Corporate social responsibility practices and disclosures in Thailand

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to investigate the patterns of corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices and disclosures of firms listed on the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET).

Design/methodology/approach

A total of 43 CSR indices under the Securities and Exchange Commission’s nine CSR components were used to quantify the CSR disclosures. The nine CSR components are good governance, environment, consumer protections, fair business practices, human rights, labor standards, community and society, innovation and anti-corruption. The common patterns of the CSR disclosures were subsequently identified using factor analysis.

Findings

The factor analysis identified four domains of the CSR disclosures of the SET-listed firms: employee relations, environment, anti-corruption and philanthropic efforts. Importantly, an increasing number of Thai firms are now attaching greater significance to the employee relations aspect of CSR, as opposed to in the past. In addition, an increasing number of the Thai companies have either initiated or participated in the anti-corruption campaigns.

Originality/value

The research offers an insight into the current development in CSR practices and disclosures in Thailand, as compared to a decade ago. To that end, this research conducted a survey on the CSR disclosures in relation to the nine CSR components, and factor analysis was used to establish the patterns of CSR practices. The findings are of great use to regulators in formulating legal frameworks and strategies to engage companies in CSR and also provide further evidence on the CSR practices in an emerging economy. Furthermore, the findings offer businesses and industries a disclosure benchmark, against which firms decide on the nature and extent of CSR information to disclose in the annual statements.

Citation

Issarawornrawanich, P. and Wuttichindanon, S. (2019), "Corporate social responsibility practices and disclosures in Thailand", Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 318-332. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-02-2017-0038