Author:
Jalaludin Dayana,Sulaiman Maliah,Nazli Nik Ahmad Nik
Abstract
PurposeThe purpose of this research paper is to report the results of a study that explains the relationship between institutional pressure and environmental management accounting (EMA) adoption. Specifically, it looks at the pressure of government and other parties in society concerning EMA adoption among manufacturing companies in Malaysia.Design/methodology/approachDrawing from the new institutional sociology theory, the paper seeks to identify the extent to which institutional pressure influences EMA adoption level. A total of 74 accountants from manufacturing companies in Malaysia participated in the survey. Institutional pressure (coercive isomorphism, normative pressure and mimetic processes) was tested against the level of EMA adoption via multiple regression analysis. Next, semi‐structured interviews were employed with four survey participants to gain further insights into the survey results.FindingsThe findings of this study reveal some influence of institutional pressure on EMA adoption. Of these, normative pressure in terms of training and accounting body membership was found to be the most forceful.Practical implicationsRecognising the important role of accountants in managing environmental issues in organisations, this study highlights the influence of education and training as determinants of EMA adoption.Originality/valueThis paper offers a preliminary understanding from the new institutional sociology perspective concerning the type of pressure that influences manufacturing companies in Malaysia to adopt EMA.
Subject
Social Sciences (miscellaneous),General Business, Management and Accounting
Reference56 articles.
1. Abdel‐Maksoud, A., Cerbioni, F., Ricceri, F. and Velayutham, S. (2010), “Employee morale, non‐financial performance measures, deployment of innovative managerial practices and shop‐floor involvement in Italian manufacturing firms”, The British Accounting Review, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 36‐55.
2. ACCA (2005), Sustainability Reporting Guidelines for Malaysian Companies, ACCA Publications, Kuala Lumpur.
3. Arnaboldi, M. and Lapsley, I. (2003), “Activity based costing, modernity and the transformation of local government”, Public Management Review, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 345‐75.
4. Bartolomeo, M., Bennett, M., Bouma, J.‐J., Heydkamp, P., James, P. and Wolters, T. (2000), “Environmental management accounting in Europe: current practice and future potential”, The European Accounting Review, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 31‐52.
5. Bennett, M. and James, P. (2000), The Green Bottom Line: Environmental Accounting for Management: Current Practice and Future Trends, 2nd ed., Greenleaf Publishing, Sheffield.
Cited by
68 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献