This study aims to investigate how three types of institutional pressures – coercive, normative and mimetic – influence carbon performance, both directly and indirectly, through the adoption of carbon management accounting (CMA).
Using a nonexperimental design and a sampling frame from the Kompas100 Index, we surveyed managers involved in corporate environmental management. Data from 218 respondents were analyzed using partial least squares path modeling (PLS-PM).
The results indicate that all three institutional pressures significantly drive the adoption of CMA, which in turn enhances carbon performance. Notably, CMA functions as a mediating mechanism that links institutional pressures to improved carbon outcomes.
This study contributes to the growing literature on carbon accounting by offering empirical evidence from an emerging market context. By highlighting CMA as a strategic response to institutional pressures, it underscores the role of accounting practices in advancing corporate carbon performance. These insights provide actionable markers for both managers and policymakers seeking to strengthen sustainability practices.
