Corporate social responsibility disclosures of companies listed on the Vietnam’s Stock Market - Perspectives of legitimacy theory and stakeholder theory

to the fact that most activities to support and develop the community are conducted by large and prestigious companies in the market and generally, companies did not really concern about disclosing such information on their reports. Finally, regarding information on products linked with the responsibilities of enterprises with customers, there was little difference in the levels of CSRD between these two types of enterprises. Figure 6. Levels of CSRD on products in manufacturing and non-manufacturing enterprises during the period from 2006 to 2016 Source: calculations of the authors based on results of Stata 12.0 For enterprises, product quality is a key determinant of whether customers will return to these companies, therefore, it plays an important role in creating the business reputation. Vietnamese enterprises have been aware of this issue early so CSRD on products has been placed great attention. It is proved by the figures that the levels of CSRD on product safety, product quality, production and product development were relatively high with the ratios of the average level of CSRD to the maximum level of CSRD of 22.5% in non-manufacturing enterprises and 34.5% in manufacturing enterprises in 2006. This figures had a tendency to increase gradually over the years, however, there was not much difference between two types of enterprises because whether it is non-manufacturing or manufacturing enterprises, the demand on information of products of customers is given a priority by enterprises as customers are critical to the survival and development of enterprises. 4.3. Regression results In this study, to examine the differences in CSRD between manufacturing and non- manufacturing firms, T-test was used to test the difference in mean value of CSRD in general and CSRD on each information category in particular (responsibilities towards the environment, employees, the community, and customers) of manufacturing and non- manufacturing enterprises. The results are shown in the following table: Non-MF MF % Non-MF % MF 370 Table 2. T-test’s results to investigate difference in CSRD between manufacturing and manufacturing enterprises Category of information Type of enterprises Obs Mean t Pr (│T│> │t│) CSRD Non-manufacturing 176 12.35795 -5.9278 0.0000 Manufacturing 297 18.70707 ENV Non-manufacturing 176 0.9147727 -5.9418 0.0000 Manufacturing 297 2.777778 EMP Non-manufacturing 176 5.681818 -4.9488 0.0000 Manufacturing 297 7.592593 COM Non-manufacturing 176 2.528409 -2.8924 0.0040 Manufacturing 297 3.457912 CUS Non-manufacturing 176 3.232955 -6.3812 0.0000 Manufacturing 297 4.905724 Source: analysis results from Stata 12.0 The above table shows that all categories of information have Pr (|T| > |t|) < 0.05 (5%), thus, Ho is rejected. This means that there is a statistically significant difference in CSRD on each category of information between manufacturing and non-manufacturing enterprises. This finding is consistent to research hypothesis and research results of Deegan and Gordon (1996), Cooke (1992). The search results can complement the legitimacy theory on practice and disclosures of corporate social responsibility in the context of Vietnam where behavior of the business is affected by social pressures. Each company may have different pressures and different reactions to those pressures. Indeed, manufacturing enterprises have more impact on the social environment than non-manufacturing enterprises so manufacturing firms are given more attention and greater expectations from the social community. These pressures require more practice and disclosures of corporate social responsibility from companies to draw attention from the social community and to reduce the risks associated with the punishment for irresponsible behaviors as well as improve the companies’ images and prestige. 5. Conclusion The results of this study show that the levels of CSRD of listed companies on the Vietnam’s stock market were relatively low, especially the information related to the environment. In addition, there are significant differences in the levels of CSRD in general and CSRD on each category of information in particular between manufacturing and non- manufacturing enterprises. It is believed that manufacturing enterprises have more impact on the social environment compared to non-manufacturing enterprises as manufacturing enterprises receive more attention and expectations from the society. These pressures require manufacturing enterprises to implement and disclose CSR more to draw attention from the social community to reduce risks related to punishments for irresponsible activities and to improve images of enterprises. 371 This research provides empirical evidence complementing stakeholder theory and legitimacy theory to explain the increasing practice and disclosures of corporate social responsibility in the context of Vietnam due to growing pressures from stakeholders at the same time. Specifically, when stakeholders put more concern on certain issue, enterprises tend to focus more on that issue. The results suggest that the government should take appropriate measures to encourage the implementation and disclosures of CSR by increasing the shareholders’ roles. In addition, the government should standardize regulations on CSRD based on common standards in the market and international practices, however, these regulations should also be tailored to the specific characteristics of each type of enterprises and the disclosed information should be categorized according to responsibility of the business to each stakeholder. This study examined a sample of 43 enterprises randomly selected from more than 700 stable companies listed on the Ho Chi Minh stock exchange during the period from 2006 to 2016. The sample size is small as the study aimed at having balanced panel data, whereby, the results of the study may be subjective and biased. It is recommended that future research should increase the number of enterprises to have more objective results enabling broader understanding of social responsibility disclosure of enterprises listed on the stock market of Vietnam. 6. References: Branco and Rodrigues. (2006), ‘Corporate social responsibility and resource - based perspectives’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 111-132. Craig Deegan, Michaela Rankin (1996), "Do Australian companies report environmental news objectively?: An analysis of environmental disclosures by firms prosecuted successfully by the Environmental Protection Authority", Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 9 Issue: 2, pp. 50-67. David Hackston, Markus J. Milne, (1996), ‘Some determinants of social and environmental disclosures in New Zealand companies’, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 9 Issue: 1, pp. 77-108. Deegan, C and Gordon, B (1996), ‘A study of the environmental disclosure practices of Australian corporations’, Account Bus Res 26(3): 187-199. Deegan, C., M. Rankin, and P. Voght. (2000), Firms’ Disclosure Reactions to Major Social Incidents: Australian Evidence. Accounting Forum, 24 (1): 101-130. Dowling, J. and Pfeffer, J. (1975), 'Organizational Legitimacy: Social Values and Organizational Behavior', Pacific sociological review, 1975: 18, 122-136. Guthrie, J. and Parker, L. D. (1989), ‘Corporate social reporting: a rebuttal of legitimacy theory’, Accounting and Business Research, 19(76), pp. 343-352. 372 Howard Rothmann Bowen (1953), Social responsibilities of the business man, New York, Harper. Jitaree, Wisuttorn (2015), ‘Corporate social responsibility disclosure and financial performance: evidence from Thailand’, Doctor of Philosophy thesis, School of Accounting, Economics and Finance, University of Wollongong, 2015. Juniati Gunawan, Hadrian Djajadikerta, Malcolm Smith (2008), ‘An examination of corporate social disclosures in the annual reports of Indonesian listed companies’, Journal of Asia pacific center for environmental accountability, 2009: 13-39. Khlif, H., Guidara, A. and Souissi, M. (2015), ‘Corporate social and environmental disclosure and corporate performance: Evidence from South Africa and Morocco’, Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 5 (1), 51-69. Mohammed, N.A., Zakaree, S., & Oladele, O. K (2016), ‘Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure and Financial Performance of Listed Manufacturing Firms in Nigeria’ Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, 7 (4), 47-58. Mustaruddin Saleh, Norhayah Zulkifli, Rusnah Muhamad (2011), ‘Looking for evidence of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance in an emerging market’, Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, Vol. 3 Issue: 2, pp. 165-190. Nagib Salem Muhammad Bayoud (2012), ‘Corporate social responsibility disclosure and organizational performance: the case of Libya: a mixed methods study’, Doctor of Philosophy, University of Southern Queensland. Nguyen, T. K. C. (2016), Corporate social responsibility in Vietnam nowadays, Doctoral thesis. University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vietnam national university. Olivia Tjia and Lulu Setiawati (2012), ‘Effect of CSR Disclosure to Value of the Firm: Study for Banking Industry in Indonesia’, World Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 2. No. 6, pp. 169-178. RE. Freeman (1983), ‘Strategic Management a Stakeholder Approach’, Advances in Strategic Management, pp. 31-60. T.E. Cooke (1992), ‘The impact of size, stock market listing and industry type on disclosure in the annual reports of Japanese listed corporations’, Accounting and Business Research, vol. 22, no. 87, pp. 229-239. Toukabri, M., Olfa, B. J. and Faouzi, J. (2014), ‘Corporate Social Disclosure: The Explanatory Theories and Conceptual Framework’, International Journal of Academic Research in Management (IJARM), 3(2), 208-225.