Sustainability disclosure quality of Nigerian listed firms: the role of female leadership, board communication, and external assurance

Elaigwu, Moses et al. Article Sustainability disclosure quality of Nigerian listed firms: the role of female leadership, board communication, and external assurance Cogent Business & Management Provided in Cooperation with: Taylor & Francis Group Suggested Citation: Elaigwu, Moses et al. (2024) : Sustainability disclosure quality of Nigerian listed firms: the role of female leadership, board communication, and external assurance, Cogent Business & Management, ISSN 2331-1975, Taylor & Francis, Abingdon, Vol. 11, Iss. 1, pp. 1-23, https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2376774 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/326424 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Cogent Business & Management ISSN: 2331-1975 (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/oabm20 Sustainability disclosure quality of Nigerian listed firms: the role of female leadership, board communication, and external assurance Moses Elaigwu, James Ike Ugwu, Abdelkader Alghorbany, Ogechukwu Maria Ngwoke, Alexander Onyebuchi Ude, Obani Chimaobi Desmond & Peter Audu To cite this article: Moses Elaigwu, James Ike Ugwu, Abdelkader Alghorbany, Ogechukwu Maria Ngwoke, Alexander Onyebuchi Ude, Obani Chimaobi Desmond & Peter Audu (2024) Sustainability disclosure quality of Nigerian listed firms: the role of female leadership, board communication, and external assurance, Cogent Business & Management, 11:1, 2376774, DOI: 10.1080/23311975.2024.2376774 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2376774 © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group Published online: 16 Jul 2024. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 2217 View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 2 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=oabm20 Accounting, corporAte governAnce & Business ethics | reseArch Article Cogent Business & ManageMent 2024, VoL. 11, no. 1, 2376774 Sustainability disclosure quality of Nigerian listed firms: the role of female leadership, board communication, and external assurance Moses elaigwua, James ike ugwub, Abdelkader Alghorbanyc, ogechukwu Maria ngwoked, Alexander onyebuchi udeb, obani chimaobi Desmonde and peter Auduf aDepartment of accounting, Kogi state university, anyigba, Kogi state, nigeria; bDepartment of accounting, Faculty of Management sciences, Prince abubakar audu university, anyigba, Kogi state, nigeria; cDepartment of Management, university of oran 1, oran, algeria; dDepartment of Business administration, university of Canada, West British Columbia, Canada; eDepartment of accountancy, Caritas university, amorji nike, enugu, nigeria; fDepartment of Business administration, Faculty of Management sciences, Prince abubakar audu university, anyigba, Kogi state, nigeria ABSTRACT this study examined how female leadership, board communication, independent third-party assurance, and sustainability disclosure quality are interconnected in nigerian listed firms. using data from the top 100 firms on the nigerian exchange (ngX) group from 2013 to 2022, comprising 1000 observations, the study evaluates its hypotheses. employing a panel regression analysis with the random effect (re) robust estimation technique, the findings demonstrate that female leadership, board communication, and external assurance positively and significantly impact sustainability disclosure quality. this suggests that having women in leadership roles, fostering effective board communication through shared membership, and obtaining independent (external) assurance for sustainability disclosures enhance the quality of such reports. the robustness of the results is confirmed by the one-Year lag effect, which aligns with the outcomes of the main model. this positive correlation signifies an enhancement in the quality of sustainability disclosures within nigeria. however, there is room for improvement, as indicated by descriptive statistics revealing a 20% level of sustainability disclosure quality. this study underscores the need for regulators, firm management, and stakeholders to bolster compliance with sustainability reporting standards and guidelines, exerting pressure to elevate disclosure quality. in addition, the research fills gaps in the literature by providing fresh empirical evidence and insights regarding the significance of female leadership, board communication, and external assurance in shaping sustainability disclosure quality among nigerian listed firms. 1. Introduction corporate entities typically seek to maximize profit and shareholder wealth at the expense of people and the environment (tiamiyu etal., 2021). this is because the urge to generate and maximize profit appears to trump sustainability (i.e., economic, environmental, and social [ees]) repercussions of firms’ operational actions (tiamiyu et al., 2021). Financial information focuses on the economic performance of reporting firms, with little or no attention paid to non-financial activities that affect the host community and society as a whole (Wang, 2017). the absence of a focus on sustainability performance and information disclosure causes financial information to lose credibility and is perceived as incomplete (tiamiyu et al., 2021). As a result, elkington (2013) emphasized that business performance should not be judged solely by financial reporting content but should also include companies’ sustainability performance. consequently, the purpose of sustainability reporting is to strike a balance between financial and non-financial performance in terms of economic and sustainable development (elaigwu etal., 2020). For example, in a situation in which firms strive to maximize shareholder wealth, they should not take the © 2024 the author(s). Published by informa uK Limited, trading as taylor & Francis group CONTACT abdelkader alghorbany [email protected] Department of Management, university of oran 1, oran, algeria. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2376774 this is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. the terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent. ARTICLE HISTORY received 14 March 2024 revised 12 June 2024 Accepted 1 July 2024 KEYWORDS sustainability disclosure quality; female leadership; board communication; external assurance; nigeria REVIEWING EDITOR sandra Alves, higher institute of Accounting and Administration, university of Aveiro, portugal SUBJECTS Business, Management and Accounting; Finance; environmental economics 2 M. elAigWu etAl. negative impact of their business activities on the environment, people, and society at large for granted (gherghina & simionescu, 2015; World commission on environment & Development, 1987). consequently, sustainability reporting has become a global phenomenon in corporate practices, which emerging economies cannot afford to ignore if sustainable development is to be accomplished (elaigwu et al., 2024). this is because the world is threatened by sustainability challenges, and the existence of man on the planet has become a source of concern in many emerging economies. For example, increased global sustainability threats, as enshrined in the united nations sustainable Development goals in terms of negative effects of firm operations, are a source of concern for various stakeholders who request more comprehensive corporate information outside financial reporting (Abdulsalam & Babangida, 2020; Anazonwu etal., 2018; sanusi & sanusi, 2019). these sustainability issues concern climate change, ozone layer depletion, pollution, desertification, various types of emissions, biodiversity loss, and an increase in poverty, inequality, hunger, and a slew of others that are detrimental to survival (AbdulKareem etal., 2021; Al-Dhamari etal., 2022; talab etal., 2023). Meanwhile, firms’ active sustainability performance disclosure of the aforementioned sustainability issues is insufficient, as the quality of such disclosures is critical to sustainable development. therefore, analyzing the sustainability Disclosure Quality (sDQ) of nigerian listed firms reveals an evolving landscape in corporate transparency and responsibility (erin etal., 2022). While nigeria’s regulatory framework emphasizes sustainability reporting, the quality and depth of disclosures vary significantly among companies. Adeyemi etal. (2020) noted that, although there is an increasing trend in the number of firms disclosing sustainability information, the quality of these disclosures remains a concern. several factors contribute to the varied quality of sustainability disclosure among nigerian listed firms. For instance, inadequate regulatory enforcement and reporting standards play a pivotal role. Despite the securities and exchange commission (sec) nigeria’s efforts to mandate sustainability reporting through the nigerian code of corporate governance (2018), compliance lacks uniformity across industries and firms (okoye, 2021). Moreover, the lack of standardized reporting frameworks tailored to nigeria exacerbates this issue. Although global standards such as the global reporting initiative (gri) and the sustainability Accounting standards Board (sAsB) exist, their alignment with local needs and priorities remains a challenge (uadiale & Fagbemi, 2019). the lack of stakeholder engagement is another critical factor in sustainability disclosure quality. Firms often struggle to identify and prioritize stakeholders’ interests and concerns, leading to superficial or generic disclosures that lack substance (Akinbode etal., 2021). in addition, sustainability reporting quality research has received less attention in the nigerian context and remains a gray area for investigation (Anazonwu et al., 2018; odoemelam & okafor, 2018; n. p. osazuwa et al., 2017; sanusi & sanusi, 2019). given the aforementioned concerns and deficiencies in governance, ethical practices in business, and regulatory frameworks, sustainability disclosures in emerging economies have often been perceived as lacking quality (elaigwu etal., 2024; Katmon etal., 2019). this observation prompted an investigation of the sDQ in nigeria. therefore, this study aims to assess the sDQ of listed firms in nigeria, with a specific focus on significant governance attributes, such as female leadership, board communication, and external assurance, which, to the best of our knowledge, have not been analyzed together in our context. We chose to analyze these variables, as they are believed to be fundamental determinants of sustainability Disclosure Quality (sDQ). this study examines female leadership roles as opposed to gender diversity in the spirit of tokenism and critical mass assumptions (rao & tilt, 2016; Zhuang et al., 2018), focusing on women in positions such as ceo, board chairs, board committee chairs, and other strategic positions that are uncommon in the sustainability reporting literature on emerging economies. this is because the female leadership role in corporate organizations requires attention to showcasing female talent in strategic positions (Aluwong & Fodio, 2019; Moreno-gómez et al., 2018), which could lead to more effective decisions based on the cognitive variety of the teams, which could improve the sDQ (Al-shaer & Zaman, 2016; Klein, 2017). similarly, board communication is explored in this study through the lens of overlapping membership, which may lead to successful information management (Moreno-gómez et al., 2018). such information management is especially important when the board’s makeup is substantially diversified as it reduces knowledge asymmetry (samuel et al., 2019). Furthermore, board communication (overlapping cogent Business & MAnAgeMent 3 membership) has received the least attention in sustainability reporting research as it is primarily focused on firm value and financial reporting quality (Kalelkar, 2017; sassen etal., 2018; velte, 2017). Furthermore, the global reporting initiative (gri-g4) emphasizes the importance of the external assurance of sustainability reporting, although it is not mandatory. Meanwhile, there has been little research on the external assurance of sustainability disclosures in nigeria, as in many other emerging nations. therefore, because of the importance of external assurance for sustainability reporting regarding the quality of disclosures, the current study felt it was timely to evaluate the nigerian scenario. the study employed panel regression (random effect) using content analysis and found a significantly positive association between female leadership, board communication, external assurance, and sDQ. the study has practical and theoretical implications for listed firms, stakeholders of firms, government, and future sustainability research. the remainder of this paper is structured as follows: section 2 covers the literature review and theoretical background, section 3 presents the development of hypotheses, and section 4 discusses the methodology. sections 5 and 6 present the results and conclusions, respectively, while section 7 presents the limitations of the study. 2. Regulatory background of the Code of Corporate Governance in Nigeria it is obvious that the rise in industries such as refineries and breweries, as well as the increase in environmental impacts, has created serious sustainability issues. consequently, the urgent regulation of these activities without extinguishing the prospects of these sectors is therefore required (osazuwa etal., 2015, 2017). the nigerian government has put in place policies via the revised nigerian code of corporate governance (nccg) 2018 and its emphasis on sustainability and enacted laws (Federal Ministry of environment, environmental impact Assessment Act, and other Acts) that are supposed to address in totality sustainability issues (Financial reporting council of nigeria (Frc),), 2018). the issue of whether this policy is being adhered to is a subject of debate (ozili, 2021). there are indeed legislations and strategies in place to protect the existing facilities ensure they meet international standards and requirements, and ensure the citizens have the best possible conditions for optimum health and wellbeing (osazuwa et al., 2015). the policies for environmental management range from enactments in the constitution, and international treaties to environment and resource protection laws (osazuwa et al., 2017). the background of the code for corporate governance in nigeria can be traced to the 1990s when several corporate governance issues such as overvaluation and concealment of indebtedness level by some companies and the collapse of some banks led to the need for a code of corporate governance (osazuwa, 2016). in 2003, the securities and exchange commission (sec) under the chairmanship of Atedo peterside set up a committee to address the issue of corporate governance known as the peterside commission on corporate governance of companies (osazuwa, 2016). the committee came up with its report in 2003. however, despite the code of 2003, several companies still experienced weak governance systems which led to a series of corporate failures and distorted the economy (Aina, 2013). in 2008, with the dawning of the global financial meltdown that rocked the world economy and the lessons learned, the commission set up another committee to review the 2003 code and cater to its perceived weakness, and also inculcate ways of ensuring compliance following the international best practices (osazuwa, 2016). this was a timely intervention as many companies were facing collapse due to weak governance and risk structures at the time. this led to the establishment of the revised code of corporate governance for listed companies in 2011 (securities and exchange commission (sec); 2011) and 2018 (Financial reporting council of nigeria (Frc),), 2018). therefore, corporate governance regulations play a pivotal role in shaping the business landscape of any country, ensuring transparency, accountability, and responsible decision-making within corporations. in nigeria, the regulatory framework governing corporate governance has undergone significant evolution, particularly concerning board gender diversity and corporate social responsibility (csr) practices. the cAMA 20201 represents a landmark overhaul of nigeria’s corporate governance framework. it introduces provisions aimed at enhancing board diversity and accountability. section 849 mandates public companies to have a minimum of 30% female representation on their boards. non-compliance may result in penalties or fines. Besides, the nigerian code of corporate governance (nccg) 2018 provides guidelines for corporate governance practices in nigeria. it emphasizes the importance of gender 4 M. elAigWu etAl. diversity on boards as a means to improve decision-making and corporate performance. the code recommends that companies strive for gender balance in their board composition, encouraging diversity in skills, experience, and perspectives (Financial reporting council of nigeria (Frc),), 2018). Moreover, the sec2 plays a crucial role in regulating corporate governance practices in nigeria’s capital market. it requires listed companies to disclose their board diversity policies and report on their compliance with gender diversity objectives. Additionally, sec guidelines encourage companies to integrate csr initiatives into their business strategies, ensuring sustainable development and stakeholder value creation. 3.Theoretical background and hypotheses development 3.1. Theoretical background the concept of sustainable development, spearheaded by the united nations, gained prominence in 1987 with the publication of the Brundtland report at the united nations conference known as "Agenda 21" in rio de Janeiro (tiamiyu etal., 2021). By 1992, within a span of fewer than five years, 178 countries had embraced a comprehensive action plan labeled "Agenda 21" during the un conference on environment and Development (tiamiyu etal., 2021). the impetus for sustainability reporting arose from societal concerns regarding the sustainability of the human economic system, where the exponential growth of the population poses significant threats to the biophysical carrying capacity of the planetary ecosystem, as underscored by the American Accounting Association (tiamiyu etal., 2021). At times, the term "sustainability reporting" is used interchangeably with "corporate social responsibility" (Aziz & rosmiza, 2017; elaigwu etal., 2020). nevertheless, research indicates that while companies in advanced economies often utilize corporate social responsibility to safeguard their reputation, sustainability reporting offers burgeoning economies boundless growth opportunities (tiamiyu etal., 2021). For instance, Dyduch and Krasodomska (2017) suggest that the global financial crisis of 2008 led to an upsurge in demand for more comprehensive and detailed reports, either in the form of sustainability or corporate social responsibility concepts, to rebuild confidence among investors and consumers in the market. in contrast, lys et al. (2015) argue that corporate sustainability transcends environmental concerns, corporate social responsibility, and strategic philanthropy. instead, it embodies an awareness of stakeholders’ interests, aiming to ensure economic viability, while upholding social responsibility and environmental sustainability. the discussion of the World commission on environment and Development (WceD) in 1987 emphasized the relevance of sustainability practices and indicated that the future is as important as the present regarding the preservation of resources (World commission on environment & Development, 1987). the importance of the future is portrayed in the definition of sustainable development provided by the WceD. the report officially states that sustainable development (sustainability) “is the development that meets the present needs without denying the future generations the opportunity to meet their own needs” (World commission on environment & Development, 1987). sustainability, as defined by the WceD, has gained acceptance in several previous studies on sustainability practices. sustainability is defined as the calculation of sustainable development that brings forth the idea of sustainability reporting (Deegan, 2013; guenther etal., 2006; guthrie & Abeysekera, 2006). Following the above definition of sustainability, a non-profit organization, the global reporting initiative (gri) defined sustainability reporting as “reporting on how an organization contributes or aims to contribute in the future, to the improvement or deterioration of economic, environmental, and social conditions, developments, and trends at the local, regional, or global level” (global reporting initiative (gri), 2015, p. 17). the gri emphatically suggests that the sustainability concept is widely presented in such a way that “it involves discussing the performance of the organization in the context of the limits and demands placed on environmental or social resources at the sector, local, regional, or global level” (global reporting initiative (gri), 2015). Based on the relevance of sustainability, as shown by the various definitions and the un sustainable Development goals (sDgs), stakeholders have communicated sustainability information through the sustainability reporting medium as a newly formalized mode of communication (Fernandez-Feijoo et al., 2018; gnanaweera & Kunori, 2018; schaltegger & Wagner, 2006). the essence of communicating sustainability information is to enhance stakeholders’ investment decisions by meeting their information needs, cogent Business & MAnAgeMent 5 thereby legitimizing firms’ operations (Deegan, 2013; lock & seele, 2016). however, achieving impactful sustainability reporting practices left the board of directors with huge responsibility via the board’s governance mechanisms. this portrays the idea of using governance elements to encourage firms to engage in sustainable practices to enhance the green environment through resource conservation (cooke, 2015). Following previous nigerian sustainability reporting literature (e.g. Abdulsalam & Babangida, 2020; odoemelam & okafor, 2018; ofoegbu, odoemelam & okafor, 2018; osazuwa et al., 2017) the present study employs salient board governance elements, such as board independence and board size, to examine the sustainability disclosure quantity of the top 100 listed companies in nigeria. the study is premised on a theoretical framework based on agency, stakeholder, and legitimacy theories to explain the link between the variables of interest and the sDQ. Agency theory focuses on information asymmetry between a firm and its various stakeholders and posits that such asymmetry can be reduced by monitoring and controlling the responsibility of the board (Fama & Jensen, 1983; Jensen & Meckling, 1976). the theory has been well operationalized in sustainability reporting literature and documented that asymmetric information could be ameliorated through firms’ sustainability disclosures (clarkson etal., 2008; Martínez-Ferrero etal., 2015). sustainability disclosure is a communication tool that ameliorates the information asymmetry that may exist between company management and stakeholders (Fama & Jensen, 1983; reverte, 2012). therefore, agency theory provides a lens through which we can understand the dynamics between principals (shareholders) and agents (management) within organizations, particularly in the context of decision-making and governance. in the realm of sustainability disclosure, agency theory helps illuminate how female leadership, overlapping membership, and external assurance intersect to influence the quality of disclosures. the theory posits that the presence of female leaders may enhance board monitoring and governance effectiveness, leading to improved transparency and disclosure quality (Adams, 2015). From an agency theory perspective, overlapping membership can either enhance or diminish governance effectiveness. on one hand, it can facilitate information sharing, coordination, and collective decision-making across different organizational entities, thereby improving oversight and accountability. on the other hand, it may raise concerns about conflicts of interest, divided loyalties, and the potential for managerial entrenchment (Fama & Jensen, 1983). Also, agency theory suggests that external assurance can mitigate information asymmetry between principals and agents by enhancing the credibility, reliability, and objectivity of disclosed information (Deegan, 2002). By providing an external check on management assertions, assurance mechanisms strengthen the monitoring and control functions of corporate governance systems, thereby reducing agency costs and enhancing disclosure quality. however, the main limitation of agency theory is that it focuses more on monetary values, with less consideration for other potential users of non-financial (economic, environmental, and social) information. therefore, this study integrates other theories to address this gap. stakeholder theory suggests that firms have responsibilities not only to their shareholders but also to other parties affected by their operations (Freeman, 1984). this theory has been predominantly used in previous research to elucidate why firms disclose information related to sustainability practices (Şener et al., 2016). this emphasizes the importance of firms in effectively managing their relationships with various stakeholders to ensure their continued existence (Freeman et al., 2004). in essence, stakeholder theory underscores the significance of prioritizing the needs and interests of stakeholders recognized by the company’s management. previous studies have shown that a stakeholder-oriented approach can positively impact organizational performance (Şener et al., 2016). Freeman (1984) defines a stakeholder as ‘any group or individual who can influence or is influenced by the organization’s objectives’ (p. 46). he emphasized that responding to stakeholders’ expectations and maintaining positive relationships can provide companies with a competitive advantage for survival. consequently, stakeholder theory provides a robust framework for understanding the interconnectedness between female leadership, overlapping membership, external assurance, and sustainability disclosure quality within organizations. this theoretical lens emphasizes the significance of various stakeholders, including employees, customers, communities, and investors, in shaping organizational behavior and decision-making processes (Freeman, 1984). the presence of female leadership within an organization has been shown to positively influence sustainability practices and disclosure quality. research suggests that female leaders often exhibit a more inclusive and collaborative leadership style, which aligns with the principles of stakeholder 6 M. elAigWu etAl. theory (r. B. Adams & Ferreira, 2009). Moreover, the concept of overlapping membership, wherein individuals serve on multiple boards or hold various positions across organizations, plays a crucial role in enhancing sustainability disclosure quality (Kusnadi et al., 2016). When board members or executives are involved in multiple entities, they bring diverse perspectives and experiences to the decision-making process, enabling a more comprehensive consideration of stakeholder interests (Freeman et al., 2004). external assurance further strengthens the link between stakeholder theory and sustainability disclosure quality. By subjecting sustainability reports to independent verification, organizations demonstrate their commitment to transparency and accountability, thereby enhancing stakeholder trust (Deegan, 2002). Aligned with the principles of stakeholder theory, which posits that companies should acknowledge and address the interests of all relevant stakeholders, numerous investigations have been conducted to explore the advantages derived from meeting these stakeholder demands. one documented benefit is the financial gain experienced by shareholders when the management responds to various stakeholder demands (ruf etal., 2001). Moreover, firms that commit to sustainability and disclose their efforts foster trust among stakeholders and gain a competitive edge, enabling them to thrive and remain viable (Jones, 1995). chiu and Wang (2015) examined the factors influencing sustainability disclosure quality and found that stakeholder influence leads to enhancements in disclosure quality. similarly, Wang (2017) observed that sustainability disclosures increased with improved board governance, in line with the stakeholder theory. consequently, sustainability reporting practices predominantly reflect companies’ concerns for stakeholders, as they endeavor to sustain themselves. thus, stakeholder theory serves as a fundamental framework for this study, elucidating why corporate boards prioritize sustainability reporting. legitimacy theory suggests that organizations consistently strive to align their operations with the norms and expectations of the societies they function in suchman (1995). From this perspective, a company would choose to disclose its activities if its management believes that such actions are anticipated by the communities it serves (cormier & gordon, 2001; Deegan, 2002; rankin, 2012). given the potentially severe consequences of perceived breaches in the social contract for an organization’s survival, it becomes crucial to explore the remedial measures that organizations may undertake (elaigwu et al., 2024). in this context, legitimacy theory introduces the concepts of the ‘legitimacy gap’ and ‘legitimacy strategies’, which play pivotal roles in corporate sustainability practices. therefore, legitimacy theory provides a framework for understanding how organizations strive to maintain their legitimacy in the eyes of stakeholders by conforming to societal norms, values, and expectations. in the context of sustainability disclosure, legitimacy theory suggests that organizations disclose information about their sustainability practices to demonstrate their commitment to responsible business conduct and to maintain legitimacy in the eyes of stakeholders (elaigwu et al., 2024; suchman, 1995). Female leadership has been increasingly recognized as a factor that can influence organizational behavior, including sustainability practices. research suggests that female leaders may bring different perspectives and values to decision-making processes, leading to a greater emphasis on issues such as corporate social responsibility (csr) and sustainability. For example, studies have shown that companies with female ceos are more likely to prioritize sustainability initiatives and disclose more comprehensive sustainability information (r. B. Adams & Ferreira, 2009). the link between female leadership, overlapping membership, and external assurance to sustainability disclosure quality lies in the way these factors collectively contribute to organizational legitimacy. Female leaders, by prioritizing sustainability, set the tone for the organization’s commitment to responsible practices. overlapping board memberships facilitate the exchange of ideas and best practices, fostering a culture of sustainability across organizations. external assurance mechanisms provide independent validation of sustainability disclosures, enhancing their credibility and reinforcing organizational legitimacy. upper echelon theory concerns the role of female leadership. this study uses the upper echelon theory to describe the leadership position of women in corporate hierarchies, as opposed to the critical mass theory (cMt), which has been used in most sustainability studies. the current study employs the upper-echelon theory to address the limits of critical mass by looking beyond the minimum of three women on the board to gender diversity in leadership roles (Moreno-gómez et al., 2018). According to the upper-echelon theory, an organization’s performance is mostly determined by its leaders. thus, the theory provides an empirical foundation for correlating specific aspects and diversity of corporate hierarchy with business success (Jeong & harrison, 2017; Moreno-gómez etal., 2018). this minimizes bias in cogent Business & MAnAgeMent 7 terms of the lower outgroup for women on boards based only on critical mass (torchia etal., 2011; Wiley & Monllor-tormos, 2018). Furthermore, the upper echelon believes that gender is an important factor to consider when assessing the personal characteristics of executives (i.e., the top management team) that may affect organizational performance (nishii et al., 2007). the existing body of literature on corporate governance frameworks and strategic management underscores the pivotal role of top management in shaping business conduct and outcomes (r. B. Adams et al., 2010). Moreno-gómez et al. (2018) found that gender diversity at the uppermost levels of the organizational hierarchy correlates with enhanced company performance. Furthermore, they noted that a greater presence of women in leadership roles contributed positively to performance, as documented by the new York times on December 6, 2014. similarly, research conducted in latin America has revealed that integrating a critical mass of women into top-tier business positions yields substantial and advantageous effects on performance (Delloite, 2015, 2017). palvia et al. (2015) conveyed in their examination titled "the ceos and chairwomen in the usA Banking industry" that banks led by female ceos and/or Board chairs exhibit lower failure rates. liu et al. (2014) identified a constructive association between female ceos and the economic performance of publicly listed chinese enterprises. consequently, this study adopts the upper-echelon theory to elucidate how leadership by female directors can engender high-quality sustainability reporting. the theoretical framework is illustrated in Figure 1. 3.2. Development of hypotheses 3.2.1. Female leadership and SDQ Friedman (2007) argues that participation in sustainability reporting could reveal an agency problem. in other words, the agent’s interests conflict with those of the principal. in such a case, agents may use sustainability reporting to benefit themselves at the expense of shareholders (Friedman, 2007; Jensen & Meckling, 1976). According to agency theory, board effectiveness in terms of control is critical, because it pushes corporations to be more accountable for sustainability policies (Jo & harjoto, 2011). Meanwhile, this study examines gender leadership diversity in the corporate hierarchy (executive roles–the boardroom or top management) as opposed to the token or critical mass of female participation on the board of directors (Moreno-gómez etal., 2018; Wiley & Monllor-tormos, 2018). this is because women’s leadership roles in corporations highlight their talent in executive positions (Kota, 2019; Moreno-gómez et al., 2018). consequently, women in corporate high echelons contribute to team diversity in terms of both human capital and social structure. this viewpoint is consistent with the upper-echelon theory proposed by hambrick and Mason (1984) and Kanter (1977). According to upper-echelon theory, the presence of women in leadership roles contributes to the success of companies, as the organization reflects the qualities of its leaders (hambrick & Mason, 1984; hambrick, 2007; Moreno-gómez et al., 2018). this is supported by previous research indicating that women tend to be more risk-averse than men (palvia etal., 2015), possess superior monitoring skills (r. B. Adams & Ferreira, 2009), and exhibit strategic Figure 1. theoretical framework. 14 M. elAigWu etAl. and social sustainability disclosure quality (ssDQ). this analysis aims to equally check the robustness of the findings obtained from the main model, as shown in table 5. the results of the separate themes are shown in table 6, indicating that the outcomes are similar to those of the main model, thereby demonstrating the robustness of the results of the main model. 5.4.2. One-year lag effect of independent variables on SDQ the research delved deeper into assessing the lag effect of the independent variables on the sDQ, taking into consideration factors such as reverse causality, endogeneity, and indirect effects, which are consistent with previous studies (setiawan etal. (2021); Kontesa etal. (2020). setiawan etal. (2021) highlighted that endogeneity can stem from various sources, including "unobserved errors, simultaneity, measurement bias, and reverse causality," a view also supported by Masaki et al. (2017). setiawan et al. (2021) proposed that addressing simultaneity can be achieved by re-evaluating the model using one-yearlagged explanatory variables instead of contemporaneous values. Additional findings, detailed in table 7 using random effects robust analysis, examine the one-year lag effect. these lag results are consistent with the non-lag results in table 6, reinforcing the robustness of the primary model. 6. Discussion and implications 6.1. Discussion this study examined the relationship between female leadership, board communication, external assurance, and sDQ. the results indicate a positive and significant relationship between the variables of interest and the sDQ. the positive relationship between female leadership and sDQ supports the assumptions of the upper echelon theory, which links female representation in corporate hierarchies to the success of firms (hambrick & Mason, 1984; Jeong & harrison, 2017; post & Byron, 2015). the positive result also supports the premise of the agency, stakeholder, and legitimacy theories in terms of ameliorating information asymmetry enhancing firm survival, and legitimizing firms’ operations via sustainability reporting practice as a tool for stakeholder management (cho, lee, & pfeiffer Jr., 2013; Freeman, 1984; Jensen & Meckling, 1976; suchman, 1995). this positive relationship is consistent with previous literature that views organizations as a reflection of their leaders (Moreno-gómez et al., 2018). this is because the female gender is known to be risk-averse, has better monitoring skills, strategic, and long-term orientation (palvia et al., 2015; reguera-Alvarado et al., 2017); as it promotes the sharing of information for efficient business functioning and corporate performance (Moreno-gómez et al., 2018) which coincides with the focus of sustainability practices. For instance, Moreno-gómez etal. (2018) found a positive and significant association between gender diversity in the top corporate hierarchy and firm performance. he argued that the female leadership style directly affects strategic processes, corporate culture, and, Table 6. Results of Random effect (Re) robust estimation technique for esDQ, ensDQ, and ssDQ models. Dep. Variables esDQ ensDQ ssDQ (Model) (1) (2) (3) Indep. Variables FeML 0.00 (0.09)*0.00 (0.66)** 0.00 (1.21)*** BCoMM 0.01 (1.11) 0.01 (1.23)*0.03 (2.34)** eXtass 0.03 (6.69)*** 0.03 (5.30)*** 0.03 (4.80)*** Control variables LeV 0.00 (3.35)*** 0.00 (3.21)*** 0.00 (3.62)*** Roe 0.00 (0.55)*0.00 (0.57) 0.00 (0.56)** YeaR DuMMY (Y) Y Y Y _cons 0.04 (7.70)*** 0.06 (10.10)*** 0.08 (11.80)*** no. of Firms 100 100 100 number of obs 1000 1000 1000 P-Value 0.000 0.000 0.000 note: the relationship is significant at. *= p ≤ 0.10. **= p ≤ 0.05. ***= p ≤ 0.01. sDQ: total sustainability reporting quality, FeML: female leadership, BCoMM: board communication, eXtass: external assurance, LeV: leverage, Roe: return on equity. cogent Business & MAnAgeMent 15 consequently, the financial and non-financial performance of firms. similarly, palvia etal. (2015) find that companies with female ceos and board chairs are less likely to fail. the author argues that gender-based behavioral differences have a positive influence on corporate decisions. the findings also demonstrate a significant and positive correlation between board communication, characterized by overlapping directorships, and sDQ. this suggests that having directors serving on more than one committee enhances sDQ. this affirmative outcome resonates with the principles of agency and stakeholder theories, which argue that an effective board of directors mitigates the information asymmetry between management and shareholders (chen & Jaggi, 2000), thereby improving the quality of sustainability disclosures (Freeman, 1984; Jensen & Meckling, 1976). Moreover, these results corroborate the descriptive analysis of board communication, which reveals that approximately 49% of board committees overlap. this underscores that overlapping directorships are a beneficial practice that bolsters the sDQ within this context. the result of the association between board communication and sDQ is in line with prior studies that mostly looked into the association between overlapping directorships and financial reporting quality (Fernández Méndez et al., 2017; habib & Bhuiyan, 2016; Kalelkar, 2017; velte, 2017). these studies found a positive relationship from which hypothesis 2 of the present study was replicated to test for sustainability reporting quality. one plausible reason could be that effective communication on a diverse board via overlapping membership is crucial for the success of the board of directors (samuel etal., 2019). this is because overlapping memberships are said to have a connection with an improvement in terms of expertise and knowledge spillovers and increase the monitoring quality of the board (habib & Bhuiyan, 2014, 2016). Moreover, board communication is said to be an essential tool for diverse board effectiveness; hence, a diverse board can only succeed if there is effective communication to ameliorate the negative impacts of diversity (samuel et al., 2019). Malenko (2013) observed that directors’ independence is effective, and members of the board are most likely to be properly and adequately informed in the process of board discussions only if there is an avenue for effective communication among them. such an avenue could be overlapping membership. to this effect, samuel etal. (2019) posit that overlapping directorships enhance board communication, as overlapping directors have homophily and a tendency for collaboration. similarly, liao and hsu (2013) concluded that approximately 67% of sampled firms have at least one member of the audit committee serving on the compensation committee. Further, the consistency of the present result with the extant literature is evidenced by Fernández Méndez et al. (2017), who found that overlapping directorships positively contribute to financial reporting quality. similarly, habib and Bhuiyan (2016) document that companies with overlapping committee members have better financial reporting quality than those without. the findings also indicate a positive correlation between external assurance and the sDQ, suggesting that when companies enlist independent third-party assurance providers to review their sustainability reports, it enhances the quality of sustainability disclosures. this positive correlation supports both agency and stakeholder theories, aiming to mitigate information asymmetry and ensure firm survival by improving sustainability performance and providing credible sustainability information to stakeholders (Fama & Jensen, 1983; Freeman etal., 2004). these results are in line with those of previous studies (e.g. Braam & peeters, 2018; hsueh, 2018; Manning et al., 2019). one plausible explanation is that merely publishing sustainability reports may not meet stakeholders’ expectations regarding information quality unless assurance services are employed (Junior etal., 2014). however, the descriptive statistics indicate a low level of assurance practices (9%) among the sampled firms, possibly contributing to the observed Table 7. Results of Random effect (Re) robust estimation technique for sDQ (one-year lag). Dep. Variable sDQ (Model) (5) Indep. variables FeML~1 0.00 (0.05)** BCoMM~1 0.09 (2.04)*** eXtass~1 0.08 (5.92)*** Control variables LeV 0.00 (3.79)*** Roe 0.00 (0.55)* Year fixed effect (Y) Y no. of Firms 100 number of obs. 1000 16 M. elAigWu etAl. low disclosure quality (24%). this finding underscores the importance of external assurance for the sDQ, consistent with the standards set by the global reporting initiative (gri) and the sustainable Development goals of the united nations (Abdul latif et al., 2023; Weber, 2018). the positive correlation between external assurance and the sDQ aligns with prior research findings. For instance, Fernandez-Feijoo etal. (2018) observed a link between the enhanced quality of sustainability information disclosure and third-party (external) assurance. Junior et al. (2014) suggested that both the disclosure and assurance of sustainability practices are globally recognized methods for enhancing the sDQ. Braam et al. (2016) found that environmentally conscious companies utilize external assurance to enhance the quality of sustainability disclosures, aiming to bolster public confidence, foster trust among stakeholders, and gain organizational legitimacy. these scholars further theorized that, in the absence of regulations, sustainability reports may not accurately reflect a firm’s genuine commitment to addressing the adverse impacts of its operations on society. similarly, hsueh (2018) found that independent external assurance services can help alleviate credibility gaps in sustainability reporting practices. Furthermore, Manning et al. (2019) documented a positive association between third-party assurance and the srQ. Based on the theories and extant literature, the present study found that female leadership, board communication, and external assurance are key determinants of the sDQ. 6.2. Implications 6.2.1. Practical and policy implications this research contributes to the existing body of knowledge by adapting a sustainability index aligned with both the global reporting initiative (gri) and the sustainability framework of the nigerian code of corporate governance (nccg). this index assesses the economic, environmental, and social aspects of sustainability reporting by examining how the sampled firms align with the united nations’ sustainable Development goals. Moreover, this study offers practical insights to listed companies, regulators, and practitioners on the significance of female leadership, board communication, and external assurance in determining the caliber of sustainability disclosures in nigeria. therefore, implementing policies or regulations mandating external assurance, promoting greater representation of women in leadership roles, and fostering board communication through shared directorships would significantly improve the quality of sustainability disclosures among nigerian listed companies. 6.2.2. Theoretical implication this research has significantly enhanced the understanding of sustainability within the context of a developing nation, such as nigeria, where companies often prioritize shareholders over stakeholders. By scrutinizing the assumptions of the upper echelon, stakeholder, legitimacy, and agency theories, this study addresses a critical theoretical gap and provides empirical support for these theories. According to upper echelon theory, organizational behavior mirrors the characteristics of leaders. the presence of women in leadership roles, as observed in nigeria, is positively correlated with the sDQ. Moreover, the findings align with stakeholder, agency, and legitimacy theories, which emphasize the importance of firms meeting stakeholders’ information needs through transparent sustainability disclosures to mitigate information asymmetry and legitimize firm operations. By examining the combined impact of these variables and theories, this study makes a valuable contribution to the existing knowledge, particularly as one of the few investigations to do so comprehensively. 7. Limitations and suggestions for future investigations this study has certain limitations. it underscores its quantitative nature, attributing this to the subjective nature of assigning scores (3, 2, 1, and 0) to the sDQ index. While acknowledging that subjectivity in quantitative scoring is common in research concerning sDQ, this study recognizes that relying solely on quantitative data can pose challenges that may hinder sustainability performance. Moreover, this study exclusively employs quantitative methods. Despite these limitations, we assert the relevance and timeliness of our research in nigeria, where sustainability reporting plays a crucial role in the public interest. Future research should address these limitations identified in this study. cogent Business & MAnAgeMent 17 Notes 1. companies and Allied Matters Act 2020. nigeria: Federal republic of nigeria official gazette, 2020. 2. nigerian code of corporate governance 2018. securities and exchange commission, nigeria. Authors’ contribution Moses elaigwu and ugwu, James ike – conception, drafting of the paper, critical revision for intellectual content; Abdelkader Alghorbany and ogechukwu Maria ngwoke – Design, data cleaning, data analysis, and interpretation. Alexander onyebuchi ude, obani chimaobi Desmond, and peter Audu – Data collection. Disclosure statement no potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s). About the authors Moses Elaigwu is a senior lecturer at the Department of Accounting, Kogi state university, Anyigba, Kogi state, nigeria. his research area focuses on corporate governance and corporate sustainability reporting. James Ike Ugwu is a senior lecturer at the Department of Accounting, Faculty of Management sciences, prince Abubakar Audu university, nigeria. his area of specialization public sector Accounting and Finance and corporate governance. Abdelkader Alghorbany is an Assistant professor at the Department of Management, university of oran 1, oran, Algeria. the research area focuses on corporate governance and auditing. Ogechukwu Maria Ngwoke is a postgraduate student university of canada, West British columbia, canada. his research area focuses on taxation and corporate governance Alexander Onyebuchi Ude is an Associate professor at Dept of Accounting, Faculty of Management sciences, prince Abubakar Audu university, nigeria. his area of specialization: corporate governance, oil and gas, public sector accounting. Obani Chimaobi Desmond is a lecturer at the Department of Accountancy, caritas university, Amorji nike, enugu, nigeria, area of specialization: performance Management (Management Accounting) Peter Audu lecturer at the Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Management sciences, prince Abubakar Audu university, nigeria. his research area focuses on human resources management and corporate governance Data availability statement i utilized data from companies’ annual reports listed on the nigerian exchange group (ngX) between 2013 and 2022. the authors confirm that the data of this study are available from listed companies - nigerian exchange limited (nxggroup.com) References Abdul latif, r., taufil Mohd, K. n., Kamardin, h., & Mohd Ariff, A. h. (2023). Determinants of sustainability disclosure quality among plantation companies in Malaysia. Sustainability (Switzerland), 15(4), 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su15043799 AbdulKareem, i. A., elaigwu, M., & ismail shola, A.-t. (2021). the role of risk management, sustainability disclosure practices, and islamic finance in nigeria business environment. The Journal of Management Theory and Practice (JMTP), 2(4), 89–23. https://doi.org/10.37231/jmtp.2021.2.4.160 Abdullah, s. n., Mohamad, n. r., & Mokhtar, M. Z. (2011). Board independence, ownership and csr of Malaysian large firms. Corporate Ownership and Control, 8(2), 467–483. https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv8i2c4p5 Abdulsalam, n., & Babangida, M. A. (2020). effect of sales and firm size on sustainability reporting practice of oil and gas companies in nigeria. Quest Journal of Research in Business and Management, 8(1), 1–8. https://www. questjournals.org/jrbm/v8-i1.html Adams, r. (2015). Myths and facts about female directors. international Finance corporation. Adams, r. B., & Ferreira, D. (2009). Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 94(2), 291–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2008.10.007 18 M. elAigWu etAl. Adams, r. B., hermalin, B. e., & Weisbach, M. s. (2010). the role of boards of directors in corporate governance: A conceptual framework and survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 48(1), 58–107. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.48.1.58 Adeyemi, s. B., ogbechie, c., & ibidunni, A. s. (2020). corporate sustainability reporting in nigeria: A study of listed firms. Heliyon, 6(6), e04201. Ahmed haji, A. (2013). corporate social responsibility disclosures over time: evidence from Malaysia. Managerial Auditing Journal, 28(7), 647–676. https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-07-2012-0729 Ahmad, n. (2017). Board independence and corporate social responsibility (csr) reporting in Malaysia. Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 11(2), 61–85. https://doi.org/10.14453/aabfj.v11i2.5 Aina, K. (2013). Board of directors and corporate governance. International Journal of Business and Finance Management Research, 1, 21–34. Akinbode, s., Adegbite, e., & el omari, s. (2021). stakeholder engagement and corporate social responsibility disclosure: evidence from nigeria. Journal of Business Ethics, 170(3), 591–613. Al-Dhamari, r., Al-gamrh, B., Farooque, o. A., & elaigwu, M. (2022). corporate social responsibility and firm market performance: the role of product market competition and firm life cycle. Asian Review of Accounting, 30(5), 713– 745. https://doi.org/10.1108/ArA-07-2022-0179 Alghorbany, A., salau olarinoye, A., elaigwu, M., & che-Ahmad, A. (2024). Does institutional investor influence information technology investment decisions and corporate performance? Cogent Business & Management, 11(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2316280 Al-shaer, h., & Zaman, M. (2016). Board gender diversity and sustainability reporting quality. Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics, 12(3), 210–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcae.2016.09.001 Aluwong, D. B., & Fodio, M. i. (2019). effect of corporate attributes on environmental disclosure of listed oil and gas companies in nigeria. European Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance Research, 7(10), 32–47. Anazonwu, h. o., egbunike, F. c., & gunardi, A. (2018). corporate board diversity and sustainability reporting: A study of selected listed manufacturing firms in nigeria. Indonesian Journal of Sustainability Accounting and Management, 2(1), 65. https://doi.org/10.28992/ijsam.v2i1.52 Asteriou, D., & hall, s. g. (2007). Applied econometrics (2nd ed.). palgrave Macmillan uK. Aziz, n. s. A., & rosmiza, h. B. (2017). A review of the indicators disclosed in sustainability reporting of public listed companies in Malaysia. Journal of Human Capital Development, 10(2), 1–14. Baltagi, B. (2005). Econometric analysis of panel data (chicheste (ed.), 3rd ed.). John Wiley and sons. Bandi, r. p. (2017). leadership role for women a national survey on gender. https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.26106.08643 Braam, g. J. M., uit de Weerd, l., hauck, M., & huijbregts, M. A. J. (2016). Determinants of corporate environmental reporting: the importance of environmental performance and assurance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 129, 724– 734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.039 Braam, g., & peeters, r. (2018). corporate sustainability performance and assurance on sustainability reports: Diffusion of accounting practices in the realm of sustainable development. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25(2), 164–181. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1447 Breusch, t. s., & pagan, A. r. (1980). the lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. The Review of Economic Studies, 47(1), 239–253. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297111 chandar, n., chang, h., & Zheng, X. (2012). Does overlapping membership on audit and compensation committees improve a firm’s financial reporting quality? Review of Accounting and Finance, 11(2), 141–165. https://doi. org/10.1108/14757701211228192 chen, c. J. p., & Jaggi, B. (2000). Association between independent non-executive directors, family control and financial disclosures in hong Kong. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 19(4–5), 285–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/ s0278-4254(00)00015-6 chiu, t. K., & Wang, Y. h. (2015). Determinants of social disclosure quality in taiwan: An application of stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 129(2), 379–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2160-5 cho, s. Y., lee, c., & pfeiffer, Jr., r. J. (2013). corporate social responsibility performance and information asymmetry. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 32(1), 71–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2012.10.005 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(4–5), 303– 327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2007.05.003 cooke, p. (2015). green governance and green clusters: regional & national policies for the climate change challenge of central & eastern europe. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 1(1), 1–17. https://doi. org/10.1186/s40852-015-0002-z cormier, D., & gordon, i. M. (2001). An examination of social and environmental reporting strategies. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 14(5), 587–617. https://doi.org/10.1108/euM0000000006264 Deegan, c. (2002). introduction: the legitimising effect of social and environmental disclosures – a theoretical foundation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(3), 282–311. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570210435852 Deegan, c. (2013). Financial accounting theory (n. s. north ryde (ed.), 4th ed.). Mcgraw-hill education. Delloite. (2015). Diversidad en los consejos de Administraci?on, Boletín de gobierno corporativo. invierno. 2(enero de 2015). Delloite. (2017). Mujeres en los Consejos de Administraci?on: Una Perspectiva Global. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/ dam/Deloitte/mx/Documents/risk/gobierno-corporativo/2017/Mujeres-en-consejos-Administracion-2017.pdf cogent Business & MAnAgeMent 19 Dyduch, J., & Krasodomska, J. (2017). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An empirical study of polish listed companies. Sustainability, 9(11), 1934. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9111934 elaigwu, M., Abdulmalik, s. o., & talab, h. r. (2024). corporate integrity, external assurance and sustainability reporting quality: evidence from the Malaysian public listed companies. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 16(2), 410–440. https://doi.org/10.1108/ApJBA-07-2021-0307 elaigwu, M., Abdulmalik, s. o., Alghorbany, A., & che-Ahmad, A. (2024). sustainability reporting quality in Malaysia: the intricacy of family controlled and politically connected firms. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2799 elaigwu, M., che-Ahmad, A., & Abdulmalik, s. o. (2020). Board governance mechanisms and sustainability reporting quality: A theoretical framework. Cogent Business & Management, 7(1), 1771075. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975. 2020.1771075 elaigwu, M., che-Ahmad, A., & Abdulmalik, s. o. (2023). Auditor choice, audit partner busyness, and sustainability reporting quality. Afro-Asian Journal of Finance and Accounting, 13(6), 735–758. https://doi.org/10.1504/AAJFA.2023.134699 elkington, J. (2013). enter the triple bottom line. in the triple bottom line (pp. 23–38). erin, o., Adegboye, A., & Bamigboye, o. A. (2022). corporate governance and sustainability reporting quality: evidence from nigeria. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 13(3), 680–707. https://doi. org/10.1108/sAMpJ-06-2020-0185 Fama, e. F., & Jensen, M. c. (1983). separation of ownership and control. The Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 301–325. https://doi.org/10.1086/467037 Fernández Méndez, c., Arrondo garcía, r., & pathan, s. (2017). Monitoring by busy and overlap directors: an examination of executive remuneration and financial reporting quality. Spanish Journal of Finance and Accounting / Revista Española de Financiación y Contabilidad, 46(1), 28–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/02102412.2016.1250345 Fernandez-Feijoo, B., romero, s., & ruiz, s. (2018). Financial auditor and sustainability reporting: Does it matter? Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25(3), 209–224. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1449 Financial reporting council of nigeria (Frc). (2018). Nigeria code of corporate governance 2018. https://nambnigeria. org/nig_code_of_corp._governance_2018.pdf Freeman, r. e. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. M.A. pitman. Freeman, r. e., Wicks, A. c., & parmar, B. (2004). stakeholder theory and “the corporate objective revisited. Organization Science, 15(3), 364–369. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0066 Friedman, M. (2007). the social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. in Corporate ethics and corporate governance (pp. 173–178). springer Berlin heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70818-6_14 gherghina, s. c., & simionescu, l. n. (2015). Does entrepreneurship and corporate social responsibility act as a catalyst towards firm performance and brand value? International Journal of Economics and Finance, 7(4), 23–34. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijef.v7n4p23 global reporting initiative (gri). (2015). GRI’s History. https://www.globalreporting.org/information/about-gri/ grihistory/pages/gri%27s history.aspx gnanaweera, K. A. K., & Kunori, n. (2018). corporate sustainability reporting: linkage of corporate disclosure information and performance indicators. Cogent Business & Management, 5(1), 1423872. https://doi.org/10.1080/233119 75.2018.1423872 gri. (2015). Interpretations on the G4 Guidelines, issued by the Global Sustainability Standards Board. https://www. mendeley.com/catalogue/interpretations-g4-guidelines-issued-global-sustainability-standards-board/ guenther, e., hoppe, h., & poser, c. (2006). environmental corporate social responsibility of firms in the mining and oil and gas industries: current status quo of reporting following gri guidelines. Greener Management International, 2006(53), 6–25. https://doi.org/10.9774/gleaf.3062.2006.sp.00003 gujarati, D. n. (1995). Basic econometrics (3rd ed.). Mcgraw-hill. gujarati, D. n., & porter, D. c. (2004). Basic econometrics (5th ed.). Mcgraw-hill. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1186874 guthrie, J., & Abeysekera, i. (2006). content analysis of social, environmental reporting: what is new? Journal of Human Resource Costing & Accounting, 10(2), 114–126. https://doi.org/10.1108/14013380610703120 habib, A., & Bhuiyan, M. B. u. (2014). overlapping membership on audit and compensation committees, audit committee equity holdings, and financial reporting quality. SSRN Electronic Journal, 26(1), 76–90. https://doi.org/10.2139/ ssrn.2445936 habib, A., & Bhuiyan, M. B. u. (2016). overlapping membership on audit and compensation committees and financial reporting quality. Australian Accounting Review, 26(1), 76–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/auar.12086 hahn, r., & Kühnen, M. (2013). Determinants of sustainability reporting: A review of results, trends, theory, and opportunities in an expanding field of research. Journal of Cleaner Production, 59(2013), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jclepro.2013.07.005 hambrick, D. (2007). upper echelons theory: an update. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 334–343. https://doi. org/10.5465/amr.2007.24345254 hambrick, D., & Mason, p. (1984). upper echelons: the organization as a reflection of its top managers. The Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 193–206. https://doi.org/10.2307/258434 haniffa, r. M., & cooke, t. e. (2005). the impact of culture and governance on corporate social reporting. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 24(5), 391–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2005.06.001 20 M. elAigWu etAl. harte, g., & owen, D. (1991). environmental disclosure in the annual reports of British companies: A research note. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 4(3), 51–60. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513579110144442 hausman, J. A. (1978). specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica, 46(6), 1251–1271. https://doi. org/10.2307/1913827 hsueh, J. W.-J. (2018). governance structure and the credibility gap: experimental evidence on family businesses’ sustainability reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 153(2), 547–568. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3409-y Jensen, M. c., & Meckling, W. h. (1976). theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X Jeong, s.-h., & harrison, D. A. (2017). glass breaking, strategy making, and value creating: meta-analytic outcomes of women as ceos and tMt members. Academy of Management Journal, 60(4), 1219–1252. https://doi.org/10.5465/ amj.2014.0716 Jo, h., & harjoto, M. A. (2011). corporate governance and firm value: the impact of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 103(3), 351–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0869-y Jones, t. M. (1995). instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. The Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 404–437. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9507312924 Ju Ahmad, n. B., rashid, A., & gow, J. (2017). Board meeting frequency and corporate social responsibility (csr) reporting: evidence from Malaysia. Corporate Board Role Duties and Composition, 13(1), 87–99. https://doi. org/10.22495/cbv13i1c1art3 Junior, r. M., Best, p. J., & cotter, J. (2014). sustainability reporting and assurance: A historical analysis on a world-wide phenomenon. Journal of Business Ethics, 120(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1637-y Kalelkar, r. (2017). effect of audit and compensation committee membership overlap on audit fees. Asian Review of Accounting, 25(1), 34–57. https://doi.org/10.1108/ArA-12-2014-0128 Kanter, r. M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation (Kesner (ed.)). Basic Books. Katmon, n., Mohamad, Z. Z., norwani, n. M., & Farooque, o. A. (2019). comprehensive board diversity and quality of corporate social responsibility disclosure: evidence from an emerging market. Journal of Business Ethics, 157(2), 447–481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3672-6 Klein, K. (2017). Does gender diversity on boards really boost company performance? Knowledge@ Warton. Kontesa, M., lako, A., & Wendy, W. (2020). Board capital and earnings quality with different controlling shareholders. Accounting Research Journal, 33(4/5), 593–613. https://doi.org/10.1108/ArJ-01-2020-0017 Kota, h. (2019). From tokenism to critical mass. The Pioneer. https://www.dailypioneer.com/2019/columnists/ from-tokenism-to-critical-mass.html Kühn, A.-l., stiglbauer, M., & Fifka, M. s. (2018). contents and determinants of corporate social responsibility website reporting in sub-saharan Africa: A seven-country study. Business & Society, 57(3), 437–480. https://doi. org/10.1177/0007650315614234 Kusnadi, Y., leong, K. s., suwardy, t., & Wang, J. (2016). Audit committees and financial reporting quality in singapore. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(1), 197–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2679-0 liao, c., & hsu, A. W. h. (2013). common membership and effective corporate governance: evidence from audit and compensation committees. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 21(1), 79–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/ corg.12000 liu, Y., Wei, Z., & Xie, F. (2014). Do women directors improve firm performance in china? Journal of Corporate Finance, 28, 169–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2013.11.016 lock, i., & seele, p. (2016). the credibility of csr (corporate social responsibility) reports in europe. evidence from a quantitative content analysis in 11 countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 122, 186–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jclepro.2016.02.060 lys, t., naughton, J. p., & Wang, c. (2015). signaling through corporate accountability reporting. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 60(1), 56–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2015.03.001 Malenko, n. (2013). communication and decision-making in corporate boards. Review of Financial Studies, 27(5), 1486–1532. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hht075 Manning, B., Braam, g., & reimsbach, D. (2019). corporate governance and sustainable business conduct-effects of board monitoring effectiveness and stakeholder engagement on corporate sustainability performance and disclosure choices. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(2), 351–366. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1687 Martínez-Ferrero, J., garcia-sanchez, i. M., & cuadrado-Ballesteros, B. (2015). effect of financial reporting quality on sustainability information disclosure. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 22(1), 45–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1330 Masaki, t., William, c., & pepinsky, t. B. (2017). lagged explanatory variables and the estimation of causal effect. The Journal of Politics, 79(3), 949–963. https://doi.org/10.1086/690946 Moreno-gómez, J., lafuente, e., & vaillant, Y. (2018). gender diversity in the board, women’s leadership, and business performance. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 33(2), 104–122. https://doi.org/10.1108/gM-052017-0058 nguyen, t. h. h., elmagrhi, M. h., ntim, c. g., & Wu, Y. (2021). environmental performance, sustainability, governance and financial performance: evidence from heavily polluting industries in china. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(5), 2313–2331. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2748 cogent Business & MAnAgeMent 21 nishii, l., gotte, A., & raver, J. (2007). Upper echelon theory revisited: the relationship between upper echelon diversity, the adoption of diversity practices, and organizational performance, Center for A (cAhrs Working paper #07-04; (2007) 14). http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cahrswp/461 odoemelam, n., & okafor, r. (2018). the influence of corporate governance on environmental disclosure of listed non-financial firms in nigeria. Indonesian Journal of Sustainability Accounting and Management, 2(1), 25–49. https:// doi.org/10.28992/ijsam.v2i1.47 ofoegbu, g. n., odoemelam, n., & okafor, r. g. (2018). corporate board characteristics and environmental disclosure quantity: evidence from south Africa (integrated reporting) and nigeria (traditional reporting). Cogent Business & Management, 5(1), 1551510. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2018.1551510 okoye, p. v. c. (2021). the impact of regulation on corporate sustainability reporting in nigeria. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 21(1), 65–83. osazuwa, n. (2016). political connection, board characteristics, and environmental disclosure in nigeria. in Advanced science letters. universiti utara Malaysia. osazuwa, n. p., che-Ahmad, A., & che-Adam, n. (2015). A theoretical framework on the relationship between political connection, board characteristics and environmental disclosure in nigeria. in international conference on Accounting studies (icAs), August, 17–20. osazuwa, n. p., che-Ahmad, A., & che-Adam, n. (2017). political connection, board characteristics, and environmental disclosure in nigeria. Advanced Science Letters, 23(9), 9356–9361. https://doi.org/10.1166/asl.2017.10480 ozili, p. K. (2021). corporate governance research in nigeria: A review. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1(1), 105082. https:// doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3758473 palvia, A., vähämaa, e., & vähämaa, s. (2015). Are female ceos and chairwomen more conservative and risk averse? evidence from the banking industry during the financial crisis. Journal of Business Ethics, 131(3), 577–594. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2288-3 post, c., & Byron, K. (2015). Women on boards and firm financial performance: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 58(5), 1546–1571. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0319 rankin, W. (2012). Minerals, metals, and sustainability: meeting future material needs. Choice Reviews Online, 49(09), 49–5082–49-5082. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.49-5082 rao, K., & tilt, c. (2016). Board composition and corporate social responsibility: the role of diversity, gender, strategy and decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 138(2), 327–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2613-5 ravasi, D., & schultz, M. (2006). responding to organizational identity threats: exploring the role of organizational culture. Academy of Management Journal, 49(3), 433–458. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.21794663 reguera-Alvarado, n., de Fuentes, p., & laffarga, J. (2017). Does board gender diversity influence financial performance? evidence from spain. Journal of Business Ethics, 141(2), 337–350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2735-9 reverte, c. (2012). the impact of better corporate social responsibility disclosure on the cost of equity capital. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 19(5), 253–272. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.273 rosener, J. B. (1996). America’s competitive secret: utilizing women as a management strategy. Choice Reviews Online, 33(10), 33–5813–33-5813. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.33-5813 ruf, B. M., Muralidhar, K., Brown, r. M., Janney, J. J., & paul, K. (2001). An empirical investigation of the relationship between change in corporate social performance and financial performance: A stakeholder theory perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 32(2), 143–156. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010786912118 samuel, c., Kit, F. s. Y., & srinidhi, B. (2019). the value of boardroom communication: ethnic directors’ out-of-board community affiliations with other board members and the quality of accruals. AFAANZ 2019 Conference, 1–62. https://openconf.s3.amazonaws.com/AFAAnZ2019/papers/161.pdf?AWsAccessKeyid=1s4tZ7FhYc2hter44Jg2&sign ature=z7mteyju3eil1pnrs9sluuAwc5o%3D&expires=1564301593 sanusi, K. A., & sanusi, o. o. (2019). environmental sustainability reporting practices in nigeria: Are clouds darker or fairer in the manufacturing industry? International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanity Studies, 11(2), 1309– 8063. sassen, r., stoffel, M., Behrmann, M., ceschinski, W., & Doan, h. (2018). effects of committee overlap on the monitoring effectiveness of boards of directors: a meta-analysis. The Journal of Risk Finance, 19(4), 379–395. https://doi. org/10.1108/JrF-11-2017-0187 schaltegger, s., & Wagner, M. (2006). integrative management of sustainability performance, measurement, and reporting. International Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Performance Evaluation, 3(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1504/ iJAApe.2006.010098 securities and exchange commission (sec). (2011). code of corporate governance for public companies in nigeria. Şener, İ., varoğlu, A., & Karapolatgil, A. A. (2016). sustainability reports disclosures: Who are the most salient stakeholders? Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 235(october), 84–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.11.028 setiawan, D., Brahmana, r. K., Asrihapsari, A., & Maisaroh, s. (2021). Does a foreign board improve corporate social responsibility? Sustainability, 13(20), 11473. (https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011473 suchman, M. c. (1995). Managing legitimacy: strategic and institutional approaches. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331 suttipun, M., & stanton, p. (2012). Determinants of environmental disclosure in thai corporate annual reports. International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting, 2(1), 99. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijafr.v2i1.1458 22 M. elAigWu etAl. talab, h. r., Abdulzahra, A. n., Al-shiblawi, g. A. K., elaigwu, M., Flayyih, h. h., Abdulmalik, s., & Audu, F. (2023). corporate governance towards sustainability performance quality: A case of listed firms in Malaysia. Journal of Information Systems Engineering and Management, 8(4), 22882. https://doi.org/10.55267/iadt.07.14051 tang, J., crossan, M., & rowe, W. g. (2011). Dominant ceo, deviant strategy, and extreme performance: the moderating role of a powerful board. Journal of Management Studies, 48(7), 1479–1503. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14676486.2010.00985.x teoh, h. Y., & thong, g. (1984). Another look at corporate social responsibility and reporting: an empirical study in a developing country. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 9(2), 189–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/03613682(84)90007-2 tiamiyu, M. A., oyedokun, g. e., & Adeyemo, A. (2021). Firms characteristics and sustainability reporting of listed manufacturing companies in nigeria. Afar Multidisciplinary Journal of Management Sciences, 3(1), 1–18. https:// www.researchgate.net/publication/351060248 torchia, M., calabrò, A., & huse, M. (2011). Women directors on corporate boards: From tokenism to critical mass. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(2), 299–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0815-z uadiale, o. M., & Fagbemi, t. o. (2019). sustainability reporting and corporate performance: empirical evidence from nigeria. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(6), 1293–1305. van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, c. K. W., & homan, A. c. (2004). Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 1008–1022. https://doi. org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.1008 velte, p. (2017). Do overlapping audit and compensation committee memberships contribute to better financial reporting quality? empirical evidence for the german two-tier system. International Journal of Economics and Accounting, 8(3/4), 196. https://doi.org/10.1504/iJeA.2017.092272 vergoossen, r. g. A. (1993). the use and perceived importance of annual reports by investment analysts in the netherlands. European Accounting Review, 2(2), 219–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638189300000020 Wang, M. c. (2017). the relationship between firm characteristics and the disclosure of sustainability reporting. Sustainability (Switzerland), 9(4), 624. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9040624 Weber, J. l. (2018). corporate social responsibility disclosure level, external assurance and cost of equity capital. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 16(4), 694–724. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFrA-12-2017-0112 Wiley, c., & Monllor-tormos, M. (2018). Board gender diversity in the steM&F sectors: the critical mass required to drive firm performance. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 25(3), 290–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1548051817750535 World commission on environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. oxford university press. Zainal, D. (2017). Quality of corporate social responsibility reporting (csrr): the influence of ownership structure and company characteristics. Asian Journal of Accounting Perspectives, 10(1), 16–35. https://doi.org/10.22452/AJAp.vol10no1.2 Zhuang, Y., chang, X., & lee, Y. (2018). Board composition and corporate social responsibility performance: evidence from chinese public firms. Sustainability (Switzerland), 10(8), 2752. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082752 cogent Business & MAnAgeMent 23 Appendix A sustainaBiLitY tHeMes anD CHeCKLists A ECONOMIC 1Procurement practices 2indirect economic impact 3Climate-related financial risks and opportunities 4Responsible/sustainable lending 5Product Quality improvement 6iso standard 7Product safty standard Met 8Customer service improvement/award/Rating 9sustainability (CsR) Committee 10 Corporate governance B ENVIRONMENTAL 11 emissions (hazardous substances) 12 emissions (greenhouse gas) 13 Waste Management hazadous 14 Waste Management non-hazadous 15 effluent (any liquid) 16 Pollution (Water and air) 17 energy Conservation 18 Biodiversity 19 supply Chain (environmental) 20 Product and services Responsibility (environmental) 21 Materials/Recycling 22 Compliance (environmental)/Penalties 23 environmental award 24 environmental Mgt system iso 14001/14004 Certification 25 Land remediation, contamination, or degradation C SOCIAL 26 Diversity & inclusion 27 Human Rights 28 occupational safety and Health 29 anti-competitive behavior 30 anti-corruption 31 Labor practices 32 education/scholarship, training, and others 33 society (Financial to disadvantage) 34 society (social impact assessment) 35 society (compensated) 36 society (involuntary resettlement) 37 Product and services Responsibility (social) 38 supply Chain (social) 39 Compliance (social) 40 staff Welfare 41 industrial Relation 42 stakeholder engagement - Community. and Workplace