Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of sustainability disclosures and disclosure ratings on firm value. This paper compares the informativeness of sustainability disclosures in company reports versus environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosure ratings. The authors examine the extent to which they provide incremental information.

The sample consists of panel data from over 2,600 publicly-listed non-financial US companies for the period 2014–2018. The authors obtain sustainability disclosures from Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Navigator and ESG disclosure scores from Bloomberg. The authors regress market value and/or stock price on sustainability disclosures and ESG scores to evaluate information content.

ESG scores are positively associated with market value and price. Sustainability disclosures in the form of metrics and company-tailored narratives provide incremental information content on market value and/or price. Boilerplate disclosures reduce market value and price. Sustainability disclosures and ESG scores provide incremental information, suggesting that it would be beneficial to harmonize standards for reporting sustainability disclosures.

The limitation is that the authors have only considered sustainability disclosures for a sample of US companies from two sources – SASB Navigator and Bloomberg.

The paper provides some evidence that may be pertinent to the debate on whether to harmonize the guidance on reporting sustainability issues.

The paper provides evidence on the benefits to firms for reporting sustainability issues.

This paper is among the first to analyze company sustainability disclosures obtained from two different sources – SASB Navigator and ESG disclosure ratings – and compare them for relevance for company valuation. With SASB Navigator, the authors obtain further refinement into the nature of the information provided in the sustainability disclosures, that is, boilerplate, company-tailored or metrics disclosures.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the association between audit opinion and earnings persistence of listed companies in Thailand from 2004 to 2008.

We use archival data and hand collected data in regression analysis. Content analysis was used to perform decomposition analysis of audit modifications.

Firms receiving modified opinions have lower earnings persistence than firms receiving unqualified opinions, and the degree of earnings persistence varies among types of modifications. We find that firms with a qualified opinion or a disclaimer have lower earnings persistence than firms receiving an unqualified opinion with an emphasis of matter (UEM). However, we find no difference in earnings persistence between firms receiving a qualification and a disclaimer. Content analysis reveals that there is information in certain types of modified opinions with respect to earnings quality. Firms receiving a scope limitation qualification and a going concern disclaimer have lower earnings persistence than firms receiving an UEM due to going concern issues.

Audit modifications reflect different degrees of problematic issues in clients’ firms, resulting in different impacts on earnings persistence. Thus, policymakers and regulators should emphasize the importance of using auditors’ reports. Strengthened enforcement by regulators makes individual auditors more aware of reputation risk and more likely to express appropriate audit opinions.

We examine a broader set of modified audit opinions than those used in prior research. Our study offers the opportunity to examine the association between earnings persistence and different types of modified opinions, especially a disclaimer, which has been rarely found in prior research.