2013 REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION STATUS OF CORPORATE GOVERNANCE DISCLOSURES: CASE OF EGYPT

Download This Article

Abstract

This report is a case study of corporate governance disclosure in Egypt. The study employs the benchmark of good practices in corporate governance disclosure developed by the Intergovernmental Working Group of Experts on International Standards of Accounting and Reporting (ISAR). This benchmark consists of fifty two disclosure items covering five subject areas and is based on a sample of the top 29 listed companies in Egypt. This study is complimentary to an earlier study conducted in 2007: 2007 Review of the implementation status of corporate governance disclosures: case study Egypt. This report compares the results of the current study to the 2007 study. This study finds the average disclosure level is less than half of the items in the ISAR benchmark. While nine items in the ISAR benchmark were disclosed by more than two-thirds of the companies in the study, forty items were disclosed by less than half. The absolute number of disclosure items found for each company ranged from 5 to 43, indicating a high level of variability between ‘best practice’ companies and companies with minimal disclosure practices. The study concludes that while the sample has relatively high rates of disclosure for few items, and the average disclosures in 2010 almost doubled the 2005 average disclosures in Egypt for several categories, they are still low levels compared to the average emerging markets levels. Policy options discussed include penalizing companies for undisclosed items, and providing education and training for executives and directors to enhance the awareness of the rapidly evolving regulatory environment, as well as the underlying importance of corporate governance disclosure.

Keywords: Corporate Governance, Disclosure, Egypt

How to cite this paper: Shehata, N. F., & Dahawy, K. M.(2014). 2013 review of the implementation status of corporate governance disclosures: Case of Egypt. Corporate Ownership & Control, 11(2-6), 591-601. https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv11i2c6p6