Regulatory Compliance as Substitute Legitimacy: Financial Determinants of Sustainability Reporting Quality in Indonesia's Financial Sector
規制遵守による代替的正統性：インドネシア金融セクターにおける持続可能性報告品質の財務的決定要因 (AI 翻訳)
Septiani Septiani, Taufik Akbar
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本研究は、インドネシアのPOJK 51/2017による強制的なサステナビリティ報告が、金融セクターの報告品質に与える影響を分析。103社のパネルデータを用いて、収益性、レバレッジ、監査品質が報告品質に有意な影響を与えないことを発見。代わりに、規制の強制力によって最低限の開示水準（規制フロア）が確保されている。著者は、新興国向けに段階的な品質ベースのガバナンスを提案。
English
This study examines financial determinants of sustainability reporting quality in Indonesia's financial sector under mandatory POJK 51/2017. Using a panel of 103 firms, it finds that profitability, leverage, and audit quality do not significantly affect reporting quality. Instead, a regulatory floor from mandatory reporting ensures a minimum baseline. The paper proposes graduated quality-based sustainability governance for emerging economies.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本ではSSBJによる義務的なサステナビリティ報告が進んでおり、本論文の「規制のフロア」という発見は、強制開示が最低限のコンプライアンスを確保する一方で、品質向上には段階的な措置が必要であることを示唆する。インドネシアの経験は、新興国市場での政策設計に参考になる。
In the global GX context
Globally, with ISSB and CSRD mandating sustainability disclosure, this paper provides evidence that mandatory reporting creates a baseline but does not guarantee quality differentiation. It highlights the need for graduated quality-based governance to move beyond compliance to substantive disclosure, relevant for regulators and standard-setters.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:This paper offers empirical evidence on the effect of mandatory reporting on disclosure quality, contributing to legitimacy theory and institutional isomorphism literature.
🏢実務担当者:Compliance officers can understand that financial performance does not drive reporting quality under mandatory regimes; instead, regulatory pressure sets the floor.
🏛政策担当者:The finding of a regulatory floor supports the adoption of mandatory sustainability reporting, but quality improvement requires supplementary incentives.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Background: Indonesia’s mandatory sustainability reporting under POJK 51/2017 has transformed financial-sector disclosure practices; however, reporting quality remains uneven, with only 4 of 89 assessed companies achieving an “Excellent” status (OJK, 2023). Objective: This study examines whether profitability (ROA), leverage (DER), and audit quality (Big Four affiliation) determine Sustainability Reporting Quality (SRQ) among financial-sector firms listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange during 2020–2023. Methods: Grounded in Legitimacy Theory and Stakeholder Theory, this study uses a balanced panel dataset of 103 firms (412 observations). SRQ is operationalised as a Sustainability Reporting Disclosure Index (SRDI) covering 61 items from the GRI Universal Standards. A Fixed Effects Model (FEM) with White robust standard errors was selected based on the Chow Test (F = 4.614; p < 0.001) and Hausman Test (χ² = 8.278; p = 0.041). Results: Profitability (t = −1.920; p = 0.151), leverage (t = −1.190; p = 0.320), and audit quality (t = 1.303; p = 0.284) do not demonstrate significant partial effects on SRQ; however, the model is statistically significant overall (F = 5.277; p < 0.001; R² = 64.42%). The significant intercept (C = 0.489; p < 0.001) indicates the existence of a “regulatory floor,” a mandatory minimum baseline of sustainability disclosure (approximately 29 of 61 GRI items) achieved consistently by all firms regardless of their financial characteristics. This condition reflects the coercive isomorphic pressure imposed by POJK 51/2017. Conclusion: By positioning SRQ as a policy instrument, this study proposes the adoption of graduated, quality-based sustainability governance to strengthen transparency, accountability, and inclusive economic development in emerging economies.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.59261/jbt.v7i3.687first seen 2026-07-23 05:29:07
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。