Determinants and Configurational Pathways of Quantification in Corporate Environmental Disclosure: Evidence from Kazakhstan

2026

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.3390/su182010297
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

This study examines firm-level characteristics associated with quantitative disclosure breadth (QDB) and the configurations associated with high QDB in Kazakhstan. It combines ordinary least squares (OLS) regression with fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA). The analysis is organized around three theoretical elements: external information demand, information production capacity, and disclosure oversight and incentives. These elements are represented by five firm-level conditions: environmentally sensitive industry (ESI), firm size (Size), profitability (ROA), board independence (Indep), and state ownership (SOE). It uses a sample of 56 KASE-listed firms, comprising 145 firm-year observations from 2021 to 2024. The OLS results show that Indep and ESI are show significant positive associations with QDB, while Size, ROA, and SOE do not show significant average net associations. The association between Indep and QDB becomes statistically insignificant in the continuous-sample robustness test. The fsQCA results identify four equifinal configurations associated with high QDB, with an overall solution coverage of 0.3664. S1–S3 remain stable across the robustness tests, whereas S4 is sensitive to specification choices. The study contributes by distinguishing QDB as a distinct quantitative disclosure dimension and by showing how firm-level characteristics are associated with QDB through both net associations and configurational patterns.