Occupational Health and Safety Reports: A Comparative Study between Malaysia and the United Kingdom

IF 0.3 Q4 BUSINESS, FINANCE Asian Journal of Accounting and Governance Pub Date : 2018-10-31 DOI:10.17576/AJAG-2018-10-02
M. Rahman, M. Yahya, Maizatulakma Abdullah
{"title":"Occupational Health and Safety Reports: A Comparative Study between Malaysia and the United Kingdom","authors":"M. Rahman, M. Yahya, Maizatulakma Abdullah","doi":"10.17576/AJAG-2018-10-02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Occupational health and safety reporting (OHS) is important for the evaluation of business risk as well as representing the commitment of the reporting companies to their stakeholders which in turn enhance companies’ images. The evidences of OHS reporting practices can be found in prior studies that exist in the literature of corporate social reporting, intellectual capital reporting and risk reporting. However not much can be understood from prior studies as the extent to which OHS index reporting captured was somewhat limited. Therefore, an exclusive OHS reporting study that apply more comprehensive index of reporting would ensure the far-reaching of its understanding. This index was applied in content analysis of corporate annual reports for financial year ended 2014. The objective of the study is to compare the practices of OHS reporting by 40 Malaysia companies against 40 companies from so-called reporting leading country such as the United Kingdom (UK). The findings are expected to be indicative of current practices of such reporting as well as to propose the area of improvement. In the absence of reporting guidelines, the study’s findings suggest that the OHS reporting practice in Malaysia is comparable to the UK. In some reporting items, Malaysia companies report even more than the UK companies. However, Malaysia companies are suggested to increase financial-based OHS reporting as they are behind their counterparts in the UK. This study is consistent with Stakeholder Theory where reporting companies not only perform OHS work as a mean to discharge its accountability but they also use annual reports as a method of accountability information conveyance.","PeriodicalId":42796,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Accounting and Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Accounting and Governance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17576/AJAG-2018-10-02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Occupational health and safety reporting (OHS) is important for the evaluation of business risk as well as representing the commitment of the reporting companies to their stakeholders which in turn enhance companies’ images. The evidences of OHS reporting practices can be found in prior studies that exist in the literature of corporate social reporting, intellectual capital reporting and risk reporting. However not much can be understood from prior studies as the extent to which OHS index reporting captured was somewhat limited. Therefore, an exclusive OHS reporting study that apply more comprehensive index of reporting would ensure the far-reaching of its understanding. This index was applied in content analysis of corporate annual reports for financial year ended 2014. The objective of the study is to compare the practices of OHS reporting by 40 Malaysia companies against 40 companies from so-called reporting leading country such as the United Kingdom (UK). The findings are expected to be indicative of current practices of such reporting as well as to propose the area of improvement. In the absence of reporting guidelines, the study’s findings suggest that the OHS reporting practice in Malaysia is comparable to the UK. In some reporting items, Malaysia companies report even more than the UK companies. However, Malaysia companies are suggested to increase financial-based OHS reporting as they are behind their counterparts in the UK. This study is consistent with Stakeholder Theory where reporting companies not only perform OHS work as a mean to discharge its accountability but they also use annual reports as a method of accountability information conveyance.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
职业健康和安全报告:马来西亚和联合王国的比较研究
职业健康和安全报告对于评估业务风险以及代表报告公司对其利益相关者的承诺非常重要,这反过来又提高了公司的形象。在企业社会报告、智力资本报告和风险报告的文献中,可以找到职业健康安全报告实践的证据。然而,由于职业安全与卫生指数报告所涵盖的范围有些有限,因此从先前的研究中无法了解多少。因此,一个专门的职业安全与卫生报告研究,采用更全面的报告指标,将确保其理解的深远意义。该指标应用于2014财年企业年报的内容分析。该研究的目的是比较40家马来西亚公司与40家来自所谓报告领先国家(如英国)的公司的职业健康安全报告做法。预期调查结果将表明这种报告的目前做法,并提出需要改进的领域。在缺乏报告指南的情况下,研究结果表明,马来西亚的OHS报告实践与英国相当。在一些报告项目中,马来西亚公司的报告甚至超过了英国公司。然而,建议马来西亚公司增加基于财务的OHS报告,因为他们落后于英国的同行。本研究与利益相关者理论一致,报告公司不仅将职业健康安全工作作为履行责任的手段,而且还将年度报告作为责任信息传递的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
33.30%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
PENGARUH KEPIMPINAN BERETIKA TERHADAP TINGKAH LAKU KERJA TIDAK PRODUKTIF: KOMITMEN ORGANISASI, IDENTIFIKASI ORGANISASI DAN KEPERCAYAAN SEBAGAI PENGANTARA INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL AND SOCIAL PERFORMANCE OF ISLAMIC BANKS IN INDONESIA AND MALAYSIA: THE MODERATING ROLE OF SHARIA SUPERVISORY BOARDS EFFECTIVENESS OF GEOMETRIC BROWNIAN MOTION METHOD IN PREDICTING STOCK PRICES: EVIDENCE FROM INDIA DO INTERNAL AUDITORS IMPROVE FIRMS’ WORKING CAPITAL MANAGEMENT? DO INVESTORS OF ISLAMIC EQUITY FUNDS FOLLOW WARREN BUFFET’S ADVICE? A REGRESSION ASSESSMENT
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1