Regarding the attributes of sustainability committees, SCSIZE and SCDIV have an inverse relationship with SRQ, while SCINDEP, SCDIL and CSIZE demonstrate a positive association with SRQ; however, only SCDIL is insignificant. At the p-value larger than 0.05, SCSIZE reveals a specific negative and insignificant impact on SRQ. Kolk and Pinkse (2010) and Lodhia et al. (2012) reported a positive association between the two variables, which is in contrast to this finding. In contrast, and in line with Cho et al., the effect of SCINDEP on SRQ is positive and significant at the p-value less than 0.05. (2020). Similar to this, SCDIV shows a detrimental but important effect (p-value 0.05). This viewpoint is in agreement with Orlitzky et al. (2017), who discovered a substantial relationship between a company’s diversity and reporting quality. However, the impact of SCDIL on SRQ is positive but insignificant in contradiction with the Global Reporting Initiative (2015). Thus, the general results in the statistical model imply that increasing the number of the committee’s independent directors, the frequency of annual meetings, as well as the total assets of the company will favorably improve sustainability reporting quality, while a rise in the number of committee members along with improvement in the ratio of female directors to overall directors would rather affect SRQ adversely.
These findings in respect of SCINDEP and SCDIV support the position of Cho et al. (2020) that sustainability committee attributes are SRQ-relevant. Furthermore, the stakeholder theory is consistent with these findings in that revealing sustainability engagements communicates to stakeholders that an organization values social justice, the environment, and the economy. This facilitates value maximization for relevant stakeholders in an organization[142]
.Table 6 summarizes the results of the study’s assessments of direct relationships. The Table lists the type of regression (positive or negative), its significance (significant or insignificant), and its conclusion (indicating null or not) for the research.
This study investigates five (5) research hypotheses to assess the influence of the sustainability reporting committee on SRQ. The involvement of the board in SRQ is predicted by research hypothesis 1–4. The first study hypothesis examines the connection between SCSIZE and SRQ. According to the findings, there is a weak and negative correlation between board size and SRQ. H0(1) is therefore accepted. The results are at odds with earlier studies in the area of sustainability reporting (Chau & Gray, 2010; Shamil et al., 2014). This demonstrates that SRQ may be raised by using a bigger board. This conclusion is consistent with that of Carels et al. (2013) and De Villiers and Sharma (2017), who found that powerful boards may persuade management to provide appropriate sustainability reporting data.
The relationship between sustainability committee independence and SRQ is examined in the second hypothesis. The findings show a robust and beneficial association between the two, leading to the rejection of H0(2). Our findings are in line with those of the studies conducted by Shamil et al. (2014), Kaur and Lodhia (2014) and Garca-Sanchez et al. (2019). It implies that independent sustainability committees positively influence sustainability reporting quality, indicating the need for further research on their effectiveness in Nigerian and South African corporate reporting contexts.
The relationship between sustainability committee’s gender diversity on the board and SRQ is the subject of the third study hypothesis. The results demonstrate a significant and unfavorable correlation between SRQ and gender diversity. This finding contradicts earlier studies (Adams & McNicholas, 2007; Faisal et al., 2012; Cebrian et al., 2013). According to Bakar et al. (2019), female directors have a detrimental effect on corporate reporting procedures. Therefore, the study fails to support the third hypothesis of the study (H0(3)).
The fourth research hypothesis predicts how the diligence of sustainability committee and SRQ interact. The results show that sustainability committee’s diligence has a beneficial but insignificant effect on SRQ. This suggests that the committee’s meeting frequency is crucial, although holding meetings all year long does not raise the standard of sustainability reports. These results support the research of Arumona et al. (2019), which led to the acceptance of H0(4).