Search results

Grounded in the stakeholder theory and signaling theory, this study aims to broaden the research agenda on environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing by uncovering public sentiments and key themes using Twitter data spanning from 2009 to 2022.

Using various machine learning models for text tonality analysis and topic modeling, this research scrutinizes 1,842,985 Twitter texts to extract prevalent ESG investing trends and gauge their sentiment.

Gibbs Sampling Dirichlet Multinomial Mixture emerges as the optimal topic modeling method, unveiling significant topics such as “Physical risk of climate change,” “Employee Health, Safety and well-being” and “Water management and Scarcity.” RoBERTa, an attention-based model, outperforms other machine learning models in sentiment analysis, revealing a predominantly positive shift in public sentiment toward ESG investing over the past five years.

This study establishes a framework for sentiment analysis and topic modeling on alternative data, offering a foundation for future research. Prospective studies can enhance insights by incorporating data from additional social media platforms like LinkedIn and Facebook.

Leveraging unstructured data on ESG from platforms like Twitter provides a novel avenue to capture company-related information, supplementing traditional self-reported sustainability disclosures. This approach opens new possibilities for understanding a company’s ESG standing.

By shedding light on public perceptions of ESG investing, this research uncovers influential factors that often elude traditional corporate reporting. The findings empower both investors and the general public, aiding managers in refining ESG and management strategies.

This study marks a groundbreaking contribution to scholarly exploration, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, by being the first to analyze unstructured Twitter data in the context of ESG investing, offering unique insights and advancing the understanding of this emerging field.

This paper examines the effect of ESG ratings and its dimensions (environmental, social and governance) on the financial performance of JSE-listed firms included in FTSE/JSE Responsible Investment Index.

The paper employs panel data covering 40 JSE-listed firms included in FTSE/JSE Responsible Investment Index between 2015 and 2019. The paper employs the two-stage least squares (2SLS) instrumental variable regression technique to estimate the effect of ESG ratings and its dimensions (environmental, social and governance) on both accounting- and market-based performance indicators.

The results of the two-stage least squares instrumental estimation analysis reveal that investment in ESG initiatives improves both accounting- and market-based indicators of financial performance. Of the ESG pillars, the paper finds environmental initiatives improves firms' financial bottom line and market performance, while a firm's social and governance practices are observed to have no effect on a firm's accounting and market performance measures.

The insights from this study proffers policy implications for firms' management, investors and regulatory authorities.

As far as the authors are concerned, this paper presents the first empirical analysis on the contribution of ESG ratings on financial performance in South Africa.

The purpose of this paper is to test if building reputation capital through environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing can mitigate the negative effect of economic policy uncertainty (EPU) on firms’ valuation.

This study uses an unbalanced panel of 591 financial firms between 2005 and 2021 from Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom (UK) and the USA. Ordinary least square method is used in the empirical tests. To alleviate a potential endogeneity problem, robustness tests are performed using the two-stage least square approach with instrumental variables.

The results of this paper show that sustainable reporting can offset the negative effect of EPU on the valuation of financial firms. Consistent with the stakeholder-based reputation-building hypothesis, sustainability performance may have an insurance-like impact on firms’ valuation during periods of high uncertainty.

According to the findings, during high policy uncertainty periods, investors accept to pay a premium for the stocks of the firms which built social capital through environmental and social investments. Accordingly, it is suggested that regulatory bodies and governments motivate firms to increase their stakeholder orientation to attain higher reputation capital.

Managers can mitigate the negative impact of policy uncertainty on the value of their firms via building social capital, which will increase financial market stability in return, and portfolio investors may use such firms for portfolio optimization decisions.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is one of the first to examine the mitigating role of ESG investing on EPU and firm valuation relationships for financial firms. Thus, this study provides new insights related to the impact of ESG performance on valuation during uncertain times.

This study aims to establish the effect of environmental, social and governance (ESG) practices on Australian energy and utility investment performance.

Conventional and ESG-rated portfolios are constructed using monthly returns and ESG scores of S&P/ASX 300 listed energy and utility firms from 2014 to 2022. Portfolio performance is estimated using a four-factor regression model, controlling for any economic shocks associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.

The findings show that the lower the ESG score associated with the overall ESG and environmental portfolios, the greater the performance compared to the market (but not the conventional and other ESG portfolios). High ESG scores do not appear to influence the performance of the energy and utility portfolios, which contrasts expectations that the uptake of ESG should deliver superior risk-return outcomes for investors. The findings also indicate that a contrarian investment approach may be a reasonable performance indicator for high-rated ESG portfolios. ESG practices did not impact portfolio performance during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This research has contributed to the literature by offering ESG investment insights for policymakers, regulators, fund managers and investors. Consistent with the agency perspective on ESG practices and efficient market hypothesis, the evidence implies that, regardless of ESG scores (either high or low), investors should consider investing passively in diversified energy and utility portfolios or low-cost index fund equivalents.

This article aims to analyse the relationship between the environmental, social and governance (ESG) score and the cost of capital of 600 large, mid and small capitalization companies across 17 countries that are component of the EURO STOXX 600 Index. By examining whether ESG has an impact on the cost of capital, this article contributes to the solutions to improve the impact of organizations and societies on sustainable development. The article further examines whether the effect is because of the environmental, social and/or governance components. In addition, the article analyses which WACC component (i.e. the cost of equity, the cost of debt, the beta or the leverage ratio) is affected. Furthermore, this article analyses whether a high ESG score can substitute for a weaker legal environment.

The results were obtained by using ordinary least squares panel data modelling to analyse the relationship between the ESG score and the cost of capital. The sample consists of companies that are part of the STOXX Europe 600 Index over the period 2018–2021, which is composed of 600 companies, including large, mid and small capitalization firms listed across 17 countries. The sample finally includes 1,960 firm-year observations.

Companies with a higher ESG score tend to have a lower cost of capital, but this relationship holds only for firms domiciled in countries with a weaker legal environment. In addition, these firms should not only increase their ESG score to create a more sustainable environment but also to reduce their cost of debt. Environmental and social factors have a significantly negative impact on the cost of capital only in countries with a weaker legal environment, while the governance component positively impacts the cost of capital by allowing firms to borrow more.

There is not yet a standardized taxonomy to define ESG, making the study dependent on commercial data providers.

The new insights can be used by companies domiciled in countries with weaker legal environments to reduce their cost of capital. The results also allow us to know on which components of the ESG score to focus. It can also help policymakers, specifically those in countries with a weaker legal environment, to provide incentives to further stimulate ESG investments and disclosure, thereby contributing to a more sustainable society.

To achieve the sustainable development goals put forward by the United Nations, it is important for firms to invest in ESG projects. It is nevertheless insightful to know whether these ESG investments, which are currently observed as a cost, also provide benefits to firms and in which countries. If firms clearly see the advantages of investing in ESG projects, they are likely to proactively engage in them.

This article is the first, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, to focus on 17 European countries, thereby capturing divergent legal environments. This setting allows us to answer the main novel research question, namely, whether the ESG score can act as a substitute for the legal environment in which the company is domiciled. The article also goes further than previous articles by examining whether the effect is because of the environmental, social and/or governance component and whether these impact the components of the weighted cost of capital, namely, the cost of equity, the cost of debt, the beta or the leverage ratio of the companies.

There is an increasing awareness of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors in the private equity (PE) environment. While many studies deal with the implementation of ESG in the field of PE, only little is known about how the subcategory venture capital. Therefore, this study aims to answer the questions: What are the motivations for venture capitalists to consider ESG in their investment decisions? How do they implement it and what are the barriers that hinder them?

An inductive study based on semi-structured interviews with 11 investors of venture capital firms (VCs) was conducted to explore the drivers, the barriers and the strategies to implement ESG in the investment decision-making.

All investors perceive that ESG will play a major role in investment decisions in the long term. VCs have seen benefits primarily in terms of performance and commercialization of startups that incorporate the ESG aspect. Limited partners are a driving force for change in this process. No standardized framework and lack of resources for implementation are mainly assumed as barriers.

Politics and industry might support particularly smaller VCs in their implementation by providing standardized frameworks. Owing to increasing awareness and interest of ESG criteria among VCs, startups should also address these criteria.

This paper contributes to the literature by examining how ESG is currently considered in VCs’ decisions and what challenges they face. Therefore, this research contributes to the understanding of the decision-making process among venture capitalists.

Investment decisions hold immense significance for investors and eventually affect their portfolio performance. Investors are advised to weigh the costs and benefits associated with every decision in order to make rational investment decisions. However, behavioral finance research reveals that investors' choices often stem from a blend of economic, psychological and sociological factors, leading to irrationality. Moreover, environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) factors, aligned with behavioral finance hypotheses, also sway opinions and stock prices. Hence, this study aims to identify how individual equity investors prioritize key determinants of investment decisions in the Indian stock market.

The current research gathered data from 391 individual equity investors through a structured questionnaire. Thereafter, a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (F-AHP) was used to meet the purpose of the research.

Information availability, representative heuristics belonging to psychological factors and macroeconomic indicators falling under economic factors were discovered to be the three most prioritized criteria, whereas environmental issues within the realm of ESG factors, recommendations of brokers or investment consultants of sociological factors, and social issues belonging to ESG factors were found to be the least prioritized criteria, respectively.

Only active and experienced individual equity investors were surveyed in this study. Furthermore, with a sample size of 391 participants, the study was confined to individual equity investors in one nation, India.

This research has implications for individual investors, institutional investors, market regulators, corporations, financial advisors, portfolio managers, policymakers and society as a whole.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, no real attempt has been made to comprehend how active and experienced individual investors prioritize critical determinants of investment decisions by taking economic, psychological, sociological and ESG factors collectively under consideration.

This study aims to conduct an empirical investigation to assess the hedge, diversifier and safe-haven properties of different environmental, social and governance (ESG) assets (i.e. green bonds and ESG equity index) vis-à-vis conventional investments (namely, equity index, gold and commodities).

The authors examine the sample period 2007–2021 using the bivariate cross-quantilogram (CQG) analysis and a dynamic conditional correlation (DCC) multivariate generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (GARCH) experiment with several extensions.

The evidence shows that the analyzed ESG investments exhibit mainly diversifying features depending on the asset class taken as a reference, with some potential hedging/safe-haven qualities (for the green bond) in peculiar timespans. Therefore, the results suggest that investors might consider sustainable investing as a new measure of risk reduction, which has interesting implications for both portfolio allocation and policy design.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first that empirically investigates at once the dependence between different ESG investments (i.e. equity and green bond) with different conventional investments such as gold, equity and commodity market indices over a large sample period (2007–2021). Well-suited methodologies like the bivariate CQG and the DCC multivariate GARCH are used to capture the spillover effect and the hedging/diversifying nature, even in temporary contexts. Finally, a global perspective is used.

Considering the standards developed by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB), this study aims to examine whether the link between material sustainability and financial performance depends on the extent to which the company is oriented toward stakeholders.

To test the predictions, 13,942 firm-year observations from 43 different countries are used, covering the period from 2010 to 2019. Using a hand-mapping approach to match the indicators suggested by the SASB with those of the ASSET4, the authors realize that there are 170 material sustainability indicators among 466 indicators of the ASSET4. The authors use three different methods to verify if the materiality matters, including the alphas obtained from the Fama and French factor models, comparing the average abnormal returns of the portfolios and the bootstrapped Cramer technique.

The findings show that companies investing in material sustainability activities perform better than those investing in immaterial activities. Also, consistent with the theoretical foundations, the authors find that the effect of investing in material sustainability activities is more pronounced in stakeholder-oriented countries than that in shareholder-oriented countries. The results are robust to a battery of sensitivity tests.

Owing to COVID-19 in late 2019, data from 2020 to 2022 have not been used to obtain reliable results.

The results obtained in the current research provide valuable guidance for investors to make investments considering the degree of materiality of sustainability activities in different industries. It also helps managers to increase the company’s financial performance, make efficient decisions related to investment in sustainability activities and find investment strategies on the material sustainability issues in their industries.

This study provides a clearer understanding of investment in sustainability activities in different industries by separating material and immaterial sustainability activities in stakeholder and shareholder-oriented countries, and the results obtained can change the perspective of investors and company managers regarding investing in such activities in different countries. Investing in more materiality sustainability activities than the immateriality dimension can be new opportunities for companies to achieve predetermined goals, help retain and attract business partners or be a source of innovation for new product lines or services. Internal morale and employee engagement may increase while increasing productivity and firm performance. This discussion opens the way for future research.

This study provides insight into the effect of investing in material and immaterial sustainability activities in different industries on the company’s performance in shareholder and stakeholder-oriented countries.

This paper aims to investigate the relationship between corporate environmental, social and governance (ESG) ratings and leverage manipulation and the moderating effects of internal and external supervision.

The authors draw on a sample of Chinese non-financial A-share-listed firms from 2013 to 2020 to explore the effect of ESG ratings on leverage manipulation. Robustness and endogeneity tests confirm the validity of the regression results.

ESG ratings inhibit leverage manipulation by improving social reputation, information transparency and financing constraints. This effect is weakened by internal supervision, captured by the ratio of institutional investor ownership, and strengthened by external supervision, captured by the level of marketization. The effect is stronger in non-state-owned firms and firms in non-polluting industries. The governance dimension of ESG exhibits the strongest effect, with comprehensive environmental governance ratings and social governance ratings also suppressing leverage manipulation.

Firms should strive to cultivate environmental awareness, fulfil their social responsibilities and enhance internal governance, which may help to strengthen the firm’s sustainability orientation, mitigate opportunistic behaviours and ultimately contribute to high-quality firm development. The top managers of firms should exercise self-restraint and take the initiative to reduce leverage manipulation by establishing an appropriate governance structure and sustainable business operation system that incorporate environmental and social governance in addition to general governance.

Policymakers and regulators should formulate unified guidelines with comprehensive criteria to improve the scope and quality of ESG information disclosure and provide specific guidance on ESG practice for firms. Investors should incorporate ESG ratings into their investment decision framework to lower their portfolio risk.

This study contributes to the literature in four ways. Firstly, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, it is among the first to show that high ESG ratings may mitigate firms’ opportunistic behaviours. Secondly, it identifies the governance factor of leverage manipulation from the perspective of firms’ subjective sustainability orientation. Thirdly, it demonstrates that the relationship between ESG ratings and leverage manipulation varies with the level of internal and external supervision. Finally, it highlights the importance of governance in guaranteeing the other two dimensions’ roles by decomposing overall ESG.