环境、社会和治理争议与系统风险:机器学习方法

IF 6.9 2区 经济学 Q1 BUSINESS, FINANCE Finance Research Letters Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-06 DOI:10.1016/j.frl.2025.106894
Mohammad Hassan Shakil, Arne Johan Pollestad, Khine Kyaw
{"title":"环境、社会和治理争议与系统风险:机器学习方法","authors":"Mohammad Hassan Shakil,&nbsp;Arne Johan Pollestad,&nbsp;Khine Kyaw","doi":"10.1016/j.frl.2025.106894","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>We examine the relationship between environmental, social and governance (ESG) controversies and systematic risk among non-financial firms in the STOXX Europe 600 index from 2016 to 2022. We apply random forest regression to predict firm-level systematic risk and employ explainable AI techniques to assess the role of ESG controversies. The results show a negative relationship between ESG controversies and systematic risk, with higher controversies predicting increased systematic risk. Traditional regression models, such as pooled ordinary least squares and year- and industry-fixed effects, show a similar relationship. However, our model exhibits an average prediction error of 0.25 for 2022, representing a 30 percent reduction in the prediction error compared to the benchmark. Systematic risk increases significantly for firms embroiled in ESG controversies for the first time (“first timers”) and those with frequent issues (“regulars”). Sector-wise, systematic risk is most pronounced in the machinery sector and least in the real estate sector.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12167,"journal":{"name":"Finance Research Letters","volume":"75 ","pages":"Article 106894"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Environmental, social and governance controversies and systematic risk: A machine learning approach\",\"authors\":\"Mohammad Hassan Shakil,&nbsp;Arne Johan Pollestad,&nbsp;Khine Kyaw\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.frl.2025.106894\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>We examine the relationship between environmental, social and governance (ESG) controversies and systematic risk among non-financial firms in the STOXX Europe 600 index from 2016 to 2022. We apply random forest regression to predict firm-level systematic risk and employ explainable AI techniques to assess the role of ESG controversies. The results show a negative relationship between ESG controversies and systematic risk, with higher controversies predicting increased systematic risk. Traditional regression models, such as pooled ordinary least squares and year- and industry-fixed effects, show a similar relationship. However, our model exhibits an average prediction error of 0.25 for 2022, representing a 30 percent reduction in the prediction error compared to the benchmark. Systematic risk increases significantly for firms embroiled in ESG controversies for the first time (“first timers”) and those with frequent issues (“regulars”). Sector-wise, systematic risk is most pronounced in the machinery sector and least in the real estate sector.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12167,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Finance Research Letters\",\"volume\":\"75 \",\"pages\":\"Article 106894\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Finance Research Letters\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1544612325001588\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Finance Research Letters","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1544612325001588","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们研究了2016年至2022年斯托克欧洲600指数非金融公司的环境、社会和治理(ESG)争议与系统风险之间的关系。我们应用随机森林回归来预测公司层面的系统性风险,并采用可解释的人工智能技术来评估ESG争议的作用。结果显示,ESG争议与系统风险呈负相关,争议越大,系统风险越高。传统的回归模型,如汇总普通最小二乘和年度和行业固定效应,也显示出类似的关系。然而,我们的模型显示2022年的平均预测误差为0.25,与基准相比,预测误差减少了30%。对于第一次卷入ESG争议的公司(“第一次”)和经常卷入ESG争议的公司(“经常”),系统风险显著增加。就行业而言,机械行业的系统性风险最为明显,房地产行业的风险最小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Environmental, social and governance controversies and systematic risk: A machine learning approach
We examine the relationship between environmental, social and governance (ESG) controversies and systematic risk among non-financial firms in the STOXX Europe 600 index from 2016 to 2022. We apply random forest regression to predict firm-level systematic risk and employ explainable AI techniques to assess the role of ESG controversies. The results show a negative relationship between ESG controversies and systematic risk, with higher controversies predicting increased systematic risk. Traditional regression models, such as pooled ordinary least squares and year- and industry-fixed effects, show a similar relationship. However, our model exhibits an average prediction error of 0.25 for 2022, representing a 30 percent reduction in the prediction error compared to the benchmark. Systematic risk increases significantly for firms embroiled in ESG controversies for the first time (“first timers”) and those with frequent issues (“regulars”). Sector-wise, systematic risk is most pronounced in the machinery sector and least in the real estate sector.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Finance Research Letters
Finance Research Letters BUSINESS, FINANCE-
CiteScore
11.10
自引率
14.40%
发文量
863
期刊介绍: Finance Research Letters welcomes submissions across all areas of finance, aiming for rapid publication of significant new findings. The journal particularly encourages papers that provide insight into the replicability of established results, examine the cross-national applicability of previous findings, challenge existing methodologies, or demonstrate methodological contingencies. Papers are invited in the following areas: Actuarial studies Alternative investments Asset Pricing Bankruptcy and liquidation Banks and other Depository Institutions Behavioral and experimental finance Bibliometric and Scientometric studies of finance Capital budgeting and corporate investment Capital markets and accounting Capital structure and payout policy Commodities Contagion, crises and interdependence Corporate governance Credit and fixed income markets and instruments Derivatives Emerging markets Energy Finance and Energy Markets Financial Econometrics Financial History Financial intermediation and money markets Financial markets and marketplaces Financial Mathematics and Econophysics Financial Regulation and Law Forecasting Frontier market studies International Finance Market efficiency, event studies Mergers, acquisitions and the market for corporate control Micro Finance Institutions Microstructure Non-bank Financial Institutions Personal Finance Portfolio choice and investing Real estate finance and investing Risk SME, Family and Entrepreneurial Finance
期刊最新文献
Confucian culture, artificial intelligence, and executive financial misconduct: Internal control and information disclosure as governance channels Capital market liberalization and its impact on corporate sustained innovation Artificial intelligence technology application and corporate green productivity: A study on financial transmission mechanisms Ex-ante defense: enterprise risk management and supply chain integration Wildfires and financial stability of U.S. regional banks in California
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1