Proceedings

the reduction of the sample to the 46 entities because it would be relevant to quantify
the environmental reporting for the entities that have environmental impact. It was
found that there are two entities (SC Albalact SA and SC Romimplent SA) who have
claimed to have no significant impact on the environment and have not provided
relevant information on the environmental impact, being thus fined by The
Environmental Guard because of the violation of the laws of the environment. This
trend highlights that the entities avoid the presentation of negative aspects (such as
fines, penalties), being thus violated the principle of true image on environmental
impact, trying to maintain its legitimacy by not providing information that could strike
its reputation. Appendix 1 (at the end of the paper) presents the descriptions of the
variable and appendix 2 (at the end of the paper) reflects the values of variables for
the 46 entities included in the sample.
Checking the first assumption I analyzed the variation of environmental reporting
related to the public exposure of the organization. As stated earlier, the public
exposure of an organization was quantified by the following variables:
1 The Stock Exchange section
2 The Stock Exchange category
3 The percentage of export sales
Table 3. The coefficient of the correlation between variables
The level
of environmental
reporting
The Stock
Exchange
section
~ 1030 ~
The Stock
Exchange
category
The percentage
of sales export
Pearson Correlation 1 -.581(**) -.623(**) .488(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .001
N 46 45 45 45
Kendall's tau_b 1 -.549(**) -.546(**) .428(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000
N 46 45 45 45
Spearman's rho 1 -.656(**) -.654(**) .593(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000
N 46 45 45 45
** The correlation is significant for a level of the coefficient equal to 0.01.
(Source: calculations made by the author in SPSS)
The correlation between the dependent variable and the three independent variables is
reflected in table 3:
1 Pearson’s coefficient (ranging between -1 and 1), for the first independent
variable (the Stock Exchange variable) is negative (-0.581 different from 0),
which demonstrates a link inversely proportional, of average intensity,
between the level of environmental reporting and the Stock Exchange section.
In other words, the entities traded on BVB have a higher level of
environmental reporting than the RASDAQ traded entities;
2 For the second independent variable (the Stock Exchange category) the
Pearson’s coefficient is negative (-0.623 different from 0), which demonstrates
a link inversely proportional, of average intensity, between the level of
environmental reporting and the Stock Exchange category. In other words, the
entities that are traded in the first category present a higher level of