Evaluasi Pelaporan Tanggung Jawab Sosial pada PT Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk

Authors

  • Rosinta Ria Panggabean Bina Nusantara University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21512/bbr.v4i1.1031

Keywords:

Social accounting, CSR, environmental accounting, PT Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk

Abstract

This study uses a content analysis framework that provides information on the comprehensiveness of corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting, an important aspect of social and environmental accountability. Comprehensive reporting requires three types of information for each disclosed CSR item: (i) vision and goals, (ii) management approach, and (iii) performance indicators. This study evaluates the comprehensiveness of CSR
reporting using the 2011 annual report of PT Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk. The content analysis reveals a low level of comprehensive reporting. This finding complements those of prior studies on the completeness of CSR reporting.

Author Biography

Rosinta Ria Panggabean, Bina Nusantara University

Accounting and Finance Department

References

Adams, C. A. (2004). The ethical, social and environmental reporting-performance portrayal gap. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 17(5), 731–757.

Archel, P., Fernández, M., & Larrinaga, C. (2008). The organizational and operational boundaries of triple bottom line reporting: A survey. Environmental Management, 41(1), 106–117.

Bouten, L., Everaert, P., van Liedekerke, Luc., de Moor, L., Christiaens, J. (2011). Corporate social responsibility reporting: A comprehensive picture?. Accounting Forum 35 (2011) 187 – 204.

Farneti, F., & Guthrie, J. (2009). Sustainability reporting by Australian public sector organisations: Why they report. Accounting Forum, 33(2), 89–98.

GRI. N.d. www.globalreporting.co.id. Diakses tanggal 5 Januari 2013.

Guthrie, J., & Abeysekera, I. (2006). Content analysis of social, environmental reporting: What is new? Journal of Human Resource Costing and Accounting, 10(2), 114–126.

Hopwood, A. G. (2009). Accounting and the environment. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(3–4), 433–439.

Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

Lamberton, G. (2005). Sustainability accounting—A brief history and conceptual framework. Accounting Forum, 29(1), 7–26.

Milne, M., & Gray, R. (2007). Future prospects for corporate sustainability reporting. In J. Unerman, J. Bebbington, & B. O’Dwyer (Eds.), Sustainability accounting and accountability (pp. 184– 207). London: Routledge.

Reynolds, M. A., & Yuthas, K. (2008). Moral discourse and corporate social responsibility reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 78(1–2), 47–64.

Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas.

Unerman, J. (2000). Methodological issues: Reflections on quantification in corporate social reporting content analysis. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 13(5), 667–680.

van Staden, C. J., & Hooks, J. (2007). A comprehensive comparison of corporate environmental reporting and responsiveness. British Accounting Review, 39(3), 197–210.

Vuontisjärvi, T. (2006). Corporate social reporting in the European context and human resource disclosures: An analysis of Finnish companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 69(4), 331–354.

Weber, R. P. (1990). Basic content analysis (2nd ed.). Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, Series No. 49, Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Willis, A. (2003). The role of the Global Reporting Initiative’s sustainability reporting guidelines in the social screening of investments. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(3), 233–237.

Downloads

Published

2013-05-31
Abstract 387  .
PDF downloaded 896  .