Corporate governance and environmental social governance disclosure: A meta‐analytical review

Abstract

This paper provides, to the best of the authors' knowledge, the first meta-analysis of evidence about the influence of the corporate governance on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosure, in a setting where the disclosure of information is voluntary but not discretionary. We apply meta-analysis to a sample of 24 empirical studies to clarify the relationship of board size, board independence, women on board, number of board meeting, CEO duality, and company ownership with ESG disclosure. Our results show that board independence, board size, and women directorship visibly enhance ESG voluntary disclosure; board ownership and CEO duality do not improve the level of ESG disclosure; and some hesitations remain in respect of the number of board meetings and institutional and family ownership.The paper contributes to the ongoing debate on the corporate governance mechanisms that lead to more ESG disclosure and highlight the need of new approach on these issues.

Does Internal Control Contribute to a Firm’s Green Information Disclosure? Evidence from China

“…Furthermore, compared with companies that had not corrected major deficiencies, those that had corrected major deficiencies made significant improvement in the structure of the board of directors, audit committees, and senior management. The literature confirms that good firm governance, diversity of the board of directors, and improvement in the educational qualifications of senior management can effectively restrain a company's environmental pollution, improve its environmental information disclosure level, and promote the true fulfillment of the company's environmental commitments [23,25,28,30]. Therefore, high-quality internal control through improvement of firm governance can help reduce the self-interested motivation of managers and controlling shareholders, maximize the protection of the rights and interests of various stakeholders, and provide reasonable assurance of reliable firm environmental reporting.…”

“…Their results revealed that the age of the youngest director has a negative effect on environmental disclosure, while in contrast independent directors and the presence of lead independent directors strengthen the decision to develop environmental disclosures. Furthermore, Lagasio and Cucari [28] found that board independence, board size and female director status significantly improved environmental, social, and governance (ESG) voluntary disclosures; whereas board ownership and chief executive officer (CEO) duality did not. Pucheta-Martínez and López-Zamora [29] analyze the role performed by representatives of institutional investors in environmental reporting in Spain.…”

Board gender diversity and corporate environmental performance: The moderating role of family and dual‐class majority ownership structures

“…Hollindale et al (2019) results stressed instead the importance of having multiple female directors for increasing the quality of GHG emission-related disclosure in annual and sustainability reports. Cucari et al (2018), conversely, reported a negative relationship between women on the board and ESG disclosure, suggesting that the presence of women directors is more driven by regulatory pressures. On balance, this body of research appears to point to women directors being associated with higher ESG and related disclosure.…”

“…Following the studies on CSR in general, some researchers found that women have a more protective attitude towards the environment in particular (Wehrmeyer & McNeil, 2000) and are more likely than males to be ecologically conscious (Park, Choi, & Kim, 2012). Related research shows that boards with a higher proportion of women directors had higher environmental performance (Kassinis et al, 2016;Li et al, 2017;Lu & Herremans, 2019;Post et al, 2015;Walls et al, 2012) and higher levels and quality of environmental reporting (Rao et al, 2012;Liao et al, 2015;Ben-Amar et al, 2017;Lagasio & Cucari, 2019;Bravo and Reguera-Alvarado, 2019). These relationships are found in non-U.S. countries as well, such as in Spain in terms of GRI reporting (Fuente et al, 2017) and Australia in terms of corporate sustainability activities (Nadeem et al, 2017).…”

Environmental, social, governance: Implications for businesses and effects for stakeholders

“…For instance, “the EU policy for sustainable finance is not only a policy in the EU (the third polluter of the world responsible for 10% of the emissions), but thanks to the EU political leadership in the area may become a policy for the world, or at least the world biggest economies Nava (forthcoming). New rules are expected to bring about more long‐term focus in corporate governance and address a number of governance shortcomings (Brogi & Lagasio, ; Cucari, Esposito De Falco, & Orlando, ; Lagasio & Cucari, ; Lo & Kwan, ). For instance, the question of how compatible ESG criteria are with corporate financial performance has remained central in the debate for practitioners and academics alike for more than 40 years (Friede, Busch, & Bassen, ).…”