Search results

The purpose of this study is to develop a method to assess social performance. Traditionally, environment, social and governance (ESG) rating providers use subjectively weighted arithmetic averages to combine a set of social performance (SP) indicators into one single rating. To overcome this problem, this study investigates the preconditions for a new methodology for rating the SP component of the ESG by applying machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) anchored to social controversies.

This study proposes the use of a data-driven rating methodology that derives the relative importance of SP features from their contribution to the prediction of social controversies. The authors use the proposed methodology to solve the weighting problem with overall ESG ratings and further investigate whether prediction is possible.

The authors find that ML models are able to predict controversies with high predictive performance and validity. The findings indicate that the weighting problem with the ESG ratings can be addressed with a data-driven approach. The decisive prerequisite, however, for the proposed rating methodology is that social controversies are predicted by a broad set of SP indicators. The results also suggest that predictively valid ratings can be developed with this ML-based AI method.

This study offers practical solutions to ESG rating problems that have implications for investors, ESG raters and socially responsible investments.

The proposed ML-based AI method can help to achieve better ESG ratings, which will in turn help to improve SP, which has implications for organizations and societies through sustainable development.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this research is one of the first studies that offers a unique method to address the ESG rating problem and improve sustainability by focusing on SP indicators.

This study aims to provide further insights into the connection between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and companies’ credit ratings, while also exploring the role of corporate governance as a moderating factor. The hypotheses for this relationship are rooted in both legitimacy and stakeholder theories.

Using a sample of French non-financial listed firms from 2007 to 2020, this paper uses the ordered probit model introduced by Greene (2000). The issue of endogeneity has also been addressed.

The study reveals that CSR practices positively impact companies’ credit ratings by enhancing solvency and financial performance. Specifically, firms that prioritize CSR, particularly in the social and environmental dimensions (such as community relations, diversity, employee relations, environmental performance and product characteristics), tend to have higher credit ratings and a reduced risk of default. This suggests that credit rating agencies likely incorporate CSR performance when assigning credit ratings. Furthermore, the quality of corporate governance acts as a moderator, strengthening the relationship between CSR and credit ratings. The findings remain robust even after accounting for key firm attributes and addressing potential endogeneity between CSR and credit ratings.

This research provides valuable guidance for policymakers, corporate managers, investors and other stakeholders, as it offers insights into the influence of CSR activities on risk premiums and financing costs. For financial institutions, expanding credit decisions to encompass non-financial factors such as CSR can result in more accurate predictions of firm credit quality compared to relying solely on financial indicators.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study stands out as the first to systematically examine the relationship between CSR and credit ratings within the French context. Moreover, it distinguishes itself by investigating the moderating influence of corporate governance on this relationship, setting it apart from prior research.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the issue of social responsibility of crowdfunding industry, an industry that is expanding rapidly as an alternative source of finance and new business model, while failing to sufficiently advance and adhere to good social responsibility practices. The paper develops a stakeholder-based rating system of corporate social responsibility (CSR) among crowdfunding platforms that could assist in making this industry more trustworthy and robust.

The approach is based on exploratory research methodology, using interviews as data collection tool, to develop an initial understanding of the dimension and issues that define a construct for measuring the social responsibility of crowdfunding businesses.

The paper offers a preliminary construct for measuring the social responsibility of crowdfunding businesses, which identifies the stakeholders’ dimensions to be measured, assigned a relative weight for those stakeholders within an aggregated CSR measure and identified the social responsibility issues to be gauged.

This research adds to the understanding of the under studied subject of social responsibility of crowdfunding industry by developing a stakeholder-based rating system of CSR among crowdfunding businesses that could assist in making this industry more trustworthy and robust, thereby laying out an agenda for further research on the topic.

This chapter describes an in-class exercise to illustrate the implications associated with earnings management and corporate social responsibility (CSR). Student teams act as senior managers, evaluating scenarios in which they must decide whether to engage in earnings management and socially responsible actions. All decisions have the potential to change the firm's net operating income. The “auditor” reviews earnings management decisions based on accounting choices, imposing a penalty if the auditor disallows a decision. Earnings management decisions also affect the firm's earnings quality, operationalized through adjustments to the price–earnings (P/E) ratio. Several decisions affect the firm's social responsibility rating, which ultimately affects the P/E ratio (reflecting the long-term effects of CSR). The class discusses the implications of engaging in earnings management and practicing social responsibility, as well as the ethical issues associated with these decisions. Survey results indicate that this is an effective pedagogical tool, as students are highly engaged in the exercise. Data analysis also suggests that propensity to engage in accounting manipulations decreases over the course of the exercise.

This paper uses a stakeholder framework to review the empirical literature on corporate social performance (CSP), focusing particularly on studies attempting to correlate social with financial performance. Results show first that most studies correlate measures of business performance that as yet have no theoretical relationship (for example, the level of corporate charitable giving with return on investment). To make sense of this body of research, CSP studies must be integrated with stakeholder theory. Multiple stakeholders (a) set expectations for corporate performance, (b) experience the effects of corporate behavior, and (c) evaluate the outcomes of corporate behavior. However, we find that the empirical CSP literature mismatches variables in terms of which stakeholders are relevant to which kind of measure. Second, only the studies using market‐based variables and theory show a consistent relationship between social and financial performance, particularly those showing a negative abnormal return to the stock price of companies experiencing product recalls. Although this paper shows that the CSP construct is not yet well‐specified enough to produce stronger results, recent research suggests that much progress is being made both empirically and theoretically in developing valid and reliable measures of corporate social performance.

This paper fits in a research field dealing with the impact of Corporate Ethics Assessment on Financial Performance. The authors argue how environmental, social and governance (ESG) paradigm, meant to measure corporate social performance by rating issuance, can impact on abnormal returns of Italian firms listed on Financial Times Stock Exchange Milano Indice di Borsa (FTSE MIB) Index, developing a panel data analysis which runs from 2007 to 2015.

This study aims at exploring whether socially responsible investors outperform an excess market return on Italian Stock Exchange because of their investment behavior, testing statistically the relationship between the yearly ESG assessment issued by Standard Ethics Agency on FTSE MIB’s companies and their abnormal returns. To verify the impact of an ESG Rating on a company’s abnormal return, the authors developed a panel data analysis through a Fixed Effects Model. They measured abnormal returns via Fama–French approach, running a yearly Jensen’s Performance Index for each company under investigation.

The empirical results denote in Italy both a growing interest to corporate social responsibility (CSR) and sustainability by managers over the past decade, as well as an improving quality in ESG assessments because of a reliable corporate disclosure. Thus, despite investors have been applying ESG criteria in their stock – picking operations, the authors found a not positive and statistically significant impact in terms of market premium, when they have been undertaking a socially responsible investment (SRI).

The findings described above show that ethics is not yet a reliable fundraising tool for Italian-listed companies, despite SRIs having a positive growth rate over past decade. Investors seem to be not pricing CSR on Stock Exchange Market; therefore, listed companies cannot be rewarded with a premium price because of their highly stakeholder oriented behavior.

This paper explores, for the first time in Italy, when market extra-returns (if any) are related to corporate social performance and how managers leverage ethics to build capital added value.

This paper aims to analyse the similarities and differences in the methodologies adopted by corporate social responsibility (CSR) rating agencies.

The authors gather secondary and primary evidences of practices from selected agencies on the methodologies and criteria they rely upon to assess a firm’s CSR performance.

The authors find not only evidence of similarities in the methodologies adopted by the CSR rating agencies (e.g. the use of environment, social and governance themes, exclusion criteria, adoption of positive criteria, client/“customised” input, quantification) but also several elements of differences, namely, in terms of the thresholds for exclusion, transparent vs confidential approach, industry-specific ratings and weights for each dimension. Drawing from Sandberg et al.’s (2009) conceptualisations, the authors tentatively argue that this mixed picture may reflect competing organisational pressures to adopt a differentiation approach at the strategic and practical levels whilst recognising, and incorporating, the “globalising” tendencies of the CSR business at the terminological levels.

Although these data are based on a relatively small number of agencies, the findings and analysis convey some implications for users of CSR ratings and policymakers, particularly in light of the recent Paris 2016 Agreement on Climate Change and the increased emphasis on the monitoring of social, environmental and governance performance.

The authors contribute to the literature by highlighting how key intermediate rating organisations operationalise notions of CSR.

Using a sample of listed Chinese companies that issued bonds from 2010 to 2019, the authors empirically test the link between CSR and corporate bond pricing, and the mechanism and channels behind this link.

This study systematically examines whether and how corporate social responsibility (CSR) affects the corporate bond market in China.

Firms with better CSR have higher corporate bond credit ratings and lower corporate bond yield spreads. These associations remain stable in robustness checks, including checks that use regional typhoon disaster as an instrumental variable. The effects of CSR are more significant for firms with a worse information environment and for those operating in high-risk environments. Better CSR is associated with less earnings management, fewer financial restatements and less analyst forecast divergence. In addition, the effects of CSR are more pronounced after the 2013 market-oriented reform and when issuers are non-state-owned enterprises.

Because market participants can incorporate firms' CSR into their decision-making, establishing an effective channel for communicating CSR between issuers and market participants will enhance the effects of CSR.

Researchers need to attend to the mechanisms behind the link between CSR and corporate bond pricing, and to the characteristics of strong environmental contingency in emerging markets, specifically the periods and scenarios in which the effects of CSR change.

This study provides systemic evidence that CSR benefits corporate bond pricing through both informational and reputational channels and that the effects of CSR vary by time and firm. These findings enrich the literatures on both the economic consequences of CSR and the determinants of corporate bond pricing, and provide a plausible explanation for mixed findings on the effects of CSR in previous studies.