Carbon costing integration, environmental disclosure, and carbon intensity: Evidence from Jordanian listed firms
炭素原価計算の統合、環境情報開示、炭素強度：ヨルダン上場企業からのエビデンス (AI 翻訳)
Bassam Maali, Ayman Bader, Amer Morshed, Laith T. Khrais
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本論文は、ヨルダン上場企業における炭素原価計算の活動基準原価計算への統合が、環境情報開示の質や炭素強度に与える影響を検証した。2018～2024年の12社のパネルデータを用いた固定効果モデル分析の結果、コスティング統合と開示品質・炭素強度との間に統計的に有意な関連は見られなかった。企業規模のみが開示品質と正の関連を示した。実務への浸透が不十分であることが示唆される。
English
This study examines whether integrating carbon costing into activity-based costing improves environmental disclosure quality and reduces carbon intensity among Jordanian listed firms. Using panel data from 12 firms over 2018–2024, two-way fixed-effects models find no significant association between costing integration and disclosure quality or carbon intensity. Only firm size positively correlates with disclosure, indicating that implementation depth remains weak in this context.
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
ヨルダン企業を対象とした実証研究であるが、SSBJや日本の有価証券報告書における気候関連開示の実効性を評価する上で、原価計算と開示の連携が必ずしも成果に直結しない点は示唆的。日本の開示制度においても、コスト情報の統合の実質的な効果検証が必要。
In the global GX context
This paper provides empirical evidence from an emerging economy that carbon costing integration alone does not automatically improve disclosure or reduce emissions. For global GX practice, it underscores that managerial accounting tools need stronger institutional and organizational embedding to yield measurable outcomes, relevant to ISSB and TCFD implementation contexts.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Highlights the gap between accounting integration and actual environmental performance; useful for studies on management accounting and carbon disclosure.
🏢実務担当者:Shows that adopting carbon costing methods may not directly improve disclosure or emissions without deeper organizational change.
🏛政策担当者:Suggests that mandating carbon costing integration needs complementary measures to ensure effectiveness, relevant for disclosure regulation design.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Type of the article: Research ArticleAbstractEnvironmental reporting is expanding, yet many firms achieve limited environmental improvement when carbon effects are not translated into decision-relevant cost information for budgeting, pricing, and investment appraisal. This study examines whether integrating carbon costing into activity-based costing is associated with higher carbon and environmental disclosure quality and lower carbon intensity among listed firms in Jordan. The analysis uses disclosures for 12 firms over 2018–2024 and estimates two-way fixed-effects panel models with firm-clustered standard errors to test whether within-firm changes in costing integration are followed by changes in disclosure quality and emissions intensity after controlling for firm-specific unobserved heterogeneity and common year effects. The results show no statistically significant association between costing integration and disclosure quality (β = 0.013, p > 0.10) and no significant association with carbon intensity (β = 0.238, p > 0.10). The interaction analysis further indicates that the integration–disclosure relationship is not stronger in environmentally sensitive industries (β = −0.350, p > 0.10). By contrast, firm size is positively related to disclosure quality, suggesting that visibility, organizational capacity, and reporting resources matter more than costing integration in this context. These findings indicate weak implementation depth rather than clear environmental gains. Overall, carbon-costing integration has not yet become sufficiently embedded in routine managerial practice to produce measurable improvements in disclosure quality or emissions performance in Jordanian listed firms.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.21511/ee.17(2).2026.13first seen 2026-06-17 07:31:18
🔔 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。