Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance (GUJAF) Vol. 5 Issue 1, April, 2024 ISSN: 2756-665X A Publication of Department of Accounting and Finance, Faculty of Management and Social Sciences, Federal University Gusau, Zamfara State -Nigeria Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 ii © Department of Accounting and Finance Vol. 5 Issue 1 April, 2024 ISSN: 2756-665X A Publication of Department of Accounting and Finance, Faculty of Management and Social Sciences, Federal University Gusau, Zamfara State -Nigeria All Rights reserved Except for academic purposes no part or whole of this publication is allowed to be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means be it mechanical, electrical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the Copyright owner. Published and Printed by Ahmadu Bello University Press Limited, Zaria, Kaduna State, Nigeria. Tel: 08065949711 e-mail: abupress@abu.edu.ng info@abupress.com.ng abupress2013@gmail.com Website: www.abupress.com.ng mailto:abupress2013@gmail.com http://www.abupress.com.ng/ Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 iii EDITORIAL BOARD Editor-in-Chief: Prof. Shehu Usman Hassan Department of Accounting, Federal University of Kashere, Gombe State. Associate Editor: Dr. Muhammad Mustapha Bagudo Department of Accounting, Ahmadu Bello University Zaria, Kaduna State. Managing Editor: Umar Farouk Abdulkarim Department of Accounting and Finance, Federal University Gusau, Zamfara State. Editorial Board Prof.Ahmad Modu Kumshe Department of Accounting, University of Maiduguri, Borno State. Prof Ugochukwu C. Nzewi Department of Accounting, Paul University Awka, Anambra State. Prof Kabir Tahir Hamid Department of Accounting, Bayero University, Kano, Kano State. Prof. Ekoja B. Ekoja Department of Accounting, University of Jos. Prof. Clifford Ofurum Department of Accounting, University of PortHarcourt, Rivers State. Prof. Ahmad Bello Dogarawa Department of Accounting, Ahmadu Bello University Zaria. Prof. Yusuf. B. Rahman Department of Accounting, Lagos State University, Lagos State. Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 iv Prof. Suleiman A. S. Aruwa Department of Accounting, Nasarawa State University, Keffi, Nasarawa State. Prof. Muhammad Junaidu Kurawa Department of Accounting, Bayero University Kano, Kano State. Prof. Muhammad Habibu Sabari Department of Accounting, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria. Prof. Okpanachi Joshua Department of Accounting and Management, Nigerian Defence Academy, Kaduna. Prof. Hassan Ibrahim Department of Accounting, IBB University, Lapai, Niger State. Prof. Ifeoma Mary Okwo Department of Accounting, Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Enugu State. Prof. Aminu Isah Department of Accounting, Bayero University, Kano, Kano State. Prof. Ahmadu Bello Department of Accounting, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria. Prof. Musa Yelwa Abubakar Department of Accounting, Usmanu Danfodiyo University, Sokoto State. Prof. Salisu Abubakar Department of Accounting, Ahmadu Bello University Zaria, Kaduna State. Prof. Sunusi Sa'ad Ahmad Department of Accounting, Federal University Dutse, Jigawa State. Prof. Isaq Alhaji Samaila Department of Accounting, Bayero University, Kano State. Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 v Dr. Fatima Alfa Department of Accounting, University of Maiduguri, Borno State. Dr. Nasiru A. Ka’oje Department of Accounting, Usmanu Danfodiyo University Sokoto State. Dr. Aminu Abdullahi Department of Accounting, Usmanu Danfodiyo University Sokoto, State. Dr. OnipeAdebenege Yahaya Department of Accounting, Nigerian Defence Academy, Kaduna State. Dr. Saidu Adamu Department of Accounting, Federal University of Kashere, Gombe State. Dr. Nasiru Yunusa Department of Accounting, Ahmadu Bello University Zaria. Dr. Aisha Nuhu Muhammad Department of Accounting, Ahmadu Bello University Zaria. Dr. Lawal Muhammad Department of Accounting, Ahmadu Bello University Zaria. Dr. Farouk Adeza School of Business and Entrepreneurship, American University of Nigeria, Yola. Dr. Bashir Umar Farouk Department of Economics, Federal University Gusau, Zamfara State. Dr Emmanuel Omokhuale Department of Mathematics, Federal University Gusau, Zamfara. State Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 vi ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS Prof. Kabiru Isah Dandago, Bayero University Kano,Kano State. Prof A M Bashir, Usmanu Danfodiyo University Sokoto, Sokoto State. Prof. Muhammad Tanko, Kaduna State University, Kaduna. Prof. Bayero A M Sabir, Usmanu Danfodiyo University Sokoto, Sokoto State. Prof. Aliyu Sulaiman Kantudu, Bayero University Kano, Kano State. Editorial Secretary Yazid Kabir Ibrahim Department of Accounting and Finance, Federal University Gusau, Zamfara State. Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 vii CALL FOR PAPERS The editorial board of Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance (GUJAF) is hereby inviting authors to submit their unpublished manuscript for publication. The journal is published in two issues of April and October annually. GUJAF is a double-blind peer reviewed journal published by the Department of Accounting and Finance, Faculty of Management and Social Sciences, Federal University Gusau, Zamfara State Nigeria The Journal accepts papers in all areas of Accounting and Finance for publication which include: Accounting Standards, Accounting Information System, Financial Reporting, Earnings Management, , Auditing and Investigation, Auditing and Standards, Public Sector Accounting and Auditing, Taxation and Revenue Administration, Corporate Governance Issues, Corporate Social Responsibility, Sustainability and Environmental Reporting Issue, Information and Communication Technology Issues, Bankruptcy Prediction, Corporate Finance, Personal Finance, Merger and Acquisitions, Capital Structure, Working Capital Management, Enterprises Risk Management, Entrepreneurship, International Business Accounting and Finance, Banking Crises, Bank’s Profitability, Risk and Insurance Issue, Islamic Finance, Conventional and Islamic Banks and so forth. GUIDELINES FOR SUBMISSION AND MANUSCRIPT FORMAT The submission language is English and must be a well-researched original manuscript that has not previously been submitted elsewhere for publication. The paper should not exceed more than 15 pages on A4 type paper in MS-word format, 1.5-line spacing, 12 Font size in Times new roman. Manuscript should be tested for plagiarism before submission, as the maximum similarity index acceptable by GUJAF is 25 percent. Furthermore, the length of a complete article should not exceed 5000 words including an abstract of not more than 250 words with a minimum of four key words immediately after the abstract. All references including in text citation and reference list, tables and figures should be in line with APA 7th Edition publication manual. Finally, manuscript should be send to our email address elfarouk105@gmail.com and a copy to our website on journals.gujaf.com.ng http://www.gujaf.com.ng/ Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 viii PUBLICATION PROCEDURE After receiving a manuscript that is within the similarity index threshold, a confirmation email will be send together with a request to pay a review proceeding fee. At this point, the editorial board will take a decision on accepting, rejecting or making a resubmission of the manuscript based on the outcome of the double-blind peer review. Those authors whose manuscript were accepted for publication will be asked to pay a publication fee, after effecting all suggested corrections and changes made on the manuscript. All corrected papers returned within the specified time frame will be published in that issue. PAYMENT DETAILS Bank: FCMB Account Number: 7278465011 Account Name: Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance FOR INQUIRY The Head, Department of Accounting and Finance, Federal University Gusau, Zamfara State. elfarouk105@gmail.com +2348069393824 FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT The Editor-in-Chief on +2348067766435 The Associate Editor on +2348036057525 OR visit our website on www.gujaf.com.ng or journals.gujaf.com.ng http://www.gujaf.com.ng/ http://www.gujaf.com.ng/ Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 ix CONTENTS Impact of Audit Quality on Earnings Management of Consumer Goods Firms in Nigeria Sirajo Bappah, Auwal Saad, Shehu Usman Hassan PhD, Saidu Adamu PhD Board Characteristics and Corporate Social Responsibility of Listed Oil and Gas Companies in Nigerian. Aliyu Abubakar, Yunusa Nasiru PhD, Dr. Umar Abubakar Board Characteristics and Audit Quality of Listed Consumer Goods Firms in Nigeria Aliyu Shehu Usman, Danson Andrew, Abdullahi Bala Ado PhD, CEO Characteristics and Financial Reporting Quality in Listed Consumer Goods Companies in Nigeria Okika Nkiru Philomena, Oyeneye Temitope Esther, Adedeji Daniel Gbadebo Liquidity Risk and Financial Performance of Listed Deposit Money Banks in Nigeria Bashir Abdulrauf Mohammed, Aliyu Ahmed Abdullah PhD, Prof. Salisu Mamman Ibrahim Yusuf PhD, Suleiman Salami PhD Information Asymmetry and Cost of Capital: A Review of Empirical Evidence Sunusi Ridwan Ayagi PhD, ACA, Rashida Lawal, PhD Ownership Structure and Female Inclusion of Listed Financial Firms in Nigeria Gbemigun Catherine Omoleye , Alade Muyiwa Ezekiel Phd CSR Initiatives and Sustainability Resilience in Nigeria's Oil and Gas Industry: A PLS-SEM Approach from Local Communities' Perspective Tajudeen Alaburo, Rofiat Bolanle, Abdussalam, Abdulrahman Abubakar, Tajudeen, Akeem Olamilekan Babatunde Capital Structure and the Financial Performance of Listed Information and Communications Technology Firms in Nigeria Nasiru Adamu Kanoma, Nurudeen Usman Miko, Augustine Ayuba, Idris Mohammed, Mark G, Tagwai Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 x Profitability and Turnover Appraisal of Listed Deposit Money Banks in Nigeria Odogu, Terry Keme Zuode (PhD) and Koroye, Amapamo Stephen Board Attributes and Timeliness of Financial Reports of Listed Non-Financial Firms in Nigeria Rashida Lawal PhD and Prof. Kabir Hamid Tahir Board Independence and Financial Reporting Quality of Listed Oil and Gas Companies in Nigeria: Moderated by Firm Size Adamu Lawal Bello, Prof. J. Okpanachi, Prof. T. Nyor and Lateef Olumude Mustapha (Ph.D) Does ESG Investment Impact the Financial Sustainability of Nigerian Energy Companies: A Panel Regression Approach? Tajudeen Alaburo, Abdulsalam and Adedeji Daniel Gbadebo Board Attributes and Sustainability Reporting of Listed Firms in Nigeria Idris Mohammed, Bejamin K, Gugong PhD, Rofiat Adedokun, Abdulrahman A, Olorunloga and Mark, G, Tagwai Mediating Effect of Internal Auditors’ Ethical Conduct on The Relationship Between Usage of Information Technology, Management Support for Internal Audit Department, and Internal Audit Effectiveness: A Conceptual Framework Nura Badamasi, Adura Binti Ahmad Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 312 BOARD ATTRIBUTES AND SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING OF LISTED FIRMS IN NIGERIA Idris Mohammed Department of Accounting, Kaduna State University, Nigeria idrisu02@gmai.com; +234 8063234829 Prof. Bejamin K. Gugong Department of Accounting, Kaduna State University, Nigeria Rofiat Adedokun Department of Finance A.B.U Business School Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Kaduna State, Nigeria rofiatadedokun24@gmail.com +234 7033674137 Abdulrahman A. Olorunloga Department of Accounting, Kaduna State University, Nigeria Mark G Tagwai Department of Accounting, Kaduna State University, Nigeria Abstract This study investigates the impact of board attributes on sustainability reporting among listed firms in Nigeria from 2013 to 2022, using a correlational research design. The research population encompasses all Nigerian listed firms, with a stratified sampling technique deemed appropriate for the study. Secondary data were sourced from the audited annual reports and accounts of sampled firms available on the Nigerian Exchange Group (NGX) website. The analysis of the extracted panel data was conducted using multiple regression techniques with STATA version 13. The findings of the study reveal that board size, gender diversity, and independence positively influence sustainability reporting, while board commitment has a negative impact on sustainability reporting. Consequently, the study recommends that the management of Nigerian listed firms should view mailto:idrisu02@gmai.com mailto:rofiatadedokun24@gmail.com Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 313 large and diverse boards as an asset for promoting sustainability reporting. Such boards, comprising experienced and knowledgeable members, are more likely to make effective decisions on sustainability-related issues. Additionally, the presence of women on boards should be considered a valuable factor in encouraging comprehensive financial reporting, which includes qualitative and quantitative information on the social, environmental, and economic activities of the business for stakeholders. Keywords: Board size, gender, independence, commitment and sustainability reporting 1. Introduction It is imperative to note that sustainability reporting has been considered as one of the world contentious issues as far as corporate business environment is concern. Sustainability in the context of International Financial reporting Standards (IFRS) deals with financial reporting that focused on information disclosure of business environment, economic, social and governance performance. Although, IFRS framework has no dedicated standards specifically on the sustainability reporting, in same vain, corporate entities are obligated prepare their financial report based on the requirements of corporate best practice. Today, individual investors and other stakeholders of different corporate entities have raised serious concern on the adoption of suitability reporting practice particularly in Nigeria, being a requirement for global best accounting practice. Considering the growing global pressure on sustainability reporting in line with the established Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) framework in consideration with the world Suitability Development Goal (SDG) agenda, sequel to the Paris climate deal on environmental degradation through carbon emission which causes global warming of climate (Malarvizhi & Yadav, 2008). Following to the adoption IFRS in 2012 by the Financial Reporting Council of Nigeria (FRCN), all corporate organizations have been encouraged to comply with its requirements towards enhancing their financial reporting credibility, transparency and reliability to specifically encourage foreign direct investment and to foster economic development. Although, Young and Marais (2012) in their study expressed concern and interest on the way and manner Nigerian corporate organizations disclose their quantitative and qualitative information that would enable them ascertain the extent of their general well-being. Yet, the Nigerian Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) essentially emphasized the need for a transparent and credible financial and non-financial disclosure in line with the ethical standards of Company and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) by the management Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 314 of all listed corporate entities in Nigeria (SEC, 2011). Also, in an effort to achieve the global standard and regulatory framework on environment protection, Federal Environmental Protection Agency and Federal Ministry of environment, in Nigeria provided guide lines to the all industrial related firms on the waste management towards environmental protection based on the waste and pollution Decree No. 42, 1988 and other relevant laws (Yunusa, 2017). Nevertheless, being one of the environmentally polluted countries via gaseous and chemical substances of industries as well as oil spillage due to criminal activities, due to the negligence of public concern and absence of legal requirement, Nigeria was reported to be backward in the aspect of environmental reporting disclosure (Adewuyi & Olowookere, 2010; Adeyemi & Fagbemi, 2010 & Hassan, 2012). Nevertheless, the integration of sustainability reporting into IFRS framework has attracted the attention of researchers in various context like (Cicchiello, et al., 2021; Asuquo, 2012; Ndalu, et al., 2021; & Chinonyelum & Ndubuisi, 2022) were conducted in relations to the subject matter in various context and come up with mixed results. In that regard, this study deemed it necessary to investigate the moderating effect of board commitment on the relationship between board characteristic and sustainability reporting among the listed firms in Nigeria between the periods of (2013-2022). Also, this study employed Legitimacy Theory which to the best of the researcher ‘s knowledge it has not been used in any of the related study. Thus, it will serve as a contribution to existing as far as literature of accounting and finance is concern. Accordingly, the inclusion of the board commitment as a moderating variable will enable the researcher fill another the existing gap via changes in the straight and direction of the relationship between the independent variable board characteristic represented by (board size, gender and independence) and the dependent variable sustainability reporting represented by (economic, social and environment). The outcome of this paper would guide the management and board of Nigerian listed companies for effective decision making as far as suitability reporting is concern. Also, the result of the study would beneficial to government agencies authorities like federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), Nigeria Securities and Exchange Commission, Nigerian Social Insurance Trust Fund (NSITF), Federal Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Ministry of Environment in carrying out their activities. Furthermore, the study would be serving as a guide and source of reference in carrying out further related study. The paper consists of introduction, Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 315 related literature, methodology, results and discussion, as well as conclusions and recommendations. 2. Literature Review Sustainability reporting is often seen as an important tool for corporate policy and strategy of organization (Ong & Djajadikerta, 2018). According to Durand, Paugam (2019) sustainable reporting is viewed as an operational policy that provides opportunity for ensuring sustainable development goals achievable through sustainable financial outcome and business practices. Therefore, sustainability reporting spread across social responsibility, culture and ethical corporate governance, economic efficiency and environmental awareness (Hu & Lu, 2018). Herda, Taylor and Winterbotham (2012) emphasized that in a normal ground corporate sustainability disclosure reduces information asymmetries and uncertainties among the business stakeholders. It is important to note the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) and Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) developed an elaborate guideline in relation to sustainability reporting and it impact on the organization performance with aim of enlighten the corporate entities as well as public organization across. Belal (2009), Hahn (2009) and Lourenço (2013) express that the applicability of the corporate sustainability reporting is essentially made to boost the confidence of the investors and related stakeholders on corporate transparency and accountability. According to parliament of Australiaç Trireksani, and Djajadikerta (2016) sustainability reporting is the one that deals with public reporting and measurement of the business impact on matters relating to its economic, social and environmental activities. Board of an organization are committee of individual persons who are appointed by the shareholders of corporate entities that charged with responsibility for making strategic decision for the business and also monitor and control the activities of the management to ensure the survival and growth of the business. According to Gardazi, Hassan and Johari (2020) is the process by which organizations are management and controlled by certain group of individuals to protect the stakeholders’ integrity. The board compositions are often measured in terms of their sizes, duality, gender, educational qualifications, tenure independence, experience, nationality, commitment among others. Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 316 Board size is considered as the entire number of board members arising from the chairman, all director’s executive and non-executives as well as independent non- executive of listed organizations. Therefore, board size is considered as the total numbers of both executives and non-executives directors on the board (Disli, Yilmaz & Mohamed, 2022; Aksoy, Yilmaz, Tatoglu & Basar, 2020). On the other hand, Okwudili, Chibuzor and Clement (2023) considered the measurement of board size the total serving members of executive and non-executive directors with in an organization. According to Kruders & Kabir (2018) and Saari and Kao (2019) board size is measured as total number of board members in an organization. On the hand, Inua, and Meni (2019) measured board size as the number of directors siting on the board. According to Kruders & Kabir (2018) and Saari and Kao (2019) board gender is measured as number of female board members over the total number of board members. But, Inua, and Meni (2019) considered board as the total number of women on the board for the periods under consideration. Although, Chinonyelum and Ndubuisi (2022) considered board gender as board female representative; measured as proportion of female to number of directors in the board. Board independence are the non- executive directors that are entitle to sitting allowance that are seen to be independent as they have no affiliation with the organization, management and shareholders within the periods of two years before their appointment as non-executives directors. Sandhu and Singh (2019) considered board independence as directors that are responsible for monitoring the affairs of the organization in an uninterrupted manner to ensure the growth and suitability of the organization. Also, Ngwakwe, Ganda and John (2014) opined that an independent board member is the one that play a significant role of corporate management to ensure the growth and sustenance of business operations. According to Kruders & Kabir (2018) and Saari and Kao (2019) board independence is the number of independent directors (non-executive directors) over the total number of board members. And Chinonyelum and Ndubuisi (2022) emphasized that board independence is that proportion of non-executives directors to total directors. It is pertinent that the commitment of the board can be ascertained through the frequency of meeting conducted by the board themselves. Although studies were conducted justify such assertion. For instance Liao et al (2018) affirmed that the board commitment is accessed based on the number of meeting held in an Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 317 organization. Accordingly Alotaibi et al. (2016) considered board meeting as a medium through which information are communicated among certain business stakeholders. According to Saari and Kao (2019) board commitment is refers to the frequency of board meeting, as the number of board meetings per year. While, Chinonyelum and Ndubuisi (2022) considered board commitment as number of times that the board met during a financial year. 2.1 Board Size and Sustainability Reporting According to Tang and Qingling (2016) there is a significant connection between firm size sustainability reporting. Ettredge et al. (2010) stressed that board size linked to sustainability disclosure significantly. On the other hand, the number of boards has an influence on the sustainability reporting significantly. In a study conducted by Australia, Karim, Kand and Rutledge (2004) board size is significantly influence between sustainability reporting positively. Alnabsha, Abdou and Ntim,(2018) affirmed that board size is significantly influence by sustainability disclosures positively. On the hand, Farah, Farrukh and Faizan (2016) and Naseem, Rehman, Ikram (2017) conducted a study in Pakistan and discovered that board size has a connection with a sustainability reporting positively. But, Mahmod, et al (2018) discovered that board size is positively correlated with sustainability disclosure practices. But, Amran, Lee and Devi (2014) stated that board size is significantly connected to sustainability reporting negatively. Thus, it is on this basis a hypothesis is formulates as: HO1: Board Size has no significant effect on sustainability reporting of listed firms in Nigeria 2.2 Board Gender and Sustainability Reporting According to Putri and Nasih (2022) the decision of on sustainability reporting which comprises of (governance, social and environmental) is affected by board gender. Accordingly, Kassinis, Pnayiotou, Dimou (2016) discovered that there is a connection between board gender and sustainability disclosure positively. While, Bear and Rahman (2010) argued that t board gender diversity has a significant influence on the sustainability disclosure of an organization. On the other hand, Al - Baalouch (2019) asserted that women presence in the board has a significant influence on sustainability reporting. Following the above argument and findings, the study hypothesized that: Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 318 HO2: Board Gender has no significant effect on sustainability reporting of listed firms in Nigeria 2.3 Board independence and Sustainability Reporting Board independence is considered as an aspect of corporate governance which ensures that the stakeholder’s interest is protected (Ong and Djajadikerta, 2018). Also, Hu and Loh (2018) emphasized that there is an association between independent directors and sustainability disclosure. However, in a study conducted by Masud, est al (2018) in Pakistani independent board of directors were termed as determinants of transparency, accountability which form the basis of organization’s corporate sustainability reporting. Although, in a similar study conducted in Saudi Arabian and Pakistani by Alotaibi (2016) it was discovered that board independence and sustainability disclosure practices have negative and significant correlation. Also, another study by Naseem at al. (2017) revealed that corporate sustainability practice is facilitated by independent directors in Pakistan. Similarly, Muttakin (2014) established that the independent directors influence the sustainability reporting disclosures positively. Herda et al. (2012) proposed that firms’ reporting disclosure ability is often influence by board independence decision. As such, a hypothesis is formulated in a null form as: HO3: Board Independence has no significant effect on sustainability reporting of listed firms in Nigeria 2.4 Board Commitment and Sustainability Reporting Few studies were conducted with respect to the board commitment and sustainability among which was the study of Alnabsha et al. (2018) that confirmed the board commitment to be significantly connected to sustainability positively. In same vain, another study by Naseem et al. (2016) in Pakistan stressed that the commitment of the board influences is likely to influence sustainability reporting. Still, Iraya and Mwangi (2014) opined that board meetings as a board commitment has a greater tendency to influence the decision on corporate reporting of the organisation. Likewise Khan et al. (2019) emphasized that number of time meet by the member affect the decision for sustainability disclosures. Also, Shrivastava and Addas (2014) found a correlation between the number of board meetings and firms’ performance and CSR. Hu and Loh (2018) establish that the board meetings frequency and sustainability reporting disclosure are significantly associated positively. Therefore, in lined with these divergence views, the following hypothesis is formulated as: Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 319 HO4: Board commitment has no significant effect on moderating board attributes and sustainability reporting of listed firms in Nigeria 3. Methodology The study employed correlational research design covering a period of 2013 to 2022 using stratified sampling technique as a suitable technique of the study based on the following criteria: i. First, the company must have been listed in Nigeria exchange group (NGX) amongst listed firms as defines by Shahin (2015) adopted definition “manufacturing firms under NGX that is engage in the production of goods through transformation of raw materials or components into finished products using physical and chemical processes”. That enables the author utilize all possible GRI 3.1 sustainability disclosure index (economic, social and environment) from the targeted samples of study. ii. The company must have been listed not later than 2013. Table 1: Sample Size of the study S/ No NGX Sectorial Classification Actual number of the Companies Number of the selected firms 1 Agriculture 5 3 2 Conglomerate 2 1 3 Consumer goods 16 11 4 Health care 6 4 5 Industrial goods 11 8 6 oil and gas 3 2 Total 43 29 Sources: NGX Website (2024) Table.1 shows the detail of the selected sample size based on the aforementioned criteria; these comprise of a total of 29 firms of the 43 listed manufacturing firms drawn from some selected sectors namely: Agriculture, conglomerate, consumer goods, health care, industrial goods and oil and gas respectively. However other sectors like; natural resources, services, construction/real estate, financial services, and ICT were removed based on the criteria. Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 320 Multiple regression technique used to analyze the data with the aid of STATA 13 version software been a tool the analysis. Model Specifications This study adapted a panel multiple regression model of Yahaya, Idris and Mohammed (2023) in an attempt to test the effect of board attributes on sustainability reporting of listed Nigeria firms, which is encapsulated in the model below: SRit= β0 + β1BSit + β2BGit + β3BIit + β4BCit + µit ……..….…….……………….(i) Where: SR= Sustainability reporting (Dependent variable) i= Entities t= Time β0 = Constant β1-β4 = Coefficients of parameters BS = Board size (Independent variable) BG = Board gender (Independent variable) BI = Board independence (Independent variable) BC = Board commitment (Moderating variable) μ = error term Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 321 Table 2: Variable measurements and sources Dependent variable Sustainability reporting SR GRI version 3.1 Disclosure indicators (Economic, social and environmental) of sustainability reporting as: GRI (2022) Index score = n/k, Where: n= number of index which is fulfilled by the company and k= the maximum index which should be fulfilled by the company. Independent variables Board size BS Board size is measured as total number of board members in an organization Kruders and Kabir (2018) and Saari and Kao (2019) Board gender BG Board gender as board female representative; measured as proportion of female to number of directors in the board , Chinonyelum and Ndubuisi (2022) Board independence BI Board independence is the number of independent directors’ non-executive directors over the total number of board members Kruders and Kabir (2018) and Saari and Kao (2019) Board commitment BC Board commitment as number of times that the board met during a financial year Chinonyelum and Ndubuisi (2022) Source: Author’s compilation (2023) Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 322 4. Results and Discussion This section focuses on presentation and discussion of descriptive statistics, correlation result and regression results, Descriptive Statistics The characteristics of the variables have been described in this descriptive statistics table as: Table 3: Descriptive statistic Variable Min Max Mean Std. Dev. SR 0.4161 2.3226 1.5568 0.405 BS 3 19 9.9103 3.2506 BG 0 6 0.17133 0.1145 BI 0.25 1 0.6202 0.1528 BC 3 44 2.4966 2.5112 Source: STATA Output (2023) Table 3 revealed the characteristics of the variables used for the study which comprises of the sustainability reporting (SR), Board size (BS), Board gender (BG), Board independence (BI) and Board commitment (BC). It is shown that sustainability reporting value ranges from the minimum value 1.5566 and maximum value of 2.3226 with the mean and standard deviation value of 1.5568 and 0.405 respectively. Also, board size maintained a mean value of 9.9103 that further ranges between the minimum value of 3 and maximum value of 19. But board gender that represented the proportion of female in board shows an average value of 0.17133 with a corresponding standard deviation of 0.1145 which spans between the minimum and maximum values of 0 and 6 respectively. On the other hand, board independence which represents the proportion of non- executive members from the number of the board maintained a normal value of 0.602 and a standard deviation value of 0.1528 with minimum and maximum values of 0.25 and 1. The board commitment as a moderating variable of the study shows a minimum and maximum value of 3 and 44 along with a mean and standard deviation values of 2.4966 and 2.5112 respectively. Correlation Matrix The correlation matrix focuses on association between and amongst the variables of the study, which comprises of the explained variable; sustainability reporting Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 323 (SR) and explanatory variables; board size (BS), board gender (BG), board independence (BI) and board commitment (BC) respectively. Table 4: Correlation Matrix Variables 1 2 3 4 5 SR 1 BS 0.1533 1 BG 0.2302 0.0615 1 BI 0.0998 -0.0804 0.1440 1 BC -0.0447 0.1437 0.1589 0.0686 1 Source: STATA output (2023) Table 4 shows that the correlations between SR with BS, BG and BI were positively weak at coefficient value of 0.1533, 0.2302 and 0.0998 respectively, while, the correlation between SR and BC which is negative. Except that the correlation between SR with BS and BG were significant at 1% each. On the hand, the correlations amongst the explanatory variables (BS, BG and BC) are seen to be positively weak, while that of BS and BI is negative with coefficient value of - 0.0804. Except that the correlation between BS and BC is significant at 5%. Also, the correlation between BG with BI and BC were significant at 5% and 1% respectively. Hence, that signifies the absence of multicollinearity sign among the explanatory variables of the study. Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 324 Table 5: Regression Results Variables Coefficient Z- values P-Values VIF Tolerance Value BS 0.0162 1.70 0.089 1.03 0.9685 BG 1.0278 4.19 0.000 1.05 0.9543 BI 0.3510 1.85 0.064 1.03 0.9678 BC -0.0157 -1.9 0.083 1.05 0.9533 R2 0.1019 Adj R2 0.0858 F- Start 28.19 F- Sig 0.0000 Sources: STATA output (2023) Table 3 represented the summary of a regression result of the study drawn from model I and model II respectively. Therefore, the parsimonious model has been duly subjected to post regression test to ensure best fit of the models upon which the results is interpreted based on “BLUE” and ultimately came up with a valid inference from the study. Meanwhile, that has been determined through the Hausman specification test conducted, that shows Chi 2 value of 0.024, which suggested for fixed effect Model as the best in interpreting the result of the study considering the absence of heteroskedasticity outcome of the hettest test that signifies equal spread of data from the model. The Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) with the corresponding Tolerance Value was tested based on the rule of thumb of VIF and the Tolerance Value. The VIF which is constantly shown a smaller value than ten (10) with a corresponding tolerance value that constantly showing smaller value than one (1). These outcomes indicate absence of multicollinearity effect within the explanatory variables as far as the study is concern. The parsimonious model maintains a cumulative R2 (R- Squared) value of (0.1019) being a multiple coefficient of determination that represents the percentage of total variation in the dependent variable, been explained all the explanatory variables jointly in the study. This suggested that that 10% of the variation in dependent Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 325 variable is cause by the explanatory variables jointly. And the outcome has been supported by the F- Stat and F- Sig values of (28.19) and (0.000) which further signifies the fitness of the model at 1%significant level. Hypothesis One (Board Size and Sustainability Reporting) Table 4 revealed board size’ results showing a positive coefficient value of 0.01620 with a corresponding P- value of 0.089 which represent 10% significant level as far as Nigerian listed firms are concern. This means that board size has a positive and significant effect on sustainability reporting. In that regard, if there is any increase in board size, it will lead to increase in sustainability reporting by 2%. Meanwhile, It is evidence to reject the null the hypothesis that states board size has no significant effect on sustainability of listed firms in Nigeria, on the other hand, alternate hypothesis is accepted. The outcome is in line with the view of Ettredge (2011) and Pakistan et al (2016) and Naseem et al (2017) and contradicts the study of Amran at el (2014) and Kiliç et al. (2015), which justified the underpinning theory of the study. Hypothesis Two (Board Gender and Sustainability Reporting) It is found that board gender has a positive and significant relationship on sustainability reporting with a coefficient value of 1.0278 and P- value of 0.000 at 1% significant level. Therefore, it is means that any change made on the number of female directors in the board of Nigerian listed firm will lead to an increase on sustainability reporting by 103%. In that regard, the null hypothesis which states that board gender has no significant effect on sustainability of listed firms in Nigeria will not be accepted, but the alternate hypothesis will be accepted. This outcome is in line with the work of Manita et al (2018) and Lu and Herremans (2019) respectively. Also, the outcome o the study validated the underpinning theory of the study. Hypothesis Three (Board Independence and Sustainability Reporting) The result in the table 4 revealed that board independence is positively connected with sustainability of Nigerian listed firms at 10% significant level, represented by coefficient and p-value of 0.3530 and 0.064 respectively. This shows that for every 1 unit increase in the proportion of non-executive directors to the entire number of the directors would lead to increase in the sustainability reporting by 35%. These, serves as evidence for not accepting the null hypothesis that states board independence has no significant effect on sustainability of listed firms in Nigeria, but to accept the alternate hypothesis. This result agrees with Khan, Muttakin, and Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 326 Siddiqui (2013) and Naseemetal (2017), but, disputed the argument of Alotaibi and Hussainey (2016) and Mahmood et al (2018). The outcome further supported the underpinning theory of the study. Hypothesis Four (Board Commitment and Sustainability Reporting) Table 4 revealed that board commitment is a negative and significantly connected to sustainability reporting at on10%, as indicated by coefficient value of 0.0157 and p- value of 0.083. It is therefore, means that for any increase in the number of board members meetings will lead to reduction in the disclosure of sustainability reporting by 2%. This outcome indicated that the null hypothesis will not be accepted, but alternates hypothesis will be accepted. But, the outcome of this study is in contrast with the view of the Naseem et al (2017) and Alnabsha et al (2018). Thus, contradicted the underpinning theory of the study. 5. Conclusion and Recommendation The paper examined the effect of board attributes on sustainability reporting of listed Nigerian firms. Therefore, it was found that the board attributes (size, gender, independent and commitments) were termed as good determinants of sustainability. Therefore, board size, gender and independent influence sustainability reporting positively, while, board commitment influence sustainability reporting negatively. Meanwhile, the board and the management of the listed firms in Nigeria should consider board size, board gender and board independent as essential determinants of corporate sustainability reporting, which provides opportunity for transparency and effective risk and financial management of the organization, so as to increase investors’ confidence as well as other stakeholders. Hence, the following recommendations were made: i. The management of the Nigerian listed firms should consider large or diverse boards members as an opportunity to encourage sustainability reporting in their organization as the large or diverse boards comprise of experienced and knowledgeable people easily make effective decision, as far as all sustainability related matters are concern. ii. The management should consider the presence of women in the board as another means for influencing the organization to present a comprehensive financial report on the qualitative and quantitative information about the social, environmental and economic activities of their business to their respective stakeholders. In that regard, the presence of the women provide Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 327 opportunity to improve their sustainability reporting as most women are accustomed to social and environmental related issues. iii. The management should consider their board non-executive members as promoters of sustainability reporting practice in their organizations, as they are working towards building the confidence of the investors on the general activities of the organization and to also ensure relevant and accurate information are presented to the stake holders. References Adewuyi, A. O., & Olowookere, A. E. (2010). CSR and sustainable community development in Nigeria: WAPCO, a case from the cement industry. Social Responsibility, 6, 522–535. Adeyemi, S. B., & Fagbemi, T. O. (2010). Audit quality, corporate governance and firm characteristics in Nigeria. International Journal of Business and Management, 5, 169–179. Akhtar, N., Bano, M., Bano, S., Zia, H. T., & Jameel, N. (2016). Capital structure impact on banking sector performance in pakistan. International Review of Management and Business Research, 5(2), 1–17. Aksoy, M., Yilmaz, M. K., Tatoglu, E., & Basar, M. (2020). Antecedents of corporate sustainability performance in Turkey: The effects of ownership structure and board attributes on non-financial companies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 1(11), 276. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124284 Al, B. et. (2019). A study of determinant of environmental disclosure quality: Evidence from French listed company. Journal of Management and Government, 23, 939–971. Alnabsha, A., H. A. Abdou, C. G. Ntim, & A. A. E. (2018). Corporate Boards, Ownership Structures and Corporate Disclosures. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 19(1), 20–41. Alotaibi, K. O., & K. H. (2016). Determinants of CSR Disclosure Quantity and Quality: Evidence from non-Financial Listed Firms in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, 13(4), 364–393. Amran, A., Lee, S.P. and Devi, S. S. (2014). The influence of governance structure and strategic corporate social responsibility toward sustainability reporting quality. Business Strategy and the Environment, 23(4), 217–235. Asuquo, A. I. (2012). Environmental friendly policies and their financial effects on corporate performance of selected oil and gas companies in Niger Delta Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 328 region of Nigeria. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 2(1), 1–173. Bear, E. S, Rahman, N. (2010). The impact of board diversity and gender composition on corporate social responsibility and firm reputation. Journal of Business Ethics. Belal, A. R., & M. M. (2009). Corporate Social Reporting (CSR) in Emerging Economies: A Review and Future Direction. Research in Accounting in Emerging Economies, 9(1), 119–143. Chinonyelum, E. M & Ndubuisi, N. A. (2022). Effect of board structure on sustainability reporting of listed industrial goods firms in Nigeria. International Journal of Management Studies and Social Science Research. Cicchiello, A.F., Fellegara, A.M., Kazemikhasragh, A. and Monferra, S. (2021). Gender diversity on corporate boards: How Asian and African women contribute on sustainability reporting activity. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 36(7), 801–820. Disli, M., Yilmaz, M. K., & Mohamed, F. F. M. (2022). Board characteristics and sustainability performance: Empirical evidence from emerging markets. Sustainability Accounting. Management and Policy Journal, 13(14), 929– 952. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1108/SAMPJ-09-2020-0313 Durand, R., L.Paugam, & H. S. (2019). Do Investors Actually Value Sustainability Indices? Replication, Development, and new Evidenceon CSR Visibility. StrategicManagement Journal, 40(9), 1471–1490. Ettredge, M, Johnstone, K, Stone, M & Wang, Q. (2010). The effects of firm size, corporate governance quality, and bad news on disclosure compliance. Review of Accounting Studies. Farah, N., Farrukh, I. & Faizan, N. (2016). Financial performance of firms: Evidence from pakistan cement industry. Journal of Teaching and Education. Gardazi, S. S. N., Hassan, A. F. S., & Johari, J. B. (2020). Board of Directors Attributes and Sustainability Performance in the Energy Industry. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7(12), 317–328. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no12.317 Hahn, M. (2009). No Title, 2009(April 2008). Hassan, A. (2012). Corporate environmental accountability in the Nigerian oil and gas industry: The case of gas flaring. University of Abertay, Dundee. Herda, D.N., Taylor, M.E. and Winterbotham, G. (2012). The effect of board independence on the sustainability reporting practices of large US firms. Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting, 6(2), 178–197. Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 329 Hu, M., & L. L. (2018). Board Governance and Sustainability Disclosure: A Cross- Sectional Study of Singapore-Listed Companies. Sustainability, 10(7), 2578. Inua, I. O & Meni, A. A. (2019). Corporate governance attributes and social sustainability reporting. International Journal of Accounting & Finance (IJAF), 8(1). Iraya, C., M. Mwangi, &G. W. (2014). The effect of corporate governance practices on earnings management of companies Listed at the Nairobi Securities Exchange. European Scientific Journal, 11(1), 169–178. Karim, Kand & Rutledge, W. R. (2004). Environmental disclosure practices and financial performance. Journal of Business and Economics, 133. Kassinis, G, Pnayiotou, Dimou, A. and K. (2016). Gender and environmental sustainability: A longitudinal analysis. Khan, I., I. Khan, & B. B. S. (2019). Does board diversity affect quality of corporate social responsibility disclosure? Evidence from Pakistan. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(6), 1371–1381. Kruders, B., Kabir, R. (2018). The moderating role of board characteristics in the impact of corporate social responsibility on the financial performance of Dutch listed firms. University of Twente. Liao, L., T. P. Lin, & Y. Z. (2018). Corporate board and corporate social responsibility assurance: Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics, 150(1), 11–225. Lourenço, I. C., & M. C. B. (2013). Determinants of corporate sustainability performance in emerging markets: The Brazilian Case. Journal of Cleaner Production, (134–141). Mahmod, M. S., Aziz, K., Yazid, A. S., Rashid, N., Salleh, F., & Ghazali, P. L. (2018). A Conceptual Framework of ERM Practices among SMEs IN Malaysia A Conceptual Framework of ERM Practices among SMEs IN Malaysia. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 11(8), 1209–1221. Malarvizhi, S. and Y. (2009). Corporate Environmental Disclosures on the Internet: an Empirical Analysis of Indian Companies. Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting, 2(2), 211–232. Marais, Y. and. (2012). CSR reporting practices of Eurozone companies. Spanish Accounting Review, 18(2), 182–193. Masud, M.A.K., Nurunnabi, M. and Bae, S. M. (2018). The effects of corporate governance on environmental sustainability reporting: empirical evidence from South Asian countries. Asian Journal of SustainabilityandSocial Responsibility, 3(1), 1–26. Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 330 Muttakin, M. B., & A. K. (2014). Determinants of corporate social disclosure: empirical evidence from Bangladesh. Advances in Accounting, 30(1), 168– 175. Naseem, M. A., R. U. Rehman, A. Ikram, & F. M. (2017). Impact of board characteristics on corporate social responsibility disclosure. Journal of Applied Business Research (JABR), 33(4), 801–810. Ndalu, C. T., Ibanichuka, L. A. E & Ofurum, O. C. (2021). Board characteristics and environmental disclosure of quoted oil and gas firms in Nigeria: The moderating role of firm size. International Journal of Innovative Finance and Economics Research, 9(4), 51–62. Ngwakwe, C. C., Ganda, F., & John, A. O. (2014). Independent board of directors and corporate sustainability: A South African and Nigerian perspective. Journal of Governance and Regulation, 3(1), 58–68. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.22495/jgr_v3_i1_p4 SEC (2011) Corporate Governance Guideline and Revised Okwudili, R. I. I & Chibuzor, H. G & ClemenT, C. O. (2023). How much can board attributes influence sustainability performance of Firms? West African evidence. International Journal of Business and Management. Ong, T., Trireksani, T. & Djajadikerta, H. (2016). Hard and soft sustainability disclosures: Australia’s resources industry. Accounting Research Journal, 29(2), 198–217. Ong, T. and Djajadikerta, H. G. (2018). Corporate governance and sustainability reporting in the Australian resources industry: an empirical analysis. Social Responsibility Journal, 16(1), 1–14. Putri, P. C and Nasih, M. (2022). The effect of gender diversity in the boardroom and company growth on environmental, social, and governance disclosure (ESGD). Journal of Accounting and Investment, 23. Saari, V. & Kao, S. M. (2019). Board composition, sustainability and firm performance. Umea University. Sandhu, A., & Singh, B. (2019). Board composition and corporate reporting on internet: Indian evidence. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 17(2), 292–319. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1108/JFRA-05-2017-0031 Shahin, A. (2015). Manufacturing firm: An overview. International Journal of Management and Business Research, 285–282. Shrivastava, P., & A. A. (2014). The impact of corporate governance on sustainability performance. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 4(1), 21–37. Tang, Q. (2016). Carbon management system study: Contributions, limitations, and Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, April, 2024 331 future opportunities: A response to discussion comments. The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, 51(2), 310–314. Yunusa, N. (2017). Corporate governance Mechanism in social and environmental disclosure: The moderating role of non-executive directors’ownership in Nigeria. Universiti Utara Malaysia.