Environmental, Social, and Governance Risk on Firm Performance: The Mediating Role of Firm Risk
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21512/bbr.v14i2.8935Keywords:
Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) risk, firm performance, firm riskAbstract
Business sustainability can be improved by achieving Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) aspects. The research aimed to examine the effect of ESG risk on firm risk and performance, the effect of firm risk on performance, and the mediating role of firm risk between ESG risk and performance. The research sample included 150 firms listed on the Indonesia ESG Leaders Index in Indonesian Stock Exchange in 2020-2022. The research measured ESG risk by the value of ESG risk, firm risk by stock return volatility, and performance by Return on Asset (ROA) and Tobin’s Q. Data analysis applied path analysis. Based on data analysis, lower ESG risk reduces firm risk and increases performance. Moreover, lower firm risk increases performance, and lower ESG risk increases performance through firm risk reduction. The result indicates that lower ESG risk captures the ability of ESG implementation to reduce the risk of economic value and give benefit to reducing costs of conflict, uncertainty, and bad reputation risk. Furthermore, lower ESG risk improves performance by helping firms to promote higher revenue and cost efficiency. In additional analysis, the effect of lower ESG risk on firm risk reduction and performance improvement occurs more for firms in the environmentally sensitive industry. The results show that industry sensitivity strengthens the positive effect of ESG risk on firm risk and the negative effect of ESG risk on performance. The research contributes to giving new evidence of ESG risk on firm risk and performance in Indonesia since ESG risk assessment is a new evaluation on the Indonesian Stock Exchange.
Plum Analytics
References
Agustina, L., Suryandari, D., Oktarina, N., & Arief, S. (2015). The influence of good corporate governance mechanisms to financial performance with corporate social responsibility as an intervening variable. International Journal of the Computer, the Internet, and Management, 23(1), 24–29.
Ahsan, T., Al-Gamrh, B., & Mirza, S. S. (2022). Corporate social responsibility and firm-value: The role of sensitive industries and CEOs power in China. Applied Economics, 54(16), 1844–1863. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2021.1983136
Aksoy, L., Buoye, A. J., Fors, M., Keiningham, T. L., & Rosengren, S. (2022). Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) metrics do not serve services customers: A missing link between sustainability metrics and customer perceptions of social innovation. Journal of Service Management, 33(4/5), 565–577. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-11-2021-0428
Albuquerque, R., Koskinen, Y., & Zhang, C. (2019). Corporate social responsibility and firm risk: Theory and empirical evidence. Management Science, 65(10), 4451–4469. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3043
Antwi-Adjei, A., Kong, Y., Kwame, O., & Antwi-Adjei, N. A. (2020). A review: Corporate governance and sustainability. International Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology, 7(6), 79–89. https://doi.org/10.32628/IJSRST20769
Baier, P., Berninger, M., & Kiesel, F. (2020). Environmental, Social and governance reporting in annual reports: A textual analysis. Financial Markets, Institutions & Instruments, 29(3), 93–118. https://doi.org/10.1111/fmii.12132
Bărbuță-Mișu, N., & Madaleno, M. (2020). Assessment of bankruptcy risk of large companies: European countries evolution analysis. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 13(3), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm13030058
Biro Hubungan Masyarakat Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan. (2018). KLHK tegas tangani kasus pencemeran lingkungan. Retrieved from ppid.menlhk.go.id/siaran_pers/browse/1148
Boiral, O., Heras-Saizarbitoria, I., & Brotherton, M. C. (2019). Assessing and improving the quality of sustainability reports: The auditors’ perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 155, 703–721. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3516-4
Broadstock, D. C., Matousek, R., Meyer, M., & Tzeremes, N. G. (2020). Does corporate social responsibility impact firms' innovation capacity? The indirect link between environmental & social governance implementation and innovation performance. Journal of Business Research, 119(October), 99–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.014
Deloitte. (2022). CEO Survey 2021: Survey on the role of CEOs in advancing sustainability & ESG. Retrieved from https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/id/Documents/risk/id-risk-ceo-survey-on-esg-2021.pdf
Erin, O., Adegboye, A., & Bamigboye, O. A. (2022). Corporate governance and sustainability reporting quality: Evidence from Nigeria. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 13(3), 680–707. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-06-2020-0185
Friede, G., Busch, T., & Bassen, A. (2015). ESG and financial performance: Aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 5(4), 210–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2015.1118917
Hendratama, T. D., & Huang, Y. C. (2021). Corporate social responsibility, firm value and life cycle: Evidence from Southeast Asian countries. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 22(4), 577–597. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-09-2020-0194
Henseler, J., Dijkstra, T. K., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Diamantopoulos, A., Straub, D. W., ... & Calantone, R. J. (2014). Common beliefs and reality about PLS: Comments on Rönkkö and Evermann (2013). Organizational Research Methods, 17(2), 182–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114526928
Hwang, J., Kim, H., & Jung, D. (2021). The effect of ESG activities on financial performance during the COVID-19 Pandemic—Evidence from Korea. Sustainability, 13(20), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011362
Iehl, E. (2020). Can doing good reduce risk? Corporate social responsibility and risk for firms in controversial industries. Major Themes in Economics , 22(1), 1–14.
Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan. (2017). Program penilaian peringkat kinerja perusahaan dalam pengelolaan lingkungan hidup. Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan.
Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan. (2018). Program penilaian peringkat kinerja perusahaan dalam pengelolaan lingkungan hidup. Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan.
Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan. (2019). Program penilaian peringkat kinerja perusahaan dalam pengelolaan lingkungan hidup. Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan.
Kim, S., & Li, Z. (2021). Understanding the impact of ESG practices in corporate finance. Sustainability, 13(7), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13073746
Kuruppu, S. C., Milne, M. J., & Tilt, C. A. (2019). Gaining, maintaining and repairing organisational legitimacy: When to report and when not to report. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 32(7), 2062–2087. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-03-2013-1282
Lee, M. T., Raschke, R. L., & Krishen, A. S. (2022). Signaling green! Firm ESG signals in an interconnected environment that promote brand valuation. Journal of Business Research, 138(January), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.08.061
Liesch, P. W., & Welch, L. S. (2019). The firms of our times: Risk and uncertainty. In R. V. Tulder, A. Verbeke, and B. Jankowska (Eds.) International business in a VUCA world: The changing role of states and firms (pp. 41–53). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1745-886220190000014004
Lys, T., Naughton, J. P., & Wang, C. (2015). Signaling through corporate accountability reporting. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 60(1), 56–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2015.03.001
Moratis, L. (2018). Signalling responsibility? Applying signalling theory to the ISO 26000 standard for social responsibility. Sustainability, 10(11), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10114172
Olaniran, O., Namusonge, G. S., & Muturi, W. (2016). The role of risk-taking on performance of firms on Nigerian Stock Exchange. International Journal of Research in Business Studies and Management, 3(3), 36–44.
Ongsakul, V., & Sen, S. K. (2019). Low carbon energy symbiosis for sustainability: Review of shared value-based policy metabolism to enhance the implementability of the sustainable development goals in Asia. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 9(2), 24–30. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.32479/ijeep.7236
Pham, H. S. T., & Tran, H. T. (2020). CSR disclosure and firm performance: The mediating role of corporate reputation and moderating role of CEO integrity. Journal of Business Research, 120(November), 127–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.08.002
Pirson, M., Martin, K., & Parmar, B. (2019). Public trust in business and its determinants. Business & Society, 58(1), 132–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650316647950
Pulino, S. C., Ciaburri, M., Magnanelli, B. S., & Nasta, L. (2022). Does ESG disclosure influence firm performance? Sustainability, 14(13), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14137595
Purnomo, M. M. (2021). Pengaruh media exposure, sensitivitas industri, dan growth terhadap corporate social responsibility disclosure. Parsimonia: Jurnal Akuntansi, Manajemen dan Bisnis, 8(1), 27–41. https://doi.org/10.33479/parsimonia.2021.8.1.27-41
Puspitaningtyas, Z. (2019). Empirical evidence of market reactions based on signaling theory in Indonesia stock exchange. Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 16(2), 66–77. https://doi.org/10.21511/imfi.16(2).2019.06
Qodary, H. F., & Tambun, S. (2021). Pengaruh Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) dan retention ratio terhadap return saham dengan nilai perusahaan sebagai variabel moderating. Juremi: Jurnal Riset Ekonomi, 1(2), 159–172.
Safriani, M. N., & Utomo, D. C. (2020). Pengaruh Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) disclosure terhadap kinerja perusahaan. Diponegoro Journal of Accounting, 9(3), 1–11.
Sassen, R., Hinze, A. K., & Hardeck, I. (2016). Impact of ESG factors on firm risk in Europe. Journal of Business Economics, 86, 867–904. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-016-0819-3
Sekerci, N., Jaballah, J., Van Essen, M., & Kammerlander, N. (2022). Investors’ reactions to CSR news in family versus nonfamily firms: A study on signal (in)credibility. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 46(1), 82–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/10422587211010498
Shakil, M. H. (2021). Environmental, social and governance performance and financial risk: Moderating role of ESG controversies and board gender diversity. Resources Policy, 72(August). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102144
Sigdel, B., & Amponstira, F. (2021). A model of corporate social responsibility, firm reputation, and firm performance in small and medium enterprises in Kaski, Lamjung, and Gorkha District of Gandaki Province, Nepal. Open Journal of Business and Management, 9(05), 2248–2260. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojbm.2021.95121
Signori, S., San-Jose, L., Retolaza, J. L., & Rusconi, G. (2021). Stakeholder value creation: Comparing ESG and value added in European companies. Sustainability, 13(3), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031392
Soeling, P. D., Ajeng Arsanti, S. D., & Indriati, F. (2022). Organizational reputation: does it mediate the effect of employer brand attractiveness on intention to apply in Indonesia? Heliyon, 8(4), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09208
Spence, L. J., & Rinaldi, L. (2014). Governmentality in accounting and accountability: A case study of embedding sustainability in a supply chain. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 39(6), 433–452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2012.03.003
Sustainalytics. (2021). ESG risk ratings - Methodology abstract version 2.2. Retrieved from https://mutualfund.adityabirlacapital.com/-/media/bsl/files/resources/other-disclosures/disclosure-norms-for-esg/sustainalytics_esg-risk-rating_methodology.pdf
The Association of Chartered Certified Accountants. (2013). The business benefits of sustainability reporting in Singapore. Retrieved from https://www.accaglobal.com/content/dam/acca/global/PDF-technical/other-PDFs/sustainability-roundtable.pdf
Tofighi, D. (2020). Bootstrap model-based constrained optimization tests of indirect effects. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02989
Tsai, H. F., & Luan, C. J. (2016). What makes firms embrace risks? A risk-taking capability perspective. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 19(3), 219–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2016.01.002
Wahyuningrum, I. F. S., & Budihardjo, M. A. (2018). Relationship between company financial performance, characteristic and environmental disclosure of ASX listed companies. In E3S Web of Conferences. EDP Sciences.
Whelan, T., Atz, U., Van Holt, T., & Clark, C. (2021). ESG and financial performance: Uncovering the relationship by aggregating evidence from 1,000 plus studies published between 2015 – 2020. NYU Retrieved from https://www.stern.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/assets/documents/NYU-RAM_ESG-Paper_2021%20Rev_0.pdf
Yoo, S., & Managi, S. (2022). Disclosure or Action: Evaluating ESG behavior towards financial performance. Finance Research Letters, 44(January). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2021.102108
Yoon, B., & Chung, Y. (2018). The effects of corporate social responsibility on firm performance: A stakeholder approach. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 37(December), 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2018.10.005
Zhang, D., & Xie, Y. (2022). Customer environmental concerns and profit margin: Evidence from manufacturing firms. Journal of Economics and Business, 120(May-June), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconbus.2022.106057
Zhang, F., Qin, X., & Liu, L. (2020). The interaction effect between ESG and green innovation and its impact on firm value from the perspective of information disclosure. Sustainability, 12(5), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12051866
Zhang, Q., & De Vries, A. (2022). Seeking moral legitimacy through corporate social responsibility: Evidence from Chinese manufacturing multinationals. Sustainability, 14(9), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095245
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Wildan Yudhanto, Alex Johanes Simamora
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License - Share Alike that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
USER RIGHTS
All articles published Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. We are continuously working with our author communities to select the best choice of license options, currently being defined for this journal as follows: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC BY-SA)
