The end of ESG

ESG is both extremely important and nothing special. It's extremely important because it's critical to long-term value, and so any academic or practitioner should take it seriously, not just those with “ESG” in their research interests or job title. Thus, ESG doesn't need a specialized term, as that implies it's niche—considering long-term factors isn't ESG investing; it's investing. It's nothing special since it's no better or worse than other intangible assets that create long-term financial and social returns, such as management quality, corporate culture, and innovative capability. Companies shouldn't be praised more for improving their ESG performance than these other intangibles; investor engagement on ESG factors shouldn't be put on a pedestal compared to engagement on other value drivers. We want great companies, not just companies that are great at ESG.     

Indigenous sustainable finance as a research field: A systematic literature review on indigenising ESG,sustainability and indigenous community practices

Sustainable finance research has come into its own as an established area in the finance literature. The increased awareness of sustainability and global concerns around environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues, particularly among institutional investors, has catalysed a shift towards greater research and publications in this area. Accompanying this is the emerging body of work being produced on indigenous investments and indigenous community practices. These nascent strands of literature tell a story of the shift that is taking place within the finance field. To chart this shift and create a harmonised view of these bodies of work, this paper conducts a systematic literature review of the significant nexus between sustainable investments and indigenous approaches to sustainability. We present a framework for conceptualising and characterising the various stands of literature and, in so doing, make the case for Indigenous Sustainable Finance (ISF) as a distinct disciplinary field. This paper argues that ISF is distinct from mainstream sustainable finance and other social and management sciences and constitutes a legitimate, well-defined sub-field of research in its own right.     

Environmental,Social, and Governance (ESG) disclosure: A literature review

Voluntary nonfinancial Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) disclosure is a rapidly growing and increasingly important topic that has attracted great attention from both academic researchers and capital market participants in recent years. The objective of this survey study is to provide a comprehensive review of the ESG disclosure literature in accounting research with suggestions for the future. Specifically, we organize the literature into four categories: motivations for and consequences associated with ESG information, in addition to disclosure- and user-level characteristics with the potential to affect the observed outcome of information disclosure. We also discuss the key role of nonfinancial rating agencies as a new type of ESG information intermediary in capital markets and suggest opportunities for future research.     

The wages of social responsibility — where are they? A critical review of ESG investing

This paper contributes both to investigating the link between the corporate social and financial performance based on environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) ratings and to reviewing the existing empirical evidence pertaining to this relationship. The sample used includes ESG data of ASSET4, Bloomberg and KLD for the U.S. market from 1991 to 2012. The econometrical framework applies an ESG portfolio approach using the Carhart (1997) four-factor model as well as cross-sectional Fama and MacBeth (1973) regressions. Previous empirical research indicates a relationship between ESG ratings and returns. As against this, the ESG portfolios do not state a significant return difference between companies with high and low ESG ratings. Although the Fama and MacBeth (1973) regressions reveal a significant influence of several ESG variables, investors are hardly able to exploit this relationship. The magnitude and direction of the impact are substantially dependent on the rating provider, the company sample and the particular subperiod. The results suggest that investors should no longer expect abnormal returns by trading a difference portfolio of high and low rated firms with regard to ESG aspects.     

When ESG talks: ESG tone of 10-K reports and its significance to stock markets

Since the ESG topic consistently gains on importance in the investment universe, companies provide investors with information regarding recent and future ESG activities through different reporting channels. The most recent research finds relevance of ESG-related corporate activities for formation of investors' opinion regarding companies' valuations and growth prospects. Based on a sample of more than seventeen thousand unique 10-K reports of US companies filed with SEC in period 2013 to 2019 and the word-power methodology proposed by Jegadeesh and Wu (2013), this study also shows evidence for significant relation of ESG textual tone of 10-K reports to stock market returns of filing companies around the report filing dates. Using the ESG linguistic dictionary recently proposed by Baier, Berninger, and Kiesel (2020), this study shows evidence for significant relation of social and governance-related topics disclosure to stock returns, while environmental narratives being ignored by the markets. When looking at individual words from the ESG lexicon, such words as “community”, “health”, “control” imply positive reaction of markets, while “discrimination”, “embezzlement”, and “crime” are related to negative returns. The robustness analysis based on the inverse document frequency word weightings and actual ESG performance scores confirms the significance of ESG information disclosure of 10-K reports for investors. Thus, this study sheds light on the mechanics of ESG information perception and its influence on capital markets.     

ESG投资能够促进银行创造流动性吗?——兼论经济政策不确定性的调节效应

当前在我国致力于实现“碳达峰、碳中和”目标的大背景下,银行能否通过ESG投资促进流动性创造,进而推动高质量发展具有重大战略意义。本文利用2009年第一季度至2020年第二季度中国36家上市银行的面板数据,实证分析ESG投资对银行流动性创造的影响,并将其置于经济政策不确定性条件下予以讨论。研究发现:第一,ESG投资整体上促进流动性创造,表现为对资产端和负债端流动性创造的促进作用,以及对表外流动性创造的抑制作用。从ESG投资结构看,环境保护投资和社会责任投资均抑制流动性创造,而公司治理投资则促进流动性创造。异质性分析表明,地方性银行和资本短缺银行的ESG投资对流动性创造具有更强的促进作用。第二,中介机制分析发现,ESG投资主要通过“盈利”和“风险”渠道促进流动性创造。第三,在经济政策不确定性上升时期,ESG投资对流动性创造的促进作用更加显著。从ESG投资分项看,经济政策不确定性会增强环境保护投资和社会责任投资对流动性创造的抑制作用,以及公司治理投资对流动性创造的促进作用。本文结论为充分发挥ESG投资作用并以此推动高质量发展提供了政策启示。     

Corporate governance performance ratings with machine learning

We use machine learning with a cross-sectional research design to predict governance controversies and to develop a measure of the governance component of the environmental, social, governance (ESG) metrics. Based on comprehensive governance data from 2,517 companies over a period of 10 years and investigating nine machine-learning algorithms, we find that governance controversies can be predicted with high predictive performance. Our proposed governance rating methodology has two unique advantages compared with traditional ESG ratings: it rates companies' compliance with governance responsibilities and it has predictive validity. Our study demonstrates a solution to what is likely the greatest challenge for the finance industry today: how to assess a company's sustainability with validity and accuracy. Prior to this study, the ESG rating industry and the literature have not provided evidence that widely adopted governance ratings are valid. This study describes the only methodology for developing governance performance ratings based on companies' compliance with governance responsibilities and for which there is evidence of predictive validity.     

Sentimental Sustainability: Does What Companies Say Tell More Than What Companies Do?

Based on a sample of more than eleven thousand unique 10-K reports of US companies filed with SEC in period 2013 to 2018, this study examines the relationship between actual sustainability performance of companies, evaluated by MSCI ESG performance scores, and the extent and the scope of environmental, social, and governance information disclosure in their annual reports. The study shows empirical evidence supporting the signalling theory view of voluntary disclosure of ESG information in annual reports for most industries, while environmentally unfriendly companies belonging to the Mining industry division show excessive reporting behavior favoring environmental topics, which is consistent with incentives to improve public image and mitigate social, political, and legal risks in line with the legitimacy theory of information disclosure. When differentiating between forward-looking and non-forward-looking ESG statements, the study shows that companies providing more forward-looking ESG information in annual reports show better next-year ESG performance. This study implements established content analysis techniques with focus on ESG reporting and performance, building up on the study of Baier, Berninger, and Kiesel (2020) that proposed an ESG-tailored dictionary for textual analysis purposes.     

News-based ESG sentiment and stock price crash risk

From the perspective of ESG news-based sentiment, we examine the impact of ESG performance on stock price crash risk. This paper constructs a sentiment index based on ESG news to measure public opinion of listed firms. First, there is a significant negative relationship between ESG news sentiment and stock price crash risk, indicating that higher ESG news sentiment can reduce the crash risk. Second, heterogeneity analysis demonstrates that ESG sentiment has a greater impact on crash risk reduction for firms with lower analyst coverage, lower information transparency, voluntary ESG information disclosure and non-state-owned. In addition, mechanism tests indicate that ESG sentiment affects stock price crash risk by reducing negative ESG incidents, information asymmetry, and agency costs. This paper examines the research inference that ESG news sentiment is beneficial in reducing stock price crash risk and expands the research on the governance mechanism of stock price crash risk.     

The Evolution of Integrating ESG Analysis into Wealth Management Decisions

Retail investors rely heavily on the advice of their financial advisors. But relatively few of those advisors have begun to incorporate investment strategies based on environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors for their client's portfolios. The author attributes this lack of interest to the disappointing returns of the “first generation” of ESG retail investment products, which approached the topic through a “socially responsible investing” (SRI) lens with mandates to exclude companies and industries viewed as having negative impact on society. These early “negative screening” directives had the effect of reducing the size of the manager's investable universe, which effectively ensured that SRI portfolio would underperform the overall market. The author, who is himself a practicing financial advisor, proposes that an innovative evolutionary process is underway in which investment managers are shifting away from a penchant for “negative screening” to a more inclusive approach he refers to as “best‐in‐class ESG Factor Integration.” And he identifies three main catalysts for this evolution: (1) greater disclosure of ESG data by public companies; (2) the growing accuracy and accessibility of ESG research, from commercial as well as academic sources; and (3) the inclusion of ESG factors with the traditional value drivers emphasized by the fundamental and quantitative methods used by portfolio managers. Although such integration is yet in its early stages, the author is optimistic that this growing trend will become an important part of an overall sustainable investing movement. No longer confined to large institutional investors, ESG factor integration is now available through a growing number of products and investment platforms.     

ESG Controversies,ESG Disclosure and Analyst Forecast Accuracy

We investigate whether an environmental social governance (ESG) disclosure moderates the relation between ESG controversies and analyst forecast accuracy. The previous literature has shown that ESG controversies increase uncertainty about a firm's future prospects, while ESG disclosure decreases this uncertainty. We therefore take the next step and integrate ESG controversies, ESG disclosure and uncertainty into one model. Our study is based on 8,369 firm-year observations across 51 countries from 2008 to 2017, containing data from RepRisk, Bloomberg and the Institutional Brokers' Estimate System. We find that analyst forecast errors are generally higher for firms with higher exposure to ESG controversies. More importantly, we establish ESG disclosure as a moderator that mitigates the strength of the relation between ESG controversies and analyst forecast errors. Additionally, we identify that the most important pillar for the relation derives from social controversies and disclosure.     

The ESG effect on the cost of debt financing: A sharp RD analysis

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors have become increasingly relevant within the financial world. Despite extensive evidence regarding the equity side, limited studies in the literature have investigated the potential effects of ESG performance on the main drivers of debt. This study aims to understand whether there is a positive effect from a cost of debt standpoint for corporations with relatively better ESG performance. Using the ESG score by Refinitiv and a sharp regression discontinuity design, we do not find statistically significant evidence for discrete jumps in correspondence with the ESG score average for the cost of debt of European nonfinancial corporates over the 2018–2020 period. In a sharp regression discontinuity setting, we obtain analogous results by developing a linear probability model.     

Drivers of differences in performance of ESG-focused funds relative to their underlying benchmarks

Several studies have examined whether environmental, social, and governance (ESG) focused funds outperform their benchmarks. While these studies vary in their methods and scope, their findings indicate that, at a minimum, these funds do not underperform their benchmarks on a risk-adjusted basis. This study is designed to further contribute to this body of research by analyzing the performance of the Jantzi Social Index (JSI) relative to its underlying benchmark, the TSX 60, and to gain insight into the possible factors that drive their performance differences. Our findings indicate that JSI's performance differential is driven (primarily) by the higher weight that JSI attaches to companies with higher net ESG scores and not (necessarily) by its superior asset-selection ability. As the regulators globally move toward making ESG disclosure mandatory, these findings become particularly relevant.     

The crossroads of ESG and religious screening on firm risk

Using a large and extended global dataset of non-financial firms (4624 listed entities from 2002 to 2018), we provide the first empirical evidence on how ESG and Sharia screenings interact and influence market risks. We link two contrasting literature streams: the risk reduction role that the stakeholder theory attributes to ESG scores, and the opposite effect for Sharia-compliance anticipated by the portfolio and agency theories.We find that when ESG scores are not considered, Sharia certification increases risks. We also prove that engagement in sustainable activities mitigates risks for both Sharia-compliant and conventional firms. More interestingly, we show that Sharia-compliant firms obtain a larger risk-mitigating effect for greater levels of ESG scores. These results are robust to endogeneity and to extensive additional checks.Our findings validate the hypothesized complementarity between ESG and Sharia screenings.     

Time-varying fund manager skills of socially responsible investing (SRI) funds in developed and emerging markets

We examine stock selectivity and timing abilities in the market-wide return, volatility and liquidity of SRI fund managers. We find that multi-dimensional fund manager skills are time-varying and persistent in the short run, with developed market funds exhibiting longer persistence in all dimensions. Fund manager skills tend to be affected by fund characteristics (i.e., expense ratio, fund size, turnover and management tenure) and market characteristics (i.e., ESG market capitalization, mandatory ESG regulation and 10–2 yield spread). Fund managers of developed (emerging) market funds outperform (underperform) the market indices. For both fund types, fund managers possess exceptional volatility and liquidity timing despite poor return timing. Moreover, fund managers focus more (less) on timing the market’s return and less (more) on picking stocks when the prospect of recession keeps increasing (decreasing). Interestingly, if fund managers attempt to time the market-wide return or liquidity, stock selectivity will be worsened by their timing behavior.     

ESG,Material Credit Events,and Credit Risk

A growing body of research has extended the analysis of the materiality of ESG criteria from the perspective of equity investors to creditors. Past research and analysis have demonstrated the link between better management of ESG criteria and better management of risk overall. Despite this growing consensus and consistent evidence that ESG performance is correlated with credit risk, no empirical evidence has yet linked ESG performance to cost or expense variances or revenue shortfalls that could explain these correlations. The authors attempt to address this lack of mechanism‐based empirical evidence by citing and then building on a number of well‐publicized cases with analysis of two major ESG issues—indigenous land claims and biodiversity—as they affect the global project finance and agriculture sectors. Broadening these single‐sector results, the authors use a novel dataset providing systematic coding of material events reported in the media across a variety of empirical settings to produce the first large‐sample empirical evidence of the mechanisms linking ESG performance to credit risk.     

ESG Integration in Investment Management: Myths and Realities

The number of public companies reporting ESG information grew from fewer than 20 in the early 1990s to 8,500 by 2014. Moreover, by the end of 2014, over 1,400 institutional investors that manage some $60 trillion in assets had signed the UN Principles for Responsible Investment (UNPRI). Nevertheless, companies with high ESG “scores” have continued to be viewed by mainstream investors as unlikely to produce competitive shareholder returns, in part because of the findings of older studies showing low returns from the social responsibility investing of the 1990s. But studies of more recent periods suggest that companies with significant ESG programs have actually outperformed their competitors in a number of important ways. The authors’ aim in this article is to set the record straight on the financial performance of sustainable investing while also correcting a number of other widespread misconceptions about this rapidly growing set of principles and methods: Myth Number 1: ESG programs reduce returns on capital and long‐run shareholder value. Reality: Companies committed to ESG are finding competitive advantages in product, labor, and capital markets; and portfolios that have integrated “material” ESG metrics have provided average returns to their investors that are superior to those of conventional portfolios, while exhibiting lower risk. Myth Number 2: ESG is already well integrated into mainstream investment management. Reality: The UNPRI signatories have committed themselves only to adhering to a set of principles for responsible investment, a standard that falls well short of integrating ESG considerations into their investment decisions. Myth Number 3: Companies cannot influence the kind of shareholders who buy their shares, and corporate managers must often sacrifice sustainability goals to meet the quarterly earnings targets of increasingly short‐term‐oriented investors. Reality: Companies that pursue major sustainability initiatives, and publicize them in integrated reports and other communications with investors, have also generally succeeded in attracting disproportionate numbers of longer‐term shareholders. Myth Number 4: ESG data for fundamental analysis is scarce and unreliable. Reality: Thanks to the efforts of reporting and investor organizations such as SASB and Ceres, and of CDP data providers like Bloomberg and MSCI, much more “value‐relevant” ESG data on companies has become available in the past ten years. Myth Number 5: ESG adds value almost entirely by limiting risks. Reality: Along with lower risk and a lower cost of capital, companies with high ESG scores have also experienced increases in operating efficiency and expansions into new markets. Myth Number 6: Consideration of ESG factors might create a conflict with fiduciary duty for some investors. Reality: Many ESG factors have been shown to have positive correlations with corporate financial performance and value, prompting ERISA in 2015 to reverse its earlier instructions to pension funds about the legitimacy of taking account of “non‐financial” considerations when investing in companies.     

ESG,time horizons,risks and stock returns

Investment time horizon is an important part of significance of ESG factors. This research examines the role of ESG factors in returns and risks in short- and medium-term investment periods. It compares (a) the returns and risks of ESG portfolios between before scoring and after scoring, and (b) the returns and risks between ESG portfolios and their peers.The main results suggest that after scoring most short-term ESG portfolios have similar returns, but lower risks than before scoring. The returns of ESG portfolios are similar to those of nonESG portfolios for both short- and medium-term. There are more ESG portfolios, whose risks are different from nonESG portfolios, in the short-term investment than in the medium-term.ESG factors therefore play a greater role in risks than in returns, and in the short-term than in the medium-term. Additionally, the role of ESG factors in risks varies from industry to industry.     

Audit 4.0-based ESG assurance: An example of using satellite images on GHG emissions

As Environment, Social, and Governance (ESG) information has become an essential resource for investors, regulators have attempted to assure its quality. While more companies offer ESG disclosure, it is usually not fully substantiated with supporting information. Assurance is needed to verify that ESG reports are free of substantive errors. However, traditional financial audit approaches are less effective in providing ESG assurance due to the difference in the nature of evidence, difficulty in measuring and verifying ESG measures, and ever-changing ESG performance. To increase the effectiveness of ESG audit approaches, this study proposes Audit 4.0-based ESG assurance, which uses Big Data and emerging technologies of Audit 4.0 to capture evidence from the physical world and provide accurate assurance on ESG reports in a timely manner. We further perform a case study as a proof of concept of the proposed approach, which explores the integration of satellite-based methane estimation as ESG audit evidence. The use of satellite images provides opportunities for regulators and companies to monitor and assure ESG reports in a continuous manner.     

Comparative analysis of environmental,social, and governance disclosures

We examine the level of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) sustainability disclosure by firms between two regimes where disclosure is mandatory versus voluntary. We use the regulatory environment between the United States (US) and European Union (EU) to compare ESG disclosures. Firms in the US are currently under a voluntary disclosure regime. In contrast, EU members are under a mandatory disclosure regulatory regime that began in 2017. We find that EU firms outperform US firms under voluntary disclosure requirements (2007–2016), and the ESG disclosure of EU firms further improves relative to US firms after the implementation of the mandatory disclosure in Europe in 2017. Our results suggest that the 2017 adoption of disclosure guidelines in the EU is associated with improvements in EU firms' ESG disclosure. Our results regarding the value-relevance of ESG disclosure support a move toward mandatory ESG disclosures. Results support current initiatives that have been taken by global regulators and stock exchanges in recommending and requiring globally listed companies to disclose their ESG sustainability information to portray accurate and comprehensive corporate reporting. The results further our understanding of how firms from different institutional environment settings may have disclosed their ESG practices, thus providing opportunities for future research.