(In)Consistency Between Private and Public Disclosure on Enterprise Risk Management and Its Determinants

Silvia Panfilo ()
Additional contact information
Silvia Panfilo: Ca’ Foscari University of Venice

A chapter in Multiple Perspectives in Risk and Risk Management, 2019, pp 87-123 from Springer

Abstract: Abstract Worldwide governance organizations and regulators have recently called for more enhanced disclosures about how organizations manage risks. Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) is recognized as a value-contributing best practice even when legal standards do not require it (Whitman in Risk Manag Insur Rev 18(2):161–197, 2015), but public disclosure on such a process is not generally mandatory. In Italy emphasis on risk disclosure started in 2008 but it was the 2011 revision of the Corporate Governance (CG) code for listed companies to ask for the board commitment in disclosing, within the CG report, about the main internal control and risk management system’s characteristics (Borsa Italiana in Codice di Autodisciplina, 2011). Given the proprietary nature of risk information in addition to the Italian capital market characteristics (small capitalization and presence of a dominant shareholder) and the lack of any mandate for what specific aspects board should disclose, the study aims at investigating a potential variation between private and public disclosure on ERM. Relying on the ERM concepts provided by the COSO framework (2004) the author submitted a survey seeking information about ERM practices within Italian listed companies. Such a private information is compared to public CG reports released by the same companies. The comparison shows companies tend to privately reveal a more effective ERM process than the one they publicly disclose. An examination of CG and firm’s risk variables potentially determining higher variation—i.e. information inconsistency—supports proprietary costs theory rather than agency theory expectations. Thus showing the limits of voluntary disclosure dealing with risk management systems. The study might have international policy implications.

Keywords: Enterprise risk management (ERM); Private disclosure; Public disclosure; Information (in)consistency; Determinants (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:prbchp:978-3-030-16045-6_4

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/9783030160456

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-16045-6_4

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().