Impact of Gender Diversity On Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure (CSRD) in Ghana

IJEBR / August, 2017/ Volume -IV /Issue 2/ Research Article 1 / 1- 24 ISSN:2397-2237
International Journal of Economics Review & Business Research

Impact of Gender Diversity on Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure
(CSRD) in Ghana
Agyemang Andrew Osei1*, Kong Yusheng1**, Ayamba Emmanuel Caesar1*** & Vincent Konadu Tawiah2****
1
School of Finance & Economics, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang City, China
2
Department of Accounting, Griffith University, Brisbane City, Australia
Correspondence: Agyemang Andrew Osei, School of Finance & Economics, Jiangsu University, 301 Xuefu Road, Zhenjiang, China.
Tel: 1860 5243723. E-mail: 5102160202@stmail.ujs.edu.cn
Abstract
This paper presents the extent of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure (CSRD) in
Ghana. In particular, the study investigates the impact of women on board to
relationship between CSRD levels of listed companies in Ghana. The hypothesis was
tested using OLS regression model on 7 years data. The results provide evidence that
Women on Board have significant positive association with CSRD. More importantly,
the association is much stronger when a woman is the chairperson of the board of
directors. Also, board size and board independence play an important role in
determining the level of CSRD. This implies that companies with a higher proportion of
gender diversity and independence are more likely to have a higher level of CSR
disclosure
Keywords: Board Composition, Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Social

Responsibility Disclosure, Gender Diversity, Listed Companies;
Biography of Authors
*Agyemang Andrew Osei holds a bachelor degree in Economics & Business Administration from Catholic University of Ghana with
Accounting as his major. He is currently a Masters student at Department of Economics & Finance of Jiangsu University in the Peoples
Republic of China pursuing Accounting.
**Prof Kong Yusheng holds Ph.D. from Nanjing University of Science and Technology. He has taught at Jiangsu University since June,
1986. He is currently the Dean of School of Finance and Economics at Jiangsu University. Research fields are: accounting, the theory and
methods of corporate finance and corporate governance.
***Ayamba Emmanuel Caesar attained his Masters degree in Business Planning and Microfinance Management in 2015 and at present is a
Doctoral candidate in Jiangsu University, School of Finance and Economics. Ayamba Emmanuel Caesar is currently a Lecturer at the school
of Business Studies, Bolgatanga Polytechnic, Ghana.
www.ijebr.com 1
****Vincent Konadu Tawiah holds M.Com from University of Mysore, India and a member of Institute of Chartered Accountants, Ghana.
He is currently a PhD Candidate at Griffith University, Australia. He works as a Post-Graduate Research Supervisor at University of Cape
Coast in Ghana.
1. Introduction
The recent global financial crisis did not only illustrate the intrinsic problems with quick-
return investments but also underscored the importance of a long-term health of a company
using gender-inclusive leadership, both in the boardroom and at the executive table as a
benchmark. Rita and Agota (2014) suggest that companies and society win when business
leaders are gender diverse. They concluded that, companies with gender-inclusive leadership
teams contributed, on average, more charitable funds. Moreover, commitment to gender
inclusive leadership is associated with higher returns which sometimes go beyond financials
(Ely et al. 2011).
This has led to more studies related to gender diversity and CSR issues by researchers
in most of the developed countries. This paper therefore seeks to conduct a similar research on
gender and CSR in a developing country; Ghana. This paper investigates the impact of gender
diversity on Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure (CSDR) from Ghanaian perspective.
The objective of this study is to examine the impact of board characteristics such as
size, independency, and women diversity on CSRD with emphasis on all the thirty-seven
companies listed on the Ghana Stock Exchange (GSE). The study examined how the
companies report CSR in their annual reports and web pages. The companies were examined
and evaluated based on these four main questions: What is the total number of board
members? What is the gender composition of the board? What is the proportion of
independent directors on the board? Does a board characteristic have any impact on CSR
reporting?
www.ijebr.com 2
The study is note worthy because it is both relevant and timely due to the board gender
diversification policy initiatives currently undertaken by several countries in the world
(Nguyen et al. 2015). Board gender diversity has emerged as a contemporary policy debate in
most developing countries (Schuppan 2009, Miller and del Carmen Triana 2009, Nguyen et al.
2015). Accordingly, the significance of the market-based consequences of such policy
initiatives is an important policy concern in many countries in the world.
Secondary data was collected from all the 37 listed companies of the GSE covering 7 7
financial years was analysed using OLS regression model. Choice and selection of variables
was influenced by the past research and different studies conducted by different scholars on
board diversity
It was found that, all the companies have a CSR reporting programme either in annual
report or on websites. Despite the advocacy for more women on company board, the study
revealed that the average woman on corporate boards in Ghana was 2 which is very low. This
is because, Ghana has no law binding companies to have specific number of women on
company boards.
With regards to the nature of CSR, most of the companies engaged in societal CSR
such as health improvement, educational improvement and donations to the less privileged in
the society. Most of the companies did little in terms of economic and environmental
dimensions. Cal Bank Ghana Limited collaborated with the Department of Parks and Gardens
to plant over six thousand trees in the major cities of Ghana. Also, Ghana Oil Company
Limited provided mechanized boreholes in 8 communities annually to provide drinking water
for the poor communities.
The paper is divided into six sections. Section 1 introduction, section 2 background of
the study, section 3 development of the hypotheses, section 4 methodology and sampling as
www.ijebr.com 3
well as the model to test the hypotheses. The empirical results and findings are discussed in
section 5 and finally, section 6 discusses the conclusion and recommendation of the research.
2. Background of the Study
2.1 Corporate Social Responsibility
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has become an important topic in academic writing and
the business field. Many organizations worldwide strongly emphasize that firms must take into
consideration the economic, social and environmental effects of their activities. The general
concept of CSR as a voluntary initiative was proposed in 2006 by the European Commission
and was set as a policy issued in (European Union 2014). The term CSR is defined as the
responsibility of enterprises for their impacts on society (European Union 2014).Corporate
Social Responsibility Disclosure (CSRD) is a process of providing information about
interactions between companies with regard to environment, employees, society and consumer
issues (Hooghiemstra 2000). CSRD includes all information reported to stakeholders about
social and environmental effects of a companys actions. As such, it involves extending the
accountability of a company beyond the traditional role of providing a financial account to the
owners of capital. This information could be of qualitative or quantitative nature or both and it
may be reported in annual reports, specific reports, media releases or other forms as a means
of achieving companys objectives (Akhtaruddin et al. 2009). CSRD is influenced by choices,
motives and values of those involved in policy formulation. Hafsi and Turgut (2013) argued in
favour of considering the board composition, such as size, independency, and women on board
as essential determinant factors of CSRD.
The purpose of CSR is to make corporate business activity and corporate culture
sustainable in three aspects: economic, social and environmental (Uddin et al. 2008).Social
aspect of CSR is the newest of the three dimensions of CSR. Social aspect of CSR means
www.ijebr.com 4
being accountable for the social effects the company had on people. Ecological aspect of CSR
is when organizations balance multiple aspects of CSR as an ongoing accomplishment with
their external environment. Economical aspect of CSR consists of understanding the economic
impacts of the companys operations.
2.2. Gender Diversity

In recent years, there have being a paradigm shift on debates of CSR towards the connection
of gender and corporate philanthropy. (Soares et al. 2011, Testa 2012, Babcock 2012). Grosser
and Jeremy (2005) examined the actual and potential contributions of CSR to gender equality
within the framework of gender mainstreaming. They introduced gender dimension as a
combination of technical systems (monitoring, reporting, and evaluation) with women's
participation in decision-making and kept the way in which it is compatible with CSR
agendas. Kate (2009) investigated how enterprise, citizenship, business stakeholder relations
and gender mainstreaming strategy approached to gender equality within by CSR. SetPamis
(2015) set the initial point for research after general adoption, that is, gender diversity
increased social responsible behaviour of an entity. The association found between the number
of female board members on a corporate board and the prevalence of corporate social
behaviour including, charitable giving, social commitment and external recognition of
employee is positive. In developed economies, companies with effective board composition
are positively presumed to be better corporate citizens and more socially and environmentally
responsible than companies with poor board composition. This indicates that there should be a
strong positive association between board characteristics and CSRD of companies (Fondas
and Sassalos 2000).
Most countries have enacted laws to promote women in key areas of business (Adams
and Ferreira 2009). In view of this background, women are actively involved in business,
www.ijebr.com 5
politics, governance, occupation and business management. Leaders in several countries in
Europe have proposed compulsory quotas for gender equality in directorship. Norway is the
leader in legislated gender equality on boards of directors with a requirement of 40% of each
gender since 2008 (Ford and Pande 2011). Finland, Sweden, Iceland, and Denmark have also
enacted laws mandating gender equality on corporate boards. Spain and France have also
legislated mandatory quotas to be implemented from 2015 and 2016 onwards, respectively. In
the United States there were only 16.9% of women on Fortune 500 Board position in 2013,
and less than one-fifth of the companies had 25% or more of the directors to be women. One-
tenth of the companies had no women on their boards (Richardson 2013). Davies (2011)
shows under representation of women in the boardrooms throughout the world with 3.6% in
the industrialized Asia-Pacific, 23% in Sweden and the Philippines; and there was 9.6% for
the United Kingdom.
Gender diversity in corporate boardrooms bring many benefits to the shareholder and
work effectively to mitigate the possibility of expropriation. Fondas and Sassalos (2000)
documented the presence of women on board increased the independence of the Board of
Directors as well as provided distinctive quality of action from a different point of view in
discussion in the boardroom by providing help and making a board interactive .
2.3. Business Environment in Ghana
Ghana has one of the highest GDP per capita in West Africa hence, becoming one of the
fastest growing economies in the world. The Ghanaian domestic economy in 2013 revolved
around services (telecommunication and banking), which accounted for 50% of GDP and
employed 28% of the work force. Industrialization is mainly associated with minerals and oil.
Ghana is Africas second-biggest gold producer (after South Africa) and second-largest cocoa
producer. Ghana's industrial base is relatively advanced. As of 2013 there were four major
www.ijebr.com 6
companies in the textiles sector. Since majority of Ghanaians engage in peasant farming,
Ghana is still unable to produce food for her citizens but import to supplement what they
produce (Baffoe 2013).
In recent years, unemployment has become major issues challenging Ghana with
around 28% in 2015. The private sector has been the engine of growth in Ghanas economy.
Most businesses and companies are owned by private individuals. In order for the private
sector to be accountable to the communities they operate they have to fulfill their duties
towards society and the environment (Robins 2005). The government has enacted regulations
that mandate organizations to disclose social and environmental reporting in their annual
reports. An example of such a law is the Environmental Protection Law (2004), which was
enacted to ensure the compliance of companies with its environmental control standards.
Another significant step was the Securities Commission Law of 1998, which required listed
companies to disclose information about social and environmental issues in their annual
reports.
There are a limited number of studies in Ghana that investigate the relationship
between the corporate governance and information disclosure in general. The few researches
conducted on CSR focused on the mining sector (Mares 2012). Most of these studies used
content analysis to measure the extent of CSR. The findings indicate that the most popular
disclosure theme was community involvement, whereas the environmental issue had the
lowest disclosure among all of these studies. Previous studies revealed that the level of CSRD
remains relatively low (Mares 2012). To bridge the gap in the existing CSR literature in
Ghana, the current study focuses on examining the impact of gender diversity on CSRD in all
listed companies of the GSE.
www.ijebr.com 7
3. Literature and Hypotheses Development
3.1. Board Size

Board of directors are one of the most important elements of corporate governance mechanism
in overseeing the conduct of a companys business and ensures that it was properly managed
by their agents. Donnelly and Mulcahy (2008) argued that a company reduced information
asymmetry between its managers and other stakeholders by having a large board size. On the
contrary, Ahn et al. (2010) suggests that individuals with multiple directorships have limited
capacity and time to monitor managers' actions and to provide useful advice on critical
strategic decisions, leaving managers to pursue their own private benefits at the expense of
various stakeholders. The size of the board affected the ability of the board to monitor and
evaluate the management (Akhtaruddin et al. 2009, Zahra et al. 2000). Dhaliwal et al. (2011)
claim that board size influenced the level of voluntary and social disclosure. Akhtaruddin et al.
(2009) stated that with more directors, the collective experience and expertise of the board
increased, and therefore, the need for the disclosure will be higher. Thus, it is hypothesized
that:
H1: There is a positive relationship between board size and CSRD.
3.2. Gender Diversity

Board gender diversity is generally known as the proportion of board directors that are female.
(Bear et al. 2010, Hafsi and Turgut 2013). Bear et al. (2010) found that CSR mediated the
relationship between the number of women on the board and corporate reputation. Therefore,
more female directors sensitized boards in terms of CSR disclosures. Female talent played a
strategic role for companies in conformity with gender diversity in order to manage their
social responsibility. Firer and Mitchell Williams (2003) suggests that the presence of women
directors on the board increased the level of charity. This brought to the attention of Chapple
www.ijebr.com 8
et al. (2007) with the findings that, gender diversity increased the boards attention to the CSR
issue. This is because women had good social sensibility and shown a more favourable
attitude towards ethical behaviour than men (Burgess and Tharenou 2002). Miller and del
Carmen Triana (2009) argued that female directors enhanced a firms reputation through CSR
and corporate charitable given as a signal to stakeholders. The presence of more female
directors stimulated more participative communication among board members. Female
directors are able to ask challenging questions and work together to demonstrate collaboration
in decision making (Konrad et al. 2008). Bear et al. (2010) found a positive relationship
between the number of women on the board and CSR. Following from these literatures, it is
hypothesized that:
H2. There is a positive relationship between the proportion of female directors and the level of
CSRD.
3.3. Board Independence

As part of corporate strategy, the board of directors played a fundamental role in determining
the social responsibility of an organization. Adawi and Rwegasira (2011) affirmed that the
boards effectiveness in the promotion of CSR performance must be determined by its
independence because it is closely related to the strength of the board. In general, it is
expected that independent directors display greater objectivity in their analysis of the
management and behaviour of the company. Independent directors are more willing to
undertake social commitments and to satisfy the interests of stakeholders (Ibrahim and
Angelidis 1995). In this respect, independent directors are seen as more able to honour the
obligations of the company. Independent directors are interested in developing and
maintaining the social responsibility of the company (Michelon and Parbonetti 2012). Higher
proportion of independent directors improved the voluntary disclosure (Rouf and Abdur
www.ijebr.com 9
2011). Lim et al. (2007) suggested that independent directors provided more voluntary
disclosures to reduce the information asymmetry between shareholders and managers. The
presence of independent director reduces litigation risk and protects their reputation. In
addition, a higher proportion of out-sider directors on corporate boards also enhanced the
comprehensiveness and quality of CSRD.
Sen and Bhattacharya (2001) argued that CSR should be disclosed, as good news
reflected the good reputation of a company. Jouiroua and Chenguel (2014) found that a larger
number of independent directors led to an increased level of voluntary environment disclosure
in Tunis companies. Htay et al. (2012) found a positive relationship between the proportion of
independent directors on the board and CSR disclosure in Malaysian banks. Consequently, this
study anticipates a positive association between independent directors and the CSRD.
Therefore, it is hypothesized that:
H3.There is a positive relationship between the proportion of independent directors and the
level of CSRD.
4. Methodology and Sampling

Since the objective of this study analysed CSRD, the sample included all companies of the
Ghana Stock Exchange (GSE). This paper was conducted using secondary source of
information which was extracted from annual reports of the company along with the
information which is available on companys website. The research covered 7 financial years
from 1st January, 2009 to 31st December, 2015.
www.ijebr.com 10
Table 1: Summary of Sample Used
YEAR OF
NAME OF COMPANY SECTOR ESTABLISHMENT DATE OF LISTING
1 AngloGold Ashanti Basic Materials 2004 27th April, 2004

2 Aluworks Basic Materials 1985 29th November, 1996
3 Golden Star Resources Basic Materials 1999 15th February, 2008
4 African Champion Industries Consumer Goods 1967 12th May, 1992
5 Benso Oil Palm Plantation Consumer Goods 2004 16th April, 2004
6 Cocoa Processing Company Consumer Goods 1981 14th February, 2003
7 Fan Milk Consumer Goods 1960 18th October, 1991
8 Guinness Ghana Breweries Consumer Goods 1991 23rd August, 1991
9 Golden Web Consumer Goods 1982 29th August, 2005
10 Mechanical Llyod Company Consumer Goods 1970 10th May, 1994
11 Produce Buying Company Consumer Goods 1981 17th May, 2000
12 Pioneer Kitchenware Consumer Goods 1959 25th August, 1995
13 PZ Cussons Ghana Consumer Goods 1958 23rd August, 1991
14 Sam Woode Consumer Goods 1984 24th April, 2002
15 Unilever Ghana Consumer Goods 1992 23rd August, 1991
16 Access Bank Ghana Financial 2009 5th May, 2010
17 Agricultural Development Bank Financial 1965 17th May, 1996
18 CAL Bank Financial 1990 5th November, 2004
19 Ecobank Ghana Financial 1990 July, 2006
20 Enterprise Group Financial 1924 21st February, 1992
21 Ecobank Transnational Inc. Financial 1985 11th September, 2006
22 Ghana Commercial Bank Financial 1953 17th May, 1996
23 HFC Bank (Ghana) Financial 1990 17th March, 1995
24 Mega African Capital Financial 2008 23rd April, 2014
25 Standard Chartered Bank Gh. Financial 1896 23rd August, 1991
26 SIC Insurance Company Financial 1962 25th January, 2008
27 Societe Generale Ghana Financial 1975 13th October, 1995
28 Trust Bank (The Gambia) Financial 1997 15th November, 2002
29 UT Bank Financial 1997 25th November, 2008
30 Ayrton Drug Manufacturing Health Care 1965 14th August, 2006
31 Starwin Products Health Care 1960 29th December, 2004
32 Camelot Ghana Industrials 1963 17th September, 1999
33 Transaction Solutions (Ghana) Industrials 2002 29th December, 2006
34 Ghana Oil Company Oil & Gas 1960 16th November, 2007
35 Total Petroleum Ghana Oil & Gas 2006 19th July, 1991
36 Tullow Oil Oil & Gas 2007 27th July, 2011
37 Clydestone (Ghana) Technology 1989 19th May, 2004
Source: Generated by the researchers from GSE database
www.ijebr.com 11
4.1. Model Specification and Measurement
In order to evaluate the impact of gender diversity on CSRD the study adopted model used by
(Khan et al. 2013) as follows:
CSRD =a + 1 WB + 2 WC + 3 BS + 4 BI + 5 ROA + 5 AGE +6 TA +
Where: CSRD = Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure Index
WB = Women on Board
WC = Women Chairperson
BS = Board Size
BI = Board Independence
ROA = Return on Assets
AGE = Age of Company
TA = Total Assets
A = Represent the fixed intercept element
= is error term
4.1.1. Dependent Variable

Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure was measured using content analysis. Content
analysis approach has been widely used in corporate social reporting research (Guthrie and
Parker 1990, Haniffa and Cooke 2005, Mohd Ghazali 2007). Content analysis is a method of
codifying the text (or content) of a piece of writing or categories depending on selected
criteria(Haniffa and Cooke 2005). Content analysis employed a three-step process. The three
steps included choosing an appropriate document or unit of analysis and unit of measuring
content, measuring the contents and identifying the themes or categories into which the
content was classified. For this paper, document of analysis is annual reports of companies
www.ijebr.com 12
listed on the Ghana Stock Exchange. The themes of measurement classified are Economical,
Social and Environmental.
In developing the index, references was first made to the items/checklists employed by
previous research which covered the themes (Haniffa and Cooke 2005, Saleh Al Arussi et al.
2009). The CSR disclosure items were extracted from companies annual reports. Then CSR
disclosure index was calculated by combining all items covered in the three themes which
were Economical, Social and Environment. The final list comprised of 30 items, 10 items for
each theme. A dichotomous procedure was applied where a company was awarded 1 if an item
included in the index was disclosed in the annual report and 0 if it is not disclosed.
Accordingly, the CSR disclosure index for a company is derived by computing the ratio of
actual scores awarded divided by the maximum score (30).
CSRD = Total items disclosure by company (i)
Total maximum disclosure score (30)
4.1.2. Independent Variables

Independent Variables were the factors hypothesized to have influenced on CSRD. The
independent variables are Women on Board, Women Chairperson, Board Independence and
Board Size. These variables and their measurement are explained below in the context of this
study. Women on Board refer to the number of women sitting on the board of directors.
Women Chairperson is the situation whereby a woman is appointed as the Chairperson of the
Board of Directors. Women Chair was used as control variable in studies such as (Jia and
Zhang 2012). Board size referes to the number of directors represented on the board. Board
independence refers to the proportion of non-executive directors on the board. It is calculated
as the proportion of non-executive directors divided by total number of directors on the board.
www.ijebr.com 13
4.1.3. Control Variable
The control variable included in the model is ROA. Return on Assets (ROA) and Return on
Equity (ROE) are accounting ratios which shows how effectively and efficiently management
used corporates asset and equity to enhance inventory turnover and sales to earn profit
(Higgins 2012). Most measures of Corporate Financial Performance (CFP) is divided into two
broad categories; accounting based measure (Bayoud et al. 2012, McWilliams and Siegel
2000, Mishra and Suar 2010) and market based measure (Lioui and Sharma 2012). Following
the precedent of the previous studies, the use of accounting based measure received vast
attention and mostly used by researchers. Therefore, CFP will be measured by ROA.
Other control variables included in the model are AGE and TA. Age of a company is
determined by deducting the year of establishment from the current year under consideration.
Some researchers argue that, companies that have existed for long are likely to show more
information to their stakeholders (Carroll and Shabana 2010). In addition to the above,
companies that have existed for long mostly have goodwill. One way of increasing their
goodwill is to make the public know about their activities thereby influencing CSRD. Total
Assets (TA) is measured by taking the natural Log of all assets of the companies.
PradoLorenzo et al. (2009) argue that larger firms are likely to show more information in
order to improve the confidence of stakeholders and reduce political cost. Studies of (Bayoud
et al. 2012, Jizi et al. 2014) have used TA as a control variable.
Table 2: Summary of the variables and their measurement

ITEM MEANING EXPLANATION
CSRD CSR disclosure Scoring of CSR disclosure index
WB Women on Board Number of women directors sit on the board
WC Women Number of women who serve as Chairperson
Chairperson for the Board of Directors
BI Board Proportion on non executive directors dived by
the total number of directors on the board of the
www.ijebr.com 14
Independence company
BS Board size Number of directors sit on the board

ROA Return on Assets Return on Assets
AGE AGE Year of study less year of establishment
TA Total Assets Natural logarithm of total assets
Source: Generated by researchers from variables used in the study
4. Empirical Results
This section discusses the empirical results of our research. It provides a descriptive statistic of
the variable, correlation matrix and OLS regression.
Descriptive statistic merely represented the statistical attributes of the variables in the
study model. Table 2 below provides such statistics. All the variables were collected from the
companys annual report and information on the companys website.
Table 3: Descriptive Statistics of Variables

Standard
Variables Observations Mean Deviation Minimum Maximum
CSRD 259 0.5594028 0.16678 0.2666667 0.946667

BS 259 10.25483 2.575361 6 18
WB 259 1.30888 1.119402 0 4
WC 259 0.1312741 0.338354 0 1
ROA 259 5.397066 1.434273 1.8 9.42
AGE 259 33.37838 23.77567 0 119
TA 259 7.92E+09 1.54E+10 136572 5.70E+10
Source: Generated by the researcher from the Annual Reports and Companies
website, using Stata (version 13).
Table 3 reveals that corporate social responsibility disclosure of the Listed Companies in
Ghana over the seven year period ranged from 26% to 94% and with average values of the
dependent variable as 56% and the standard deviation of 0.16678 indicating that on average,
56% of the observations disclosed CSR related information, it shows that the minimum
www.ijebr.com 15
disclosure is 26% while the maximum disclosure was 94%. It is an indication that none of the
firms disclosed all the CSR-related information. The average of Board size is 10.24 (10
members) with wide variation across the sample companies as the minimum and the
maximum is 6 and 18 members respectively.
Women on board show a mean of 1.30888 with a standard deviation of 1.119402 and
with a minimum value of 0 and maximum of 4. This means that women are not participating
much in the board of the listed companies in Ghana. Thus companies have not created many
opportunities in their governance system. Women Chairperson recorded average of 0.1312741
with minimum of 0 and maximum of 1. This indicates that, most of the listed companies had males at
the chairman for the Board of Directors. On average 40.46% of board members of Ghanaian
Listed Companies were independent directors with minimum of 1 and the maximum of 9.
The correlation matrix in table 4 provides an insights into which of the independent
variables were related to the dependent variables.
Table 4: Correlation Matrix of variables
Variables CSRD BS WB WC BI AGE TA WC

CSRD 1
BS 0.5437 1
WB 0.7586 0.3275 1
WC 0.5607 0.1394 0.4861 1
BI 0.4448 0.2544 0.1733 0.1734 1
ROA 0.3677 0.1932 -0.1782 -0.4646 -0.0077 1
AGE -0.0174 0.027 0.0879 -0.007 -0.0135 -0.1213 1
TA -0.0505 0.1696 0.0417 0.0927 0.0374 -0.1213 0.048 1
Source: Generated by the researcher from the Annual Reports and Companies
website, using Stata (version 13).
The correlation matrix as per table 4 above shows the relationship between all pairs of
explanatory variables used in the regression model. It reveals that, with the exception of Age
of company (AGE) and Total Assets (TA), all the other explanatory variables have a positive
www.ijebr.com 16
correlation with the dependent variable. The positive correlations imply that as Board Size
(BS), Board Independent (BI), Women on Board (WB), Women Chairperson (WC) and
Return on Assets (ROA) increases, the disclosure of corporate social responsibility also
increases and vice versa. On the other hand, Age of the company (AGE) and Total Assets
(TA) shows a negative correlation. That is, as the total assets and existence period increases, it
affects CSRD negatively
Regression model was developed to test the impact of independent variables on the
dependent variable on sector basis. R1 to R7 shows the findings of the various sectors
regression. R8 combines all the sectors. To test the quality of the linear fit to the model, the
researchers calculated the coefficient of multiple as shown below:
Table 5: OLS Regression
R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8
Basic Consumer Health
CSRD Material Goods Finance Care Industry Oil & Gas Technology All Sectors
BS -0.0408846 0.027875 -0.00633 0.0206* -0.0271 0.009935 0.153535 0.011317*

WB 0.1149337* -0.00149 0.04207** -0.01963 -0.00964 0.022279* 0.083099 0.02429***
WC -0.0837686 2.414105 0.115955* 0.14984 0.298286 0.164413 omitted 0.14804*
BI 0.0350671 0.02786* -0.00962 0.02959 0.016027 0.03143 0.031772 0.02019*
ROA -0.0472058 0.007189 0.056208 0.006268 0.092502 0.039283 -0.07363 0.03326
AGE -0.0036253 -0.00021 -0.00114 0.005735 -0.00696 -0.0013 -0.0692 -0.00053
TA -2.12E-12 -8.43E-13 9.38E-14 -8.35E-11 -1.08E-10 -3.78E-11 6.78E-09 -1.12E-12
CONS 0.9289711 0.332537 0.354183* 0.491635 0.708265 0.47214 -2.13791 0.323238
R2 0.6283 0.5474 0.5543 0.5336 0.6332 0.5427 1 0.5424

Adjusted R2 0.4182 0.5058 0.3904 0.4439 0.2052 0.2964 0 0.3241
Observations 21 84 98 14 14 21 7 259
***p < .01; **p < .05; *p < .10
Source: Generated by the researcher from the Annual Reports and Companies website, using
Stata (version 13).
The results of OLS showed the coefficient of determination "R-Square" shows 54.24%
indicating that the variables considered in the model account for about 54.24% change in the
www.ijebr.com 17
dependent variable that is CSRD, while remaining of the change is because of other variables
not addressed by this model. In terms of sector analysis of "R-Square", the highest was
Industry sector and the least was Health care which recorded 63.32% and 53.36% respectively.
This indicates that the model was fitted and the explanatory variable are properly selected,
combined and used as the substantial value of reporting quality is accounted for by the
explanatory variables. Hence, the findings of the study are valid.
From table 5, it can be seen that, board size has negative impact on CSRD in Basic
Material, Finance and Industry sectors, however, the relationship is not significant. R2, R6
and R7 recorded positive but insignificant values as well. This result is consistent with the
findings of (Kurawa and Kabara 2014, Rahman and Ismail). On the other hand, Board Size
has positive significant association with CSRD among companies in the health sector. This
implies that, the impact of board size on CSRD differ from industry to industry. While some
industries such as finance and basic materials may not need large board size to influence their
decision in disclosing information, the health sector requires large size to disclose more CSR
information. Overall, size of the companys board influences their CSRD. (see R8 results).
This results is consistent with the findings of (Jizi et al. 2014, Isa and Muhammad 2015). The
results affirm H1. That is, there is a positive relationship between board size and CSRD.
The result also shows that the relationship between WB and CSRD is positive and
significant at 1% for R1 and R6. Again, the results are positive and significant at 5% for R3.
Finally, when all the sectors are combined and regressed, CSRD and WB is positive and
significant at 10%. The findings imply that, with an increase in WB by one person, while other
variables remained constant there will be an increase in the firms CSRD. This implies that, as
more women serve on the board, it will increases CSRD of listed Ghanaian Companies. These
results are consistent with the findings of(Wang and Coffey 1992, Bear et al. 2010). It is
important to note that an increase in the proportion of women on the board increases the level
www.ijebr.com 18
of CSRD. The findings affirm H2. That is, there is a positive relationship between women on
board and CSRD.
Similarly, a woman as chairperson of the board of directors was found to be positive
and significant to the level of CSRD at 1% for R3 and R8 only. R1 had a negative and
insignificant relationship with CSRD and WC while R2, R4, R5, R6 and R7 had a positive but
insignificant relationship between CSRD and WC. This implies that, if women are appointed
as the chairperson for the board, it could have a positive relationship with CSRD. This
findings agree with the findings of (Miller and del Carmen Triana 2009).
The relationship between CSRD and BI is positive and significant at 1% for R2 and
R8. It implies that an increase in BI by one more person while other variables remained
constant will result in an increase of the firms CSRD. CSRD and BI are positive but
insignificant for R1, R4, R5, R6 and R7. The positive relationship of CSRD and BI implies
that as BI increases, the level of CSRD also increases. This finding is in agreement with the
findings of Khan et al. (2013) who discovered that board independence has a positive
association with the CSR disclosure. The findings of the study affirm H3. That is, there is
positive relationship between board independence and CSRD.
Both ages of the company and total assets of the company shows either a positive or
negative but insignificant association with the level of CSRD. This implied that, age of the
company and total assets does not have any impact on CSRD.
www.ijebr.com 19
5. CONCLUSION
This paper empirically examines the relationship between board diversity characteristics and
the level of all companies listed on the GSE disclosure of CSR
The results indicate that board size (BS), women on board (WB), board independence
(BI) and women chairperson on board (WC) played an important role in determining the level
of CSRD. This implies that companies with a higher proportion of board size, gender
diversity, independency and women chair person are more likely to have a higher level of
CSRD.
It is therefore concluded that larger board sizes are more likely to be versatile than a
smaller one because they have expertise from various angles that mobilize recourses for
optimal utilization and such larger board size should be encourage.
The findings are important to policy makers in Ghana. They should implement quotas
for women in the boardroom, and adopting such a policy will increase the participation of
women in the decision-making process of the companies and reduce gender bias, as
discrimination against women in the workplace exists in Ghana.
The presence of women chairperson on the boards of the listed companies in Ghana
can enhance ratings for CSRD and corporate reputation sending vital signals to stakeholders.
Hence, women as chairperson should be encourage among Ghanaian companies.
Also, the number of independent (Non- executive) directors on the board is an
important monitoring and control device. This is because the independent directors have the
ability to monitor and control the rights of the executive directors, thereby protecting and
defending the interests of the shareholders and other stakeholders. In addition, they are free
from managerial influence and capable of monitoring executive directors effectively which
improves the level of CSRD in the Ghanaian listed companies.
www.ijebr.com 20
Based on these findings, the study recommend that, board size should be made up of
minimum of 11 and maximum of 21 to ensure more disclosure of corporate social
responsibilities. Again, there should be women quota of not less than 40% on the board. This
will ensure diversity and efficiency of the board as well as full disclosure of the companys
activities related to CSR. We also advocate for board independency to ensure effectiveness
and full disclosure of CSR. Lastly, in order to ensure women empowerment, women should be
appointed as chairperson of the board. Further studies can be conducted on the same topic
using other companies that are not listed on the GSE and also introduce new variables that are
not addressed in this study.
There are some limitations that can be improved on this study for future research.
Firstly, there is the likelihood of omitted variables in the study. Perhaps, the existence of
omitted variables could lead to better prediction and explain CSR disclosure well. Secondly,
the use of Return on Assets (ROA) as a proxy for financial performance has its own
limitations. The findings may be challenged with the use of other methods or other financial
indicators as a measurement to obtain a better result.
www.ijebr.com 21
REFERENCES
Adams, R. B. and Ferreira, D. 2009. Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and
performance. Journal of financial economics, 94(2), 291-309.
Adawi, M. and Rwegasira, K. 2011. Corporate boards and voluntary implementation of best disclosure
practices in emerging markets: Evidence from the UAE listed companies in the Middle East.
International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, 8(3), 272-293.
Ahn, S., Jiraporn, P. and Kim, Y. S. 2010. Multiple directorships and acquirer returns. Journal of
Banking & Finance, 34(9), 2011-2026.
Akhtaruddin, M., et al. 2009. Corporate governance and voluntary disclosure in corporate annual
reports of Malaysian listed firms. Journal of Applied Management Accounting Research, 7(1),
1.
Babcock, P. 2012. The Crossroads of Gender and Corporate Social Responsibility. URL: www. shrm.
org/hrdisciplines/ethics/articles/pages/gendercs r. aspx. Cited, 24(3), 2013.
Baffoe, E. A. 2013. Building Network for Entry into Emerging Economies of Africa.
Bayoud, N. S., Kavanagh, M. and Slaughter, G. 2012. Corporate social responsibility disclosure and
corporate reputation in developing countries: the case of Libya. Journal of Business and Policy
Research, 7(1), 131-160.
Bear, S., Rahman, N. and Post, C. 2010. The impact of board diversity and gender composition on
corporate social responsibility and firm reputation. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(2), 207-221.
Burgess, Z. and Tharenou, P. 2002. Women board directors: Characteristics of the few. Journal of
Business Ethics, 37(1), 39-49.
Carroll, A. B. and Shabana, K. M. 2010. The business case for corporate social responsibility: A review
of concepts, research and practice. International journal of management reviews, 12(1), 85-
105.
Chapple, W., et al. 2007. The effects of corporate governance on corporate social responsibility.
Unpublished.[available from the authors].
Davies, E. 2011. Women on boards: An independent review into women on boards. London:
Department for Business Innovation and Skills BIS.
Dhaliwal, D. S., et al. 2011. Voluntary nonfinancial disclosure and the cost of equity capital: The
initiation of corporate social responsibility reporting. The accounting review, 86(1), 59-100.
Donnelly, R. and Mulcahy, M. 2008. Board structure, ownership, and voluntary disclosure in Ireland.
Corporate Governance: An International Review, 16(5), 416-429.
Ely, R. J., Ibarra, H. and Kolb, D. M. 2011. Taking gender into account: Theory and design for women's
leadership development programs. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10(3),
474-493.
European Union, I., 2014. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the
Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions.
Bryssel.
Firer, S. and Mitchell Williams, S. 2003. Intellectual capital and traditional measures of corporate
performance. Journal of intellectual capital, 4(3), 348-360.
Fondas, N. and Sassalos, S. 2000. A different voice in the boardroom: How the presence of women
directors affects board influence over management. Global focus, 12(2), 13-22.
Ford, D. and Pande, R. 2011. Gender Quotas and Female Leadership. Background Paper for World
Development Report, World Bank.
Grosser, K. and Jeremy, M. 2005. Gender mainstreaming and corporate social responsibility:
Reporting workplace issues. Journal of Business Ethics, 62(4), 327-340.
Guthrie, J. and Parker, L. D. 1990. Corporate social disclosure practice: a comparative international
analysis. Advances in public interest accounting, 3, 159-175.
Hafsi, T. and Turgut, G. 2013. Boardroom diversity and its effect on social performance:
Conceptualization and empirical evidence. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(3), 463-479.
www.ijebr.com 22
Haniffa, R. M. and Cooke, T. E. 2005. The impact of culture and governance on corporate social
reporting. Journal of accounting and public policy, 24(5), 391-430.
Higgins, R. C., 2012. Analysis for financial management. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Hooghiemstra, R. 2000. Corporate communication and impression managementnew perspectives
why companies engage in corporate social reporting. Journal of business ethics, 27(1), 55-68.
Htay, S. N. N., et al. 2012. Impact of corporate governance on social and environmental information
disclosure of Malaysian listed banks: Panel data analysis. Asian Journal of Finance &
Accounting, 4(1), 1.
Ibrahim, N. A. and Angelidis, J. P. 1995. The corporate social responsiveness orientation of board
members: Are there differences between inside and outside directors? Journal of business
Ethics, 14(5), 405-410.
Isa, M. A. and Muhammad, S. 2015. The Impact of Board Characteristics on Corporate Social
Responsibility Disclosure: Evidence from Nigerian Food Product Firms. International Journal of
Management Science and Business Administration, 1(12), 34-45.
Jia, M. and Zhang, Z. 2012. Women on boards of directors and corporate philanthropic disaster
response. China Journal of Accounting Research, 5(1), 83-99.
Jizi, M. I., et al. 2014. Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility disclosure: Evidence
from the US banking sector. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(4), 601-615.
Jouiroua, M. and Chenguel, B. 2014. The determinants of voluntary disclosure in Tunisia: A study of
the firms listed in the Tunisian stock exchange. Journal of Business and Management
Research, 4, 86-97.
Kate, G. 2009. Corporate social responsibility and gender equality: women as stakeholders and the
European Union sustainability strategy. Business Ethics: A European Review, 18(3), 290-307.
Khan, A., Muttakin, M. B. and Siddiqui, J. 2013. Corporate governance and corporate social
responsibility disclosures: Evidence from an emerging economy. Journal of business ethics,
114(2), 207-223.
Konrad, A. M., Kramer, V. and Erkut, S. 2008. Critical Mass:: The Impact of Three or More Women on
Corporate Boards. Organizational dynamics, 37(2), 145-164.
Kurawa, J. and Kabara, A., Impact of Corporate Governance on Voluntary Disclosure by Firms in the
Downstream Sector of the Nigerian Petroleum Industry. ed. World Business Research
Conference, 2014, 21-23.
Lim, S., Matolcsy, Z. and Chow, D. 2007. The association between board composition and different
types of voluntary disclosure. European Accounting Review, 16(3), 555-583.
Lioui, A. and Sharma, Z. 2012. Environmental corporate social responsibility and financial
performance: Disentangling direct and indirect effects. Ecological Economics, 78, 100-111.
Mares, R. 2012. Corporate responsibility and compliance with the law: A case study of land,
dispossession, and aftermath at Newmont's Ahafo project in Ghana. Business and Society
Review, 117(2), 233-280.
McWilliams, A. and Siegel, D. 2000. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance.
Strategic Management Journal, 21(5), 603-609.
Michelon, G. and Parbonetti, A. 2012. The effect of corporate governance on sustainability disclosure.
Journal of Management & Governance, 16(3), 477-509.
Miller, T. and del Carmen Triana, M. 2009. Demographic diversity in the boardroom: Mediators of the
board diversityfirm performance relationship. Journal of Management studies, 46(5), 755-
786.
Mishra, S. and Suar, D. 2010. Does corporate social responsibility influence firm performance of
Indian companies? Journal of business ethics, 95(4), 571-601.
Mohd Ghazali, N. A. 2007. Ownership structure and corporate social responsibility disclosure: some
Malaysian evidence. Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society,
7(3), 251-266.
www.ijebr.com 23
Nguyen, T., Locke, S. and Reddy, K. 2015. Does boardroom gender diversity matter? Evidence from a
transitional economy. International Review of Economics & Finance, 37, 184-202.
PradoLorenzo, J. M., GallegoAlvarez, I. and GarciaSanchez, I. M. 2009. Stakeholder engagement
and corporate social responsibility reporting: the ownership structure effect. Corporate Social
Responsibility and Environmental Management, 16(2), 94-107.
Rahman, I. M. A. and Ismail, K. N. I. K. The effects of political connection on corporate social
responsibility disclosureevidence from listed companies in Malaysia.
Richardson, J. T., 2013. Principles of catalyst development. Springer.
Rita, V. and Agota, R. G. 2014. Gender in the facets of corporate social responsibility. International
Review, (1-2), 73-89.
Robins, F. 2005. The future of corporate social responsibility. Asian Business & Management, 4(2), 95-
115.
Rouf, D. and Abdur, M. 2011. The corporate social responsibility disclosure: a study of listed
companies in Bangladesh.
Saleh Al Arussi, A., Hisyam Selamat, M. and Mohd Hanefah, M. 2009. Determinants of financial and
environmental disclosures through the internet by Malaysian companies. Asian Review of
Accounting, 17(1), 59-76.
Schuppan, T. 2009. E-Government in developing countries: Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa.
Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 118-127.
Sen, S. and Bhattacharya, C. B. 2001. Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer
reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of marketing Research, 38(2), 225-243.
SetPamis, D. 2015. The relationship between women directors and corporate social responsibility.
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 22(6), 334-345.
Soares, R., Marquis, C. and Lee, M. 2011. Gender and corporate social responsibility: Itsa matter of
sustainability. Catalyst, 2011, 78-92.
Testa, H. 2012. A Woman's Place in the Boardroom. First Affirmative Financial Network, LLC.
Uddin, M. B., Tarique, K. M. and Hassan, M. 2008. Three dimensional aspects of corporate social
responsibility.
Wang, J. and Coffey, B. S. 1992. Board composition and corporate philanthropy. Journal of business
Ethics, 11(10), 771-778.
Zahra, S. A., Neubaum, D. O. and Huse, M. 2000. Entrepreneurship in medium-size companies:
Exploring the effects of ownership and governance systems. Journal of management, 26(5),
947-976.
www.ijebr.com 24

Impact of Gender Diversity On Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure (CSRD) in Ghana

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Impact of Gender Diversity On Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure (CSRD) in Ghana

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

IJEBR / August, 2017/ Volume -IV /Issue 2/ Research Article 1 / 1- 24 ISSN:2397-2237

International Journal of Economics Review & Business Research

Keywords: Board Composition, Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Social

teams contributed, on average, more charitable funds. Moreover, commitment to gender

(Ely et al. 2011).

diversity on Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure (CSDR) from Ghanaian perspective.

diversification policy initiatives currently undertaken by several countries in the world

2015). Accordingly, the significance of the market-based consequences of such policy

initiatives is an important policy concern in many countries in the world.

Limited provided mechanized boreholes in 8 communities annually to provide drinking water

for the poor communities.

2. Background of the Study

2.1 Corporate Social Responsibility

responsibility of enterprises for their impacts on society (European Union 2014).Corporate

Social Responsibility Disclosure (CSRD) is a process of providing information about

of achieving companys objectives (Akhtaruddin et al. 2009). CSRD is influenced by choices,

as essential determinant factors of CSRD.

is when organizations balance multiple aspects of CSR as an ongoing accomplishment with

impacts of the companys operations.

2.2. Gender Diversity

within the framework of gender mainstreaming. They introduced gender dimension as a

combination of technical systems (monitoring, reporting, and evaluation) with women's

behaviour including, charitable giving, social commitment and external recognition of

employee is positive. In developed economies, companies with effective board composition

and Sassalos 2000).

the United Kingdom.

discussion in the boardroom by providing help and making a board interactive .

2.3. Business Environment in Ghana

produce (Baffoe 2013).

listed companies of the GSE.

3.1. Board Size

H1: There is a positive relationship between board size and CSRD.

3.2. Gender Diversity

directors stimulated more participative communication among board members. Female

3.3. Board Independence

boards effectiveness in the promotion of CSR performance must be determined by its

independence because it is closely related to the strength of the board. In general, it is

obligations of the company. Independent directors are interested in developing and

comprehensiveness and quality of CSRD.

number of independent directors led to an increased level of voluntary environment disclosure

Therefore, it is hypothesized that:

4. Methodology and Sampling

from 1st January, 2009 to 31st December, 2015.

1 AngloGold Ashanti Basic Materials 2004 27th April, 2004

(Khan et al. 2013) as follows:

CSRD =a + 1 WB + 2 WC + 3 BS + 4 BI + 5 ROA + 5 AGE +6 TA +

Where: CSRD = Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure Index

ROA = Return on Assets

AGE = Age of Company

A = Represent the fixed intercept element

4.1.1. Dependent Variable

Social and Environmental.

actual scores awarded divided by the maximum score (30).

CSRD = Total items disclosure by company (i)

Total maximum disclosure score (30)

4.1.2. Independent Variables

independence refers to the proportion of non-executive directors on the board. It is calculated

et al. 2012, Jizi et al. 2014) have used TA as a control variable.

Table 2: Summary of the variables and their measurement

BS Board size Number of directors sit on the board

Source: Generated by researchers from variables used in the study

the variable, correlation matrix and OLS regression.

companys annual report and information on the companys website.

p < .01; p < .05; p < .10