Article Sidebar

Submitted
April 17, 2025
Accepted
July 9, 2025
Published
November 20, 2025
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 0 Download : 0

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study examines whether board commissioners’ diversity—specifically gender, educational level, and age—matters in disclosing water-related information within Indonesian state-owned enterprises during the 2019–2023 period. Utilizing panel data multiple regression analysis, the research aims to determine whether diverse board characteristics influence the extent of corporate water disclosure. The results reveal that age diversity among commissioners significantly improves water disclosure, while gender diversity and educational level do not exhibit a statistically significant impact. These findings partially support agency theory, stakeholder theory, and upper echelon theory, suggesting that older commissioners may drive greater transparency due to increased compliance awareness and concern for organizational reputation. On the other hand, the absence of significant effects from gender and educational diversity highlights the possibility that regulatory compliance and corporate priorities may outweigh the influence of individual board traits. The study contributes to the ongoing discourse on corporate governance and sustainability by offering practical implications for companies seeking to enhance their environmental reporting, as well as for investors evaluating environmental and social governance (ESG) factors. Future research is recommended to classify firms based on their water-related risk exposure and to explore alternative indicators for measuring board diversity more effectively.

Keywords

Board commissioners' diversity Water disclosure State-owned enterprises

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Natal Manihuruk, Poppy Nurmayanti M, Mela Nanda Fito

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Hak Cipta (Copyright)

Penulis yang mempublikasikan naskahnya pada Jurnal ini menyetujui ketentuan berikut:

Hak cipta pada setiap artikel adalah milik penulis.

  1. Penulis mengakui bahwa Jurnal  Current : Jurnal Kajian Akuntansi dan Bisnis Terkini berhak sebagai yang mempublikasikan pertama kali dengan lisensi Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
  2. Penulis dapat memasukan tulisan secara terpisah, mengatur distribusi non-ekskulif  dari naskah yang telah terbit di jurnal ini kedalam versi yang lain (misal: dikirim ke respository institusi penulis, publikasi kedalam buku, dll), dengan mengakui bahwa naskah telah terbit pertama kali pada Jurnal  Current :Jurnal Kajian Akuntansi dan Bisnis Terkini.
How to Cite
Manihuruk, N., Nurmayanti M, P., & Mela, N. F. (2025). DOES BOARD COMMISSIONERS’ DIVERSITY MATTER IN WATER DISCLOSURE? EVIDENCE FROM INDONESIA STATE-OWNED ENTERPRISES. CURRENT: Jurnal Kajian Akuntansi Dan Bisnis Terkini, 6(3), 483–494. https://doi.org/10.31258/current.6.3.483-494
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Arhan, M. R., Navalino, D. A., & Ali, Y. (2022). Analysis of The Different Role of State-Owned Enterprises (BUMN) and Private-Owned Enterprises (BUMS) in the Indonesian Defense Industry Sector. International Journal of Arts and Social Science, 5(1), 60–66. https://www.ijassjournal.com/2022/V5I1/414659877.pdf
  2. Bear, S., Rahman, N., & 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0505-2
  3. Beji, R., Yousfi, O., Loukil, N., & Omri, A. (2021). Board Diversity and Corporate Social Responsibility: Empirical Evidence from France. Journal of Business Ethics, 173(1), 133–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04522-4
  4. Bernhardt, A., & Gysi, N. (2013). The Worlds Worst 2013: The Top Ten Toxic Threats. In Blacksmith institute Green Cross Switzerland. http://www.worstpolluted.org/docs/TopTenThreats2013.pdf
  5. Boivie, S., Graffin, S. D., & Pollock, T. G. (2012). Time for Me to Fly: Predicting Director Exit at Large Firms. Academy of Management Journal, 55(6), 1334–1359. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.1083
  6. Carpenter, M. A., Geletkancz, M. A., & Sanders, W. G. (2004). Upper Echelons Research Revisited: Antecedents, Elements, and Consequences of Top Management Team Composition. Journal of Management, 30(6), 749–778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2004.06.001
  7. CNN. (2024). Apa Hasil dari World Water Forum ke-10? 1–5. https://www.cnnindonesia.com/teknologi/20240526053304-199-1101990/apa-hasil-dari-world-water-forum-ke-10
  8. Coffey, B. S., Wang, J., Coffey, B. S., & Wang, J. (2014). Board Diversity and Managerial Control as Predictors of Corporate Social Performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(14), 1595–1603.
  9. Daily, C. M., Dalton, D. R., & Cannella, A. A. (2003). Corporate Governance: Decades of Dialogue and Data. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 371–382. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2003.10196703
  10. Dalton, D. R., Daily, C. M., Ellstrand, A. E., & Johnson, J. L. (1998). Meta-analytic reviews of board composition, leadership structure, and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 19(3), 269–290. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199803)19:3<269::aid-smj950>3.0.co;2-k
  11. Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9503271992
  12. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57–74. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4279003
  13. Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (2019). Separation of ownership and control. Corporate Governance: Values, Ethics and Leadership, 163–188. https://doi.org/10.1086/467037
  14. Ferdiana, N., & Sugiyarto, T. (2022). State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs): The Role in Economic Development and The Determinant of Its Performance. Jurnal Ekonomi Dan Kebijakan Pembangunan, 11(2), 91–107. https://doi.org/10.29244/jekp.11.2.2022.91-107
  15. Ferreira, D. (2010). Board Diversity. In Internal Governance (pp. 225–242).
  16. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. In Cambridge University Press. https://books.google.co.id/books?id=NpmA_qEiOpkC&lpg=PR5&ots=62dgF1S2SJ&dq=Strategic Management%3A A Stakeholder Approach&lr&pg=PR5#v=onepage&q=Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach&f=false
  17. Freeman, R. E. (1994). The Politics of Stakeholder Theory: Some Future Directions. Business Ethics Quarterly, 4, 409–421.
  18. Freeman, R. E. (2001). A Stakeholder Approach to Strategic Management. Social Science Research Network, March. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.263511
  19. Hambrick, D. C. (2007). Upper Echelons Theory: An Update. The Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 334–343. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-94848-2_785-1
  20. Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper Echelons: The Organization as Reflection of its Top Managers. The Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 193–206. http://www.jstor.org/stable/258434
  21. Hoang, T. C., Abeysekera, I., & Ma, S. (2018). Board Diversity and Corporate Social Disclosure: Evidence from Vietnam. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(3), 833–852. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3260-1
  22. Hsu, W. T., Chen, H. L., & Cheng, C. Y. (2013). Internationalization and firm performance of SMEs: The moderating effects of CEO attributes. Journal of World Business, 48(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2012.06.001
  23. Hussain, N., Rigoni, U., & Cavezzali, E. (2018). Does it pay to be sustainable? Looking inside the black box of the relationship between sustainability performance and financial performance. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25(6), 1198–1211. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1631
  24. Indonesia Government. (2007). UU RI No 40 Tahun 2007 Tentang Peseroan Terbatas. In Indonesia Government.
  25. Issa, A., Zaid, M. A. A., Hanaysha, J. R., & Gull, A. A. (2022). An examination of board diversity and corporate social responsibility disclosure: evidence from banking sector in the Arabian Gulf countries. International Journal of Accounting and Information Management, 30(1), 22–46. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJAIM-07-2021-0137
  26. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 4, 305–360. http://ssrn.com/abstract=94043Electroniccopyavailableat:http://ssrn.com/abstract=94043http://hupress.harvard.edu/catalog/JENTHF.html
  27. Juuti, P. S., Katko, T. S., & Vuorinen, H. S. (2020). A Brief History of Water and Health from Ancient Civilizations to Modern Times. In Environmental History of Water. https://www.iwapublishing.com/news/brief-history-water-and-health-ancient-civilizations-modern-times
  28. Kagzi, M., & Guha, M. (2018). Board demographic diversity: a review of literature. Journal of Strategy and Management, 11(1), 33–51. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSMA-01-2017-0002
  29. Katmon, N., Mohamad, Z. Z., Norwani, N. M., & Farooque, O. Al. (2019). Comprehensive Board Diversity and Quality of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure: Evidence from an Emerging Market. Journal of Business Ethics, 157(2), 447–481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3672-6
  30. Khan, I., Khan, I., & Saeed, B. bin. (2019). Does board diversity affect quality of corporate social responsibility disclosure? Evidence from Pakistan. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(6), 1371–1381. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1753
  31. Kusuma, A. P. (2024). Pengaruh Karakteristik Presiden Direktur Terhadap Pengungkapan Air Perusahaan Indonesia.
  32. Martinez, M. C. P., & Alvarez, I. G. (2019). An International Approach of the Relationship Between Board Attributes and the Disclosure of Corporate Social Responsibility Issues. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(3), 1–36.
  33. Matsumoto, J., Perwitasari, T., Setiawan, D., & Wishart, M. J. (2020). Water Resources Management. In Indonesia Public Expenditure Review. The World Bank.
  34. Nielsen, B. B., & Nielsen, S. (2013). Top management team nationality diversity and firm performance: A multilevel study. Strategic Management Journal, 34(3), 373–382. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2021
  35. Ross, S. A. (1973). The Economic Theory of Agency: The Principal’s Problem. In American Economic Review (Vol. 63, Issue 2, pp. 134–139).
  36. The World Bank. (2012). Strengthen, Secure, Sustain 2011 Annual Report.
  37. UN WWAP. (2003). Water for people, water for life: The United Nations World Water Development Report. In The World Water Development Report 1: Water for People, Water for Life. UNESCO Publisher.
  38. UNEP. (2023). Wastewater: Turning Problem to Solution. United Nations Environment Programme. https://doi.org/10.59117/20.500.11822/43142
  39. WHO. (2023). Drinking-Water. World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/drinking-water
  40. Zahid, M., Rahman, H. U., Ali, W., Khan, M., Alharthi, M., Imran Qureshi, M., & Jan, A. (2020). Boardroom gender diversity: Implications for corporate sustainability disclosures in Malaysia. Journal of Cleaner Production, 244, 118683. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118683