We examine the effect of multiple environmental, social, and governance (ESG) scores on institutional investor ownership of firms and investor portfolio weightings. We are also the first to analyze the three individual components of ESG rankings to estimate the relative preferences of institutional investors.
Using a unique panel dataset covering US companies and institutional investor portfolios over the 2010–2019 period, we find that while investors are driven to add high-quality ESG companies to their portfolios, there is a negative relationship with ESG when it comes to taking large ownership stakes. Furthermore, ESG scores are negatively related to the portfolio weightings of institutional investors, which raises concerns of greenwashing. Our analysis of individual ESG scores points to significantly larger effects of G scores in terms of holdings, and G is the only score with no negative impact on portfolio weightings. Finally, in support of systematic stewardship theory, top institutional investors allocate higher proportions of their portfolios to firms with high-ESG ratings. Our results are robust to the use of a difference-in-differences analysis addressing endogeneity concerns.
The findings in this paper offer important policy implications for institutional investors, managers, and policymakers. Given the ongoing debate on ESG scores, this paper shows the importance of examining greenwashing for investors who have a concern regarding the extent to which the valuation of assets might be influenced by unsupported sustainability claims. In addition, our study adds to the debate regarding ESG investing and stewardship theory.
Are companies monitored by common owners (i.e., institutional investors that block-own [owning 5% or more] several companies in a single industry) more likely than other companies to record goodwill impairments when their assets are overstated?
We find that companies monitored by common owners are more likely than other companies to record goodwill impairments when their assets are overstated. The monitoring effect is stronger for common owners with a stronger incentive to monitor and with more industry knowledge and stronger for the co-presence of multiple common owners. Our findings are in line with the notion that common owners have an economy of scale in monitoring and internalize the negative externality of delayed recording of goodwill impairment. We also find that common ownership is associated with lower information asymmetry, which in turn increases the timeliness of goodwill impairment.
Our research emphasizes the monitoring role of common ownership in recording goodwill impairments. We find support for the mechanisms enabling common owners to be better monitors.
The prevalence of common ownership has prompted regulatory and societal concerns regarding under-investment in the oversight of the companies. Our findings documenting the association between common ownership and the timely recording of goodwill impairments are relevant to the ongoing debate regarding the potential costs and benefits of common ownership.
We investigate whether the risk-taking of Islamic banks is affected differently by corruption compared to conventional banks. We also examine whether the characteristics of the Shari'ah Supervisory Board (SSB) of Islamic banks and the characteristics of the board of directors of conventional banks play an effective role in moderating such an effect.
We find consistent evidence that banks in countries with higher corruption have higher bank risk for both conventional and Islamic banks. However, this association is attenuated by the size of the SSB, the presence of female board members, and higher academic qualifications of SSB members. For conventional banks, the moderating effect of the presence of female directors and academically qualified members on the board of directors is also prevalent but to a lesser extent.
This study contributes to the corporate finance literature more generally by highlighting the role played by corporate governance, particularly the presence of female members and academically qualified members on the SSBs of Islamic banks and on the board of directors of conventional banks, in mitigating the effect of corruption on bank risk-taking for the two bank types.
Our findings are based on a matched sample of banks operating in 10 OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) countries and have important implications for bank stability and bank governance reforms. On the detrimental side, urgency of the anti-corruption campaigns in these countries is justified due to the significant effect of corruption on risk-taking for both conventional and Islamic banks. Overall, to better fight corruption in countries with dual banking systems, there is a need to enforce stricter rules for all types of banks.
This study investigates whether and how executives with legal expertise impact corporate innovation.
Using a sample of listed firms in China, we have the following findings: (1) Firms that hire executives with legal expertise are associated with more corporate innovation. (2) These firms talk about potential legal risks and legal advisors more often in their annual reports and have lower chances of being sued in patent litigations. (3) The innovation-promoting effect is stronger when the firms are state-owned enterprises, have more overseas revenue, operate in high-tech industries, have prior patent litigation experience, and are in strong legal environments.
The findings indicate that executives with legal expertise bring more attention to legal risks and help the firm to shape a stable environment, which can effectively promote innovation activities. Also, the innovation-promoting effect of lawyer executives complements the role of in-house legal counsels and the external legal environment. This paper adds to the literature on the value of executives with legal background.
Our results emphasize the important role played by executives with legal expertise in corporate innovation. Given the continuing shortage of legal talents and the gradual improvement of the legal system in China, firms need to employ more legal talents to avoid potential legal risks and maintain sustainable growth.
The primary focus of this meta-analysis is to synthesize previously discordant findings on the relationship between board gender diversity (BGD) and different types of firm risk and to explore potential moderating and mediating mechanisms underlying these relationships.
We statistically combine the results from 193 studies and find a negative association between BGD and firm risk. Further investigation indicates that different measures of risk lead to systematically different effect sizes. Our meta-analysis structural equation modeling (MASEM) analysis reveals that BGD's impact on risk operates primarily through the monitoring rather than advising function of the board. Regarding the moderating role of national institutions, we find that several aspects of the national institutional context (e.g., investor protection, gender equality, and national culture) influence the relationship between BGD and different types of risk.
Overall, our results suggest that agency theory has more explanatory power than resource dependence theory for understanding the association between BGD and risk, and women's board representation is more likely to reduce downside risk than upside risk. Our moderating effect analysis also highlights interesting avenues for further research on the interplay of BGD and different risks in national environments with varying institutional attributes.
Our meta-analysis offers important practical implications for corporate risk management, suggesting that BGD significantly mitigates downside risks associated with poor corporate transparency without stifling board support for corporate decisions shaping future growth potential. In an era of rising board vulnerability to litigation for insufficient transparency, this study contributes evidence supporting trends toward greater gender diversity.
This paper studies the relationship between chief executive officers' (CEOs) personal experiences and corporate innovation in China.
We find that CEOs' famine and military experiences adversely impact firm innovation outcomes. In particular, our channel tests show that CEOs with famine experience adversely affect firm innovation by reducing both R&D expenditures and innovation efficiency, whereas CEOs with military experience hinder innovation mainly by reducing research staff.
Our results imply that innovation conservatism in some firms may be partly explained by individual CEO's early-life personal experiences. Our study thus has broader implications for the differences in management style across corporate executives who go through different experiences.
Our findings provide important insights for policy makers, suggesting that they should consider CEOs' early-life exposure to different experiences as important “soft information” when evaluating firms' innovation potential for government subsidies.
This study examines the relationship between boardroom gender diversity reforms (BGDRs) and corporate voluntary disclosure in the form of management earnings forecasts (MEFs) in a sample of 43 countries over the period 2000 to 2020.
Taking advantage of the staggered adoption of the gender diversity reforms that aim to improve women's representation on boards, we find that firms exhibit a greater propensity for and frequency of issuing MEFs. These findings hold for both governance-based and legislation-based reforms but are stronger for the latter. Furthermore, we find stronger results (a) when female directors possess higher financial expertise and serve on board sub-committees, (b) when board activity (meetings and attendance) improved following BGDRs, (c) for firms that had all-male boards before the reforms and where gender diversity increased shortly after the reforms, and (d) for countries with greater legal enforcement and gender equality. Our findings are robust using the stacked difference-in-differences approach and alternative samples, models, and fixed effects. In addition, we find that, after the reforms, there is an increase in the forecast horizon, forecast width, bad news disclosure, accuracy, and the number of disaggregated forecast items.
Our study provides the first international and comprehensive evidence of the positive role of board gender reforms in the corporate information environment and offers vital policy implications.
Our study informs the ongoing debate regarding the effectiveness of and business case for gender diversity reforms. By documenting a causal link between BGDRs and voluntary disclosure, our study provides important implications for policymakers, regulators, investors, and top management teams.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：