Download data is not yet available.


The quality of a periodical’s content, which is the key to its success, is directly related to the efforts of its reviewers. If they are technically qualified academics and dedicate sufficient time and energy to carefully review the articles submitted to them, then the periodical will likely succeed, to the benefit of the entire branch of science covered.

Peer review is recognized as a critical factor in the development of any research area. In harmony with this thinking, at the start of August, with the support of ANPAD (National Association of Postgraduate Education and Research in Administration), the First Brazilian Meeting of Scientific Editors in Administration and Accounting was held. The main theme was the quality policy of scientific periodicals. The consensus was that the work of reviewers is crucial in this respect, that their work must be conducted with the proper rigor and speed, while also remaining cordial and helpful, and that there must be mechanisms to motivate reviewers to prepare constructive opinions.
There is nothing novel in stating that peer review provides an opportunity to improve the quality of periodicals and scientific research in general. The reviewers’ opinions help to mold the future research in an area of science and to build knowledge on a solid base. For these reasons I believe that reviewing articles is an ethical responsibility of all academics.
From a utilitarian perspective, the work of reviewers serves the interests of multiple stakeholders. Authors benefit from the opinions received, periodicals gain in quality and status and the scientific community as a whole benefits from better scientific production. Granted all good academics are very busy, and it is often easier to focus on personal obligations instead of taking time to review articles by other researchers. However, from the broader perspective of the good of science, reviewing the work of colleagues in the academic community is a natural and important part of the scientific profession.
In short, the golden rule operates in science as it does in life in general: if we want our colleagues to provide accurate and helpful reviews of our work, we must be ready and willing to do the same in return.
In the second issue of 2009 we present six articles. The first is by Valcemiro Nossa, Jesuína Figueira, Annor Silva Júnior, Silvania Neris Nossa and Ézio Baptista. The authors address a timely research question in today’s world of heightened concern for socially responsible corporate behavior: Is there a relationship between abnormal returns and the social and environmental performance of firms with shares listed on the Bovespa? Using social and environmental performance metrics formulated from internal and external social indicators taken from the social balance sheets of the 100 largest companies that published such information in the period from 1999 to 2006, the authors find evidence that these indicators do not have a relationship with abnormal returns of the companies studied. This result suggests that social and environmental disclosure in Brazil does not affect companies’ market valuations, at least in the sample investigated.
The next article, by Janaina de Moura Engracia Giraldi and Ana Akemi Ikeda, investigates a provocative theme, namely the image that Chinese products enjoy in Brazil. Applying the scale developed by Nebenzahl, Jaffe and Usunier (2003) to a sample of Brazilian executives, the authors find that appliances made in China have a negative image, irrespective of the respondents’ level of familiarity with that country. The results indicate that Chinese companies need to develop better communication programs to reduce the negative bias with respect to their products.
In the third article in this issue, Ilse Maria Beuren explores an important theme: the impact of the differences between Brazilian and American accounting standards on the corporate governance indicators of Brazilian firms. The results suggest there are differences in these indicators calculated based on the two countries’ accounting standards. She additionally finds a significant correlation between the differences in the performance indicators calculated based on the accounting statements sent to the Bovespa and NYSE. From this evidence it can be inferred that these performance indicators are not significantly affected by the differences in the accounting rules between the two countries, with no information asymmetries occurring in the sample of companies between what is disclosed to the Bovespa and NYSE.
The fourth article this issue, by Janann Joslin Medeiros, discusses the theories of high reliability organizations (HROs) and how they can contribute to the effective management of environmental risk. An understanding of the causal mechanisms that contribute to operational failures improves the ability to manage them and reduces the probability of such failures. The work is innovative in suggesting a new approach to operational risk, as well as in testing the HRO theory in a sector not previously studied.
Marcelo Sanches Pagliarussi, Antônio Thadeu Matos da Luz, Arilda Teixeira and Ézio Baptista are the authors of our fifth article. In a careful study they investigate the causal relationship between narrative attributions in annual reports and the corporate governance index. The results identify, in the sample studied, that self-serving attributions can be found in all annual reports, regardless of the level of corporate governance. The study is innovative in carrying out a detailed analysis of the content of companies’ annual reports and contributes to a rigorous discussion of the research hypotheses.
In the last article this issue, Ricardo Lopes Cardoso and André Carlos Busanelli de Aquino investigate through experiments the vagueness on the left-hand side of the balance sheet, particularly the classification of fixed assets, intangibles and inventories. After an extensive literature review, and with particular methodological rigor in applying the experiment, the authors provide interesting support for the correct identification of elements making up firms’ assets, pragmatically demarcating the ambiguity of the classification choices made in preparing balance sheets.
In closing, we at Brazilian Business Review, in name of the scientific community, would like to thank all the reviewers who have provided us with diligent and constructive opinions on the articles submitted. This work is an important responsibility and will certainly improve the research in our area.
Good reading!
How to Cite
Martinez, A. L. (2009). Editorial. Brazilian Business Review, 6(2). Retrieved from
Abstract Views

Send mail to Author

Send Cancel