The Effect of EMA and CSR Costs on BOPO Mediated by GRI 11-Based CSR Disclosure: Pertamina Group 2020–2025

Authors

  • Endang Kusmana Accounting Study Program, Politeknik Negeri Pontianak, Pontianak, Indonesia Author
  • Nur Fadjrih Asyik Accounting Science Study Program, STIE Indonesia Surabaya, Surabaya, Indonesia Author
  • Wahidahwati Accounting Science Study Program, STIE Indonesia Surabaya, Surabaya, Indonesia Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.70716/emis.v4i3.823

Keywords:

environmental management accounting, CSR cost allocation, GRI 11 disclosure, BOPO efficiency

Abstract

This study investigates the impact of Environmental Management Accounting (EMA) and CSR Cost Allocation on BOPO Efficiency, with GRI 11 Disclosure acting as a mediating variable, at the Pertamina Group during the 2020–2025 period. The analysis method employed is Structural Equation Modeling–Partial Least Squares (SEM-PLS). The findings from the empirical investigation indicate that the integration of EMA and CSR Cost Allocation is accountable for 63.8% of the variation in GRI 11 Disclosure, as indicated by R² = 0.638. This integration exhibited positive and statistically significant direct effects, β = 0.521 (p = 0.000) and β = 0.348 (p = 0.000), respectively. . In contrast, the direct impact of CSR Cost Allocation on the BOPO ratio was found to be relatively robust (β = -0.214, p = 0.023). The findings of the mediation test demonstrated that GRI 11 Disclosure functions as a complete mediator in the association between EMA and BOPO, with an indirect effect coefficient of β = -0.303 (p = 0.000). Meanwhile, in the relationship between CSR Cost Allocation and BOPO, GRI 11 Disclosure acts as a partial mediator, with an indirect effect coefficient of β = -0.202 (p = 0.000). These findings serve to reinforce the theoretical integration between the Resource-Based View and Legitimation Theory, affirming that transparency in sector-based reporting has the capacity to transform internal capabilities and social expenditures into key drivers of long-term operational efficiency.

References

Adams, C. A., Alhamood, A., He, X., Tian, J., Wang, L., & Wang, Y. (2022). The nature of materiality in sustainability reporting and the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Standards update. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 35(4), 1141–1168. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-10-2021-5487

Aji, T., & Wahyudin, A. (2025). The mediating role of accountability in the relationship between green accounting and sustainable development. Econbank: Journal of Economics and Banking, 7(2), 149–163.

Amidjaya, P. G., & Widagdo, A. K. (2020). Sustainability reporting in Indonesian listed banks: Do corporate governance, ownership structure and digital banking matter? Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 21(2), 231–247. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-09-2018-0149.

Aula, R., Sumiyati, S., & Mai, M. U. (2022). The effect of corporate social responsibility disclosure on the performance of Islamic banks in Indonesia. Jurnal Manajemen Bisnis, 13(1), 93–107. https://doi.org/10.18196/mb.v13i1.12832

Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108

Burritt, R. L., & Christ, K. L. (2016). Industry 4.0 and environmental accounting: A new revolution? Asian Journal of Sustainability and Social Responsibility, 1, 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41180-016-0007-y.

Burritt, R. L., Hahn, T., & Schaltegger, S. (2002). Towards a comprehensive framework for environmental management accounting: Links between business actors and environmental management accounting tools. Australian Accounting Review, 12(27), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1835-2561.2002.tb00202.x

Cardoni, A., Kustono, A. S., & Tiron-Tudor, A. (2019). Sustainability reporting disclosure in the oil and gas industry: A comparative analysis of international practices. Sustainability, 11(4), Article 1019. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11041019

Degenhart, L., Zonatto, V. C. S., Rigon, L., & Monteiro, A. S. (2024). Effects of the environmental management system and top management support on the relationship between environmental management accounting practices and performance. Revista Ibero-Americana de Estratégia. https://doi.org/10.5585/2024.25487

Dietz, S., Gardiner, D., Jahn, V., & Noels, J. (2021). How ambitious are oil and gas companies' climate targets? Science, 374(6566), 405–408. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abh0688

Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57–74. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4279003

Ghozali, I., & Latan, H. (2015). Partial least squares: Konsep, teknik dan aplikasi menggunakan program SmartPLS 3.0 untuk penelitian empiris. Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.

Global Reporting Initiative. (2021). GRI 11: Oil and gas sector 2021. Global Sustainability Standards Board. https://www.globalreporting.org

Gunarathne, A. D. N., Lee, K.-H., & Hitigala Kaluarachchilage, P. K. (2021). Institutional pressures, environmental management strategy, and organizational performance: The role of environmental management accounting. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(2), 825–839. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2656

Gyane, A. T., Nunoo, E. K., Suleman, S., & Essandoh-Yeddu, J. (2021). Sustaining oil and gas multinational operations through corporate social responsibility practices. Discover Sustainability, 2(1), Article 34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-021-00042-x

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8

Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X

Meckling, W. H., & Jensen, M. C. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305--360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X

Roemer, E. (2016). A tutorial on the use of PLS path modeling in longitudinal studies. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116(9), 1901–1921. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-07-2015-0317

Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571--610. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331

Sugiyono. (2023). Quantitative, qualitative, and R&D research methods. Alfabeta.

Downloads

Published

2026-08-31

How to Cite

Kusmana, E., Asyik, N. F., & Wahidahwati, W. (2026). The Effect of EMA and CSR Costs on BOPO Mediated by GRI 11-Based CSR Disclosure: Pertamina Group 2020–2025. Jurnal Ekonomi, Manajemen, Dan Bisnis, 4(3), 1053-1064. https://doi.org/10.70716/emis.v4i3.823