish listed companies. African Journal of Business Management 5, 7651–7657.

18
Uyar, A., Kilic, M., 2012. The influence of firm characteristics on disclosure of financial
ratios in annual reports of Turkish firms listed in the Istanbul Stock Exchange.
International Journal of Accounting, Auditing, and Performance Evaluation 8, 137–
156.

Uyar, A., Kilic, M., Bayyurt, N., 2013. Association between firm characteristics and
voluntary corporate disclosure: Evidence from Turkish listed companies. Intangible
capital 9, 1080–1112.

Van der Laan Smith, J., Adhikari, A., Tondkar, R.H., 2005. Exploring differences in social
disclosures internationally: A stakeholder perspective. Journal of accounting and
public policy 24, 123–151.

Verrecchia, R.E., 1983. Discretionary disclosure. Journal of accounting and economics 5,

179–194.

Watson, A., Shrives, P., Marston, C., 2002. Voluntary Disclosure Of Accounting Ratios in
the UK. The British Accounting Review 34, 289–313.

19
Iubiti Arhierei, Preoti si Diaconi, cinstit Cler a lui Hristos,

Preacucernici Parintii si Pastorii ai turmei lui Hristos,

Inimile noastre tanjeste sa va vorbeasca.

Vom incepe prin a da Slava lui Dumnezeu pentru toti si pentru toate!!!
Vom continua prin a ne cere iertare in primul si cel mai important rand fata de Hristos
Dumnezeul nostru, Maicii Sale, Nascatoarea de Dumnezeu si pururea Fecioara Maria si
intregii Bisericii celei nevazute dar biruitoare!!!

Noi care facem parte din Biserica Cea Vazuta si Luptatoare ne cerem iertare si cerem putere
de la Dumnezeu pentru a ne pocai autentic si a ne schimba viata in bine, ascultand si
implinind poruncile lui Dumnezeu!!!
Ne cerem iertare caci ne vedem pe noi, care facem parte dun poporul dreptcredincios ca
vinovati pentru apostazia si lepadarea de credinta in care am cazut incepand din clipa aderari
miscari ecumeniste, acceptand sa devenim membri ai consiliului mondial al "Bisericilor" desi
corect ar fi sa fie numit consiliul mondial al ereziilor. Intreg procesul de apostazie generala de
la dreapta credinta si-a continuat de a lungul aniilor traseul prin devieri de la dreapta credinte
care s-au semnat in cadrul mai multor intruniri precum Balamand, Chambessy, Geneva si
altele. Devierea treptata de la dreapta credinta si-au atins apogeul prin textele ambigue, eretice
si rastalmacitoare de la Sinodul din Creta din anul 2106 care au fost semnate de majoritatea
episcopilor participanti dar care nu au fost semnate de majoritatea episcopilor Bisericii, caci
majoritatea episcopilor Bisericii de pretutindeni nu a participat.
Ca consecinta si urmare duhovniceasca a caderii, lepadarii de credinta care a avut loc la
sinodul talharesc din Creta, Biserica se afla acum intr-o stare profund de trista, aflandu-se in
pericol de o noua mare Schisma caci Biserica din Rusia nu se mai afla in comuniune  cu
Biserica din Constantinopol. Iar toata starea aceasta nu este decat rodul apostaziei generale ( a
clerului si a poporului). Caci toti ne-am abatut si netrebnici ne-am facut.
Dar cei mai vinovati suntem noi poporul care are botezul cel dreptcredincios dar nu si faptele,
caci faptele noastre sunt uraciune si spurcaciune inainte lui Dumnezeu si dupa faptele noastre
nu suntem vrednici nici a ne numi oameni dar indeosebi cum vom indrazni a ne chema
crestini, caci dupa cum ne invata sfinti Biserici care sunt adevarati dascali si crestini, crestin
este acela care este Botezat corect in Numele Adevaratei Sfintei Treimii in Biserica Ortodoxa
si care are simtirea Harului Dumnezeiesc si care il ajuta pe credincios sa  implineasca
poruncile si voia lui Dumnezeu.
Spunand toate acestea ne cerem iertare inaintea clerului care a apostaziat prin semnarea sau
acceptarea textelor de la sinodul din Creta.
Ne cerem iertare fiindca este vina noastra in primul rand caci clerul a ajuns in situatia de a se
lepada de credinta in mod constient sau inconstient. Noi suntem vinovati pentru caderea si

20
apostazia in care ne aflam, noi suntem vinovati caci decenii de a randul v-am constrans mereu
sa incalcati sfintele canoane, sa scurtati din randuiala slujbelor, caci v-am fortat mereu sa
faceti pogoraminte nepermise amenintandu-va de multe ori ca daca nu faceti cum dorim noi
mergem la eretici (greco-catolici sau altii) care sunt dispusi sa faca slujbele precum dorim noi
dar spre a noastra pierzare, rusine sa ne fie!!! Sa ne fie rusine si motiv de pocainta  faptul ca
v-am bruscat mereu si am dat dovada de multa lipsa de credinta, rabdare, dragoste si
ascultare. Caci nu am ascultat invataturile voastre cat timp voi ati predicat cuvantul
Adevarului, nu l-am ascultat ci L-am lepadat prin ignoranta, superficialitatea, lenea,
nepasarea, nesimtirea dar mai ales necredinta noastra. Este vina voastra caci din cauza noastra
vi-s-a alterat constiinta cea ortodoxa care cunostea si aplica cu iubire sfintele dogme si
sfintele canoane. Este vina noastra ca v-am virusat cu gandirea noastra lumeasca,
superstitioasa si eretica. Este firesc, este omeneste ca clerul cu trecerea timpului sa se
molipseasca si sa se conforme credintei poporului. Clerul este oglinda noastra a poporului.
Timp de zeci de ani de zile la randul prin pacatele noastre, prin comportamentul nostru am
adus clerul in starea aceasta jalnica in care se afla acum. Noi suntem cei care din iubire de
sine, din egoism, din necredinta sau iubire de arginti avem zeci de milioane de avorturi stiute,
tot din aceleasi motive am parasit multi dintre noi tara noastre si ne-am incurcat cu neamurile
pagane si eretice. Pentru noi ati fost nevoiti si voi, membri clerului bisericesc sa parasiti tara,
si tot pentru noi a trebuit sa faceti enorm de multe compromise si sa va umiliti in fata
ereticilor, acceptand sa faceti slujbe, conferinte si tot felul de intalniri si evenimente impreuna
cu ei  doar ca sa avem si noi un loc unde sa ne adunam. Tot noi suntem de vina ca ingaduiti
casatoriile cu ereticii ( cu catolici, protestanti, musulmani sau chiar si cu atei). Si pentru cate
altele nu suntem noi responsabili caci dintr-u inceput voi nu erati asa. Aduceti-va aminte de
starea cea dintai, de dragostea dintai fata de Dumnezeu si sfintele Sale Dogme, Canoane si
Porunci, aduceti-va aminte de juramintele depuse, marturisind ferm si hotarat supunerea,
credinta si fidelitatea fata de dogmele, canoanele si poruncile Bisericii. Noi ne aducem aminte
cat de mult va straduiati sa urmati calea Sfintiilor Parinti in credinciosie fata de invataturile
sfinte ale Biserici. Dar din nefericirea noi poporul nu v-am ascultat si v-am impins spre
prapastie, pana cand ati cazut si voi. Iar daca si voi si noi am cazut cine ne va ma ridica? Ne
va ridica Mila lui Dumnezeu care nu ne paraseste niciodata daca ne vom intoarce din calea
noastra cea rea si ne vom pocai de nelegiuirile noastre. Ne va ridica Dumnezeu pentru
rugaciunile Preacuratei, Stapanei noastre de Dumnezeu Nascatoarea si Pururea Fecioara
Maria care se roaga pentru noi toti impreuna cu intreg soborul Bisericii Biruitoare din Cer!!!
Ne va ridica Dumnezeu prin cei care inca nu au cazut, care inca nu s-au lepadat de El!!! Caci
precum pe vremea Sfantului Prooroc Ilie Dumnezeu isi are inca oameni sai care nu si-au
plecat genunchii si grumazi lui Baal, adica ecumenismului si tuturor ereziilor din zilele
noastre!!! Ne cerem iertare mai ales si fata de acestia, de ramasita aleasa de Dumnezeu care
nu L-a tradat pe Dumnezeu! Ne cerem iertare pentru prigoanele si intristarile care le sufera
din pricina noastra! Nadajduim ca bunul Dumnezeu pentru rugaciunile tuturor Sfintiilor prin
acestia ne va ridica!!! Ramane doar ca noi, cler si popor sa ne dorim lucrul acesta!!! Fiecare
dintre noi sa dea dovada de putina smerenie si sa isi recunoasca partea lui de vina pentru
starea in care ne aflam noi si intreaga lume astazi!!! Daca insasi Biserica lui Hristos este in
mare tulburare atunci sa nu ne miram ca lumea veacului acesta este intr-o si mai mare
tulburare! Asadar insistam, staruim si apelam la inima, constiinta si mila fiecaruia dintre noi:
Sa ne fie mila cu adeverat de sufletele noastre si sa incepem sa ne pocaim! Sa incepem prin a
recunoaste fata de noi insine si inaintea lui Dumnezeu in inimile noastre si in fata intregii lumi
ca am gresit! Am gresit Doamne iarta-ne! Nu este Iuda singur vinovat ci in primul rand noi!

21
Noi te-am tradat cu toti! Ne pare rau ajuta-ne sa facem roade vrednice de pocainta! Ajuta-ne
si nu lasa pe noi in voia noastra cea rea! Te-am parasit, Te-am tradat, Te-am vandut, Te-am
batjocorit, Te-am scuipat si Te-am rastignit! Dar Te rugam Doamne nu ne lasa in voia noastra
cea rea! Ca vrem ori nu vrem Tu intoarce-ne la Tine! Lumineaza-ne sa ne vedem gresealele
noastre si daruieste-ne pocainta autentica si roade vrednice de ea! Doamne, Dumnezeul
minunilor fa minunea aceasta si daruieste-ne pocainta cea aducatoare de bucuria unirii in Duh
si Adevar cu Tine! Ca Tu esti Dumnezeul nostru si Tie Slava Inaltam Tatalui si Fiului si
Sfantului Duh. Amin.

Tables

Table 1
  Share Price BVE EPSY Text
Max 69457,92 14553,64 1643,58 1,00
Min 0,36 -11,75 -84,37 -0,01
Average 162,49 48,10 5,57 0,01
Median 20,48 8,42 1,01 0,00

Table 2
Regression Statistics        
Multiple R 0,990881236      
R Square 0,981845624      
Adjusted R Square 0,981800153      
Standard Error 346,1387291      
Observations 1602      
         
ANOVA        
  df SS MS F
Regression 4 10348256619 2587064155 21592,69295
Residual 1597 191339795,6 119812,0198  
Total 1601 10539596414    
         
  Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value
Intercept -55,67078489 10,35378309 -5,376854468 8,70262E-08
BVE 3,083520737 0,090532718 34,05973898 1,3482E-191
EPSY 11,99195972 0,800538546 14,97986546 1,44215E-47
AR_SDG_text -420,8206171 148,5823946 -2,832237414 0,004680354
AR_SDG_ANY 28,06334353 19,94196011 1,407251012 0,15954756

22